Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Skepticism and critical thinking is not panacea, but can help to understand the world better

US Presidential Elections of 2016:

The first stage of the crisis of neoliberalism in the USA when the establishment candidate loses

Attempts of the Deep State to enslave Trump (and remind him about JFK destiny). Neocons counterattacked isolationalists who wanted to end  wars for enlarging the US neoliberal empire  using "Russian spy scandal and neo-McCarthyism witch hunt " as a ruse  and  managed to enslave and emasculate Trump by promoting birds of a feather for key Trump administration positions

Version 5.2 (Nov 25, 2016)

Picture from Secret Money For Private Armies

See also

News Crisis of legitimacy of neoliberal elite Recommended Links Trump vs. Deep State The Deep State New American Militarism Anti-Russian hysteria Anti Trump Hysteria Trump post-election transformation into neocon
Trump's bustard neoliberalism and his betrayal of his voters Trump turns to neocon unilateralism in foreign policy DNC emails leak Two Party System as Polyarchy US Presidential Elections of 2016: Primaries US Presidential Elections: from primaries to election day Reversal of planned detente with Russia Trump after his Colin Powell moment Korea saber-rattling
Donald Trump Trump foreign policy platform Personnel is Policy Khan Sheikhoun gas attack Obama: a yet another Neocon Hillary role in Libya disaster Bernie Sanders: A turncoat socialist, who betrayed his voters Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA Hillary health issues
Monday morning quarterbacking Understanding Hillary Clinton email scandal  "Fuck the EU": neocons show EU its real place  Hillary wet kiss with neocons Hillary role in Syria bloodbath Non-Interventionism Is Hillary Clinton a toxic manager? Elite [Dominance] Theory And the Revolt of the Elite Trump economic platform
Media-Military-Industrial Complex Neoconservatism Demonization of Putin  American Exceptionalism New American Militarism Neocolonialism as Financial Imperialism Pope Francis on danger of neoliberalism Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich Perjury Investigation of Hillary Clinton
The Iron Law of Oligarchy Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Myth about intelligent voter Pluralism as a myth Libertarian Philosophy Nation under attack meme   Trump on immigration
Principal-agent problem Corporatist Corruption Resurgence of neo-fascism as reaction on neoliberalism Ethno-linguistic Nationalism Corporatism National Security State Predator state Machiavellism Neoliberal Brainwashing -- Journalism in the Service of the Powerful Few
Betrayal by Bernie Sanders of his supporters Superdelegates at Democratic National Convention Jeb "Wolfowitz Stooge" Bush US Presidential Elections of 2012  Mayberry Machiavellians Politically Incorrect Humor Skeptic Quotations Humor Etc

Note: due to the size introduction was moved to a separate page November 2016 as a referendum on neoliberal globalization

This election is about the backlash against neoliberalism that became the dominant ideology of the ruling elite in the USA since 1980th. At this point blue color workers became sick of Demorats (aka Neoliberal Democrats) who are betraying them after each elections ("Change we can believe in" in worlds of the king of "bait and switch" Obama) and expecting still they will vote for Democratic as they have nowhere to go (Clinton strategy). They want to show middle finger to Clinton and other neoliberal criminals who deprived them of work, of dignity, of health (heroine epidemic is hitting the USA really hard). It's a class war all over again. Note how neoliberal media tried to misrepresent it accusing Trump supporters of racism, bigotry, and all other sins to mask anti-neoliberal backlash of the US population, and the revolutionary situation in the county, when the elite lost the control of the population. Which really somewhat reminds me the last days of the USSR when communist propaganda stopped working and people start seeing the "Politburo" as "naked king" -- a bunch of corrupt priests of obscure religion, who do not believe in the ideology they promote for "shmucks", only with their own and their families well-being. that their sons and daughters attend Western universities and their wives are shopping in Paris.

It is not an exaggeration to see in 2016 Presidential election as a referendum on neoliberal globalization. But the political power still belongs to  Neoliberals, which dominates both the government and the economy (transnationals are the cornerstone of neoliberal world order). It's a big question if the American people will be able to change neoliberal dogma, the official civil religion of the USA without a violent revolution...

The great Trump political breakthrough was consolidating the white working class and white middle class vote. At last "clintonization" (sellout of the Party to Wall Street whichwas initialed by Bill Clinton, converting it into the party of "soft neoliberalism" which at times was undistinguishable from "hard neoliberalism" )  of Democratic Party backfired.  Demexit -- abandoning of Demorats by white working and middle class is now a reality.

Writing in Politico, Georgetown political scientist Joshua Mitchell has a long, important take on the deep meaning of Trump — and it’s probably not what you think:

If you listen closely to Trump, you’ll hear a direct repudiation of the system of globalization and identity politics that has defined the world order since the Cold War. There are, in fact, six specific ideas that he has either blurted out or thinly buried in his rhetoric: (1) borders matter; (2) immigration policy matters; (3) national interests, not so-called universal interests, matter; (4) entrepreneurship matters; (5) decentralization matters; (6) PC speech—without which identity politics is inconceivable—must be repudiated.

These six ideas together point to an end to the unstable experiment with supra- and sub-national sovereignty that many of our elites have guided us toward, siren-like, since 1989.

 That is what the Trump campaign, ghastly though it may at times be, leads us toward: A future where states matter. A future where people are citizens, working together toward (bourgeois) improvement of their lot. His ideas do not yet fully cohere. They are a bit too much like mental dust that has yet to come together. But they can come together. And Trump is the first American candidate to bring some coherence to them, however raucous his formulations have been.

This is a clear repudiation of neoliberalism (aka "casino capitalism" or  Trotskyism for the rich) -- the secular religion to both Republican and Democratic parties adhere (while the term is prohibited from mass media -- can you imagine the Communist Party of the USSR would prohibit its members under the threat of purge to utter the word "communism" or call themselves "communists").  And that means that Trump is a threat to Washington neoliberal elite, the threat to neoliberal  Washington_Consensus, which  since 1980 (or even earlier) rules the place. That's why they fight and demonization of Trump is conducted by neoliberal media with such a fierce determination. That's why such a tremendous efforts and money are spend on propelling sick and unprincipled establishment candidate -- Hillary Clinton. A warmonger neoconservative, who is a staunch neoliberal (like her husband Bill Clinton).

The US neoliberal elite ("creator class" or "Masters of the Universe" in neoliberal jargon) have successfully revolted against the political and economic constraints on their wealth and power put by "enlightened corporatism" of the New Deal, and for 36 years managed to redistribute wealth up to the level that has no historical presidents. As a result social stability is in danger and "the rest" (or Untermensch, or "takers"/"welfare queen" in neoliberal jargon) are rebelling in the only way left open to them: voting for anyone who claims to be an outsider. (Romney-Ryan 'makers vs. takers' rhetoric helped spawn Donald Trump Washington Examiner)

This idea of low-income "takers" lay beneath Mitt Romney's view that the 47 percent of adults in the U.S. who owed no federal income tax were therefore "dependent upon government" and "who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them…."

...

But "taker" is a slur also when aimed at recipients of government benefits. Millions of "takers" are people who work 40 hours, but at low wages, and thus receive the earned-income tax credit. Will you blame their low wages on them? Perhaps they got horrible education thanks to incompetent government, or were just never blessed with marketable skills.

Some percentage of the 47 percent are World War II, Korean War, and Vietnam Veterans, who after serving their country, put in decades of work, and now live off the Social Security they paid into, without earning enough to owe federal income tax.

The "takers" include widows receiving food stamps, the ill being kept alive by Medicaid, and people drawing on unemployment because their employer got up and moved to Mexico.

More importantly, many of those on welfare or disability hate that they are dependent. They want to be working.

Are there "welfare queens," lazy able-bodied moochers, and people scamming disability? Yes. But lumping in 47 percent of the country with these scoundrels is as illegitimate lumping all businessmen in with the failed bankers who depend on bailouts.

This wasn't just Ryan's mistake. Conservatives broadly have equated low income with dependency. The conservative belief that the market tends to reward skill and diligence often mutates into a belief that poverty reflects some sort of turpitude.

That view helped give birth to Donald Trump, who has tapped into the working class that Ryan and Romney had pushed away.

Globalization and free trade are fast becoming dirty words. That’s because they were  culprits for major  shocks — like the 2008 financial crisis. In the United States alone, median household income has been practically stagnant for about three decades, the labor market continues to be anemic, manufacturing jobs have been lost, and many have experienced a significant deterioration in living standards.

Much of the post-Brexit and primary election conventional wisdom seems to be stuck in a political narrative in which the Brexit vote and the rise of Trump_vs_deep_state in the United States are seen as symbols of the populist revolution. These symbols are combined with a nationalist tide has been sweeping not only the United Kingdom and the United States, but also many other parts of Europe, including Poland, Hungary, France, The Netherlands and Scandinavia, not to mention, Russia, Turkey, India and Israel.

According to this narrative, economic insecurity and cultural anxiety that reflect sociodemographic trends have given momentum to ethnonationalism and religious separatism in both the United States and the United Kingdom. The Rust Belt is pitted against New York City, and the Midlands against London.

All this means that the crisis of neoliberalism, which started in 2008 now obtained political dimension, when the institutions created by neoliberalism are under attacks from the disgruntled population. The power of neoliberal propaganda, the power of brainwashing and indoctrination of population via MSM, schools and universities to push forward neoliberal globalization started to evaporate. And the fight against neoliberal globalization is not easy and it is not accidentally Hillary Clinton became the Democratic nominee and neoliberal MSM unlashed unprecedented campaign of blackmail against Trump.  The fact is, Sheldon Wolin not accidentally calls neoliberalism "inverted totalitarianism" . It's a system where corporate power has seized all of political  levers of control. In fact, under neoliberalism, there is no way to vote against the interests of Goldman Sachs or ExxonMobil or Raytheon. We also have lost our privacy. And under Obama, an assault against civil liberties has outstripped what George W. Bush carried out.

This is about the crisis of neoliberal ideology and especially Trotskyism part of it (neoliberalism can be viewed as Trotskyism for the rich). The following integral elements of this ideology no longer work well and are starting to cause the backlash:

  1. High level of inequality as the explicit, desirable goal (which raises the productivity). "Greed is good" or "Trickle down economics" -- redistribution of wealth up will create (via higher productivity) enough scrapes for the lower classes, lifting all boats.
  2. "Neoliberal rationality" when everything is a commodity that should be traded at specific market. Human beings also are viewed as market actors with every field of activity seen as a specialized market. Every entity (public or private, person, business, state) should be governed as a firm. "Neoliberalism construes even non-wealth generating spheres-such as learning, dating, or exercising-in market terms, submits them to market metrics, and governs them with market techniques and practices." People are just " human capital" who must constantly tend to their own present and future market value.
  3. Extreme financialization or converting the economy into "casino capitalism" (under neoliberalism everything is a marketable good, that is traded on explicit or implicit exchanges.)
  4. The idea of the global, USA dominated neoliberal empire and related "Permanent war for permanent peace" -- wars for enlarging global neoliberal empire via crushing non-compliant regimes either via color revolutions or via open military intervention.
  5. Downgrading ordinary people to the role of commodity and creating three classes of citizens (moochers, or Untermensch, "creative class" and top 0.1%), with the upper class (0.1% or "Masters of the Universe") being above the law like the top level of "nomenklatura" was in the USSR.
  6. "Downsizing" sovereignty of nations via international treaties like TPP, and making transnational corporations the key political players, "the deciders" as W aptly said. Who decide about the level of immigration flows, minimal wages, tariffs, and other matters that previously were prerogative of the state.

So after 36 (or more) years of dominance (which started with triumphal march of neoliberalism in early 90th) the ideology entered "zombie state". That does not make it less dangerous but its power over minds of the population started to evaporate. Far right ideologies now are filling the vacuum, as ith the discreditation of socialist ideology and decimation of "enlightened corporatism" of the New Deal in the USA there is no other viable alternatives.

The same happened in late 1960th with the Communist ideology. It took 20 years for the USSR to crash after that with the resulting splash of nationalism (which was the force that blow up the USSR) and far right ideologies.

It remains to be seen whether the neoliberal US elite will fare better then Soviet nomenklatura as challenges facing the USA are now far greater then challenges which the USSR faced at the time. Among them is oil depletion which might be the final nail into the coffin of neoliberalism and, specifically, the neoliberal globalization.

This has been a bipartisan effort, because they've both been captured by corporate power. We have undergone what John Ralston Saul correctly calls a corporate coup d'état in slow motion, and it's over.

Neoliberal poison destroys a society and lifts the politicians with nationalistic bend like Trump. First, neoliberalism dislocated the working class, de-industrialized the country. Then, in the name of austerity, it destroyed public institutions, education, public broadcasting. And then it poisoned the political system.

I would argue that in terms of megalomania and narcissism, Hillary Clinton is not far behind Trump. But the point is, we've got to break away from-which is exactly the narrative neoliberal MSM want us to focus on.

 We've got to break away from political personalities and understand and examine and critique the structures of power. And, in fact, the Democratic Party, especially beginning under Bill Clinton, has carried water for corporate entities as assiduously as the Republican Party.

We need to be aware of neoliberal brainwashing. I mean, this whole debate over the DNC WikiLeaks emails disclosure is insane. The key question here is not who leaked emails, but whether they are authentic or not. They are. As well as DNC dirty laundry exposed those long emails -- you should read them. They're really appalling, and exposes the way the Democratic primaries were rigged. Tricks used included the mechanism of the superdelegates (which unlawfully declared their allegiance very early creating pro-Clinton pressure of voters) , the stealing of the caucus in Nevada, and the huge amounts of corporate money and money of super PACs that flowed into the Clinton campaign. This faux feminism on which Hillary Clinton based her campaign is another propaganda trick. She si hostile to both women and children. Cold like any sociopath.  The fact is, Clinton has a track record of hurting US children: she and her husband destroyed welfare as we know it, and 70% of the original recipients were children.

If is important to understand that the rise of nationalism, the phenomenal success of Trump is just a form of backlash against neoliberalism. 

Continued...


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

Home 2016 2015

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section

Post election events (the first half of 2017) US Presidential Elections of 2016 from primaries to election day US Presidential Elections of 2016: Primaries US Presidential Elections of 2016: 2015 part of the campaign US Presidential Elections of 2012

[Jun 06, 2020] Antifa and its KKK tactics beating people up, trashing the homes of academics, shutting down discussion on campus speak for themselves. Goons hardly better than their sworn opponents.

Jun 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

gwilliard , Jun 6 2020 5:12 utc | 99

@25 & @27 & @51 & @69

I think NemesisCalling nails it here best of all, with keen nuances. I can't hear the sax without thinking of Bill Clinton, Mr. Mass Incarceration himself, playing on Saturday Night Live, and seducing black America and its turncoat elite, including Obama, for the next two decades of neoliberal ruin. The malcontribution to American black society of its entertainment and sports aristocracy could be fat treatise. So nice to see James Baldwin getting at the heart of things in his 1965 lecture.

Sorry, Antifa and its KKK tactics – beating people up, trashing the homes of academics, shutting down discussion on campus – speak for themselves. Goons hardly better than their sworn opponents.

Some items worth reading:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/antiracism-our-flawed-new-religion
https://unherd.com/2020/01/the-rise-of-identitarian-liberalism/
https://johnhalle.com/adolph-reed-on-sanders-coates-and-reparations/
https://www.thenation.com/article/culture/judith-butler-force-of-nonviolence-interview/ > see comment taking her down

@69 - The Verso ebooks on policing are free if you register an account. You have to pick ebook only, not paired with paperback.

anonymous , Jun 6 2020 5:15 utc | 104

@norecovery | Jun 5 2020 23:48 utc | 64

Anyone familiar with the Church Committee hearings knows that government agencies use agent provocateurs to corrupt movements from within. Knowing that doesn't prove any of the claims made herein. Without evidence it's all speculation. Speculation can be fun but when it gets taken seriously we have idiots shaping the narrative.

[Jun 06, 2020] The Worse the Better Why Antifa Wants Trump to Win by James Pinkerton

Jun 04, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

many thoughtful observers on the right -- including Ross Douthat , Rod Dreher , and Dan McCarthy -- have pointed out that the current protesting and rioting is likely to help Donald Trump and the Republicans. That is, the ongoing violence, fomented by leftist elements, including Black Lives Matter and Antifa, could boomerang against Joe Biden and his Democrats.

However, the planted assumption here is that the vandals and looters want Joe Biden to win. And that's not so obvious. Indeed, maybe the truth is just the reverse.

To be sure, the protesters and looters all hate Donald Trump. And yet actions speak louder than words, and their actions on the street suggest a kind of anti-matter affection for the Bad Orange Man. That is, each act of violence obscures the memory of George Floyd, who died at the knee of a Minneapolis policeman, and raises the prospect of a national backlash against both peaceful protestors and violent looters, offering a ray of hope for Trump.

Indeed, Douthat quotes Princeton political scientist Omar Wasow, whose research shows that back in the 1960s, peaceful civil rights protests helped the Democrats, while violent protests (also known as riots) hurt the Democrats. In Wasow's words, "proximity to black-led nonviolent protests increased white Democratic vote-share whereas proximity to black-led violent protests caused substantively important declines." And that's how Republican Richard Nixon defeated Democrat Hubert Humphrey in 1968.

We might add that Humphrey was a lot like Biden. Both were gabby senators turned vice presidents, regarded as reliable liberals, not as hard-edged leftists.

So now we're starting to see where Biden, a pillar of the smug liberal establishment -- he once told a group of donors that if he's elected, "nothing would fundamentally change" -- veers away from the far-left ideologues amidst the mobs.

Let's let Andy Ngo –who has shed blood , literally, while chronicling bullyboy leftists -- define the ideology of Antifa and Black Lives Matter: "At its core, BLM is a revolutionary Marxist ideology. Alicia Garza, Opal Tometi and Patrisse Cullors, BLM's founders, are self-identified Marxists who make no secret of their worship of communist terrorists and fugitives, like Assata Shakur. They want the abolition of law enforcement and capitalism. They want regime change and the end of the rule of law. Antifa has partnered with Black Lives Matter, for now, to help accelerate the breakdown of society."

We can observe that by "regime change," these revolutionary leftists don't mean replacing Trump with Biden -- they mean replacing capitalism and the Constitution. In the meantime, if one looks at a Twitter feed identified by Ngo as an Antifa hub, It's Going Down , one sees plenty of anti-Trump rhetoric, along with general hard leftism, but nothing in support of Biden.

However, here's something interesting: The Biden campaign shows no small degree of support for the street radicals. As Reuters reported on May 30,

"At least 13 Biden campaign staff members posted on Twitter on Friday and Saturday that they made donations to the Minnesota Freedom Fund, which opposes the practice of cash bail, or making people pay to avoid pre-trial imprisonment. The group uses donations to pay bail fees in Minneapolis."

We might observe that these 13 employees posted their pro-rioter sympathies on Twitter; in other words, not only did they make no effort to hide their donations, but they also actively bragged about them.

It could be argued, of course, that these are just 13 vanguard employees out of a campaign staff that numbers in the hundreds, maybe even thousands. And yet as the Reuters piece adds, Team Biden is not practicing political distancing from its in-house radicals: "Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates said in a statement to Reuters that the former vice president opposes the institution of cash bail as a 'modern day debtors prison.'"

When pressed by Reuters -- which is not exactly Fox News in its editorial stance -- the official spox for Middle Class Joe was unwilling to say more: "The campaign declined to answer questions on whether the donations were coordinated within the campaign, underscoring the politically thorny nature of the sometimes violent protests."

So we can see: The Biden campaign is trying to maintain its equipoise between liberals and mobs, even as the former is bleeding into the latter. Indeed, a look at Biden's Twitter feed shows the same port-side balancing act. On May 30, for instance, he tweeted , "If we are complacent, if we are silent, we are complicit in perpetuating these cycles of violence. None of us can turn away. We all have an obligation to speak out."

There's enough ambiguity here, as well as in his other tweets, to leave everyone parsing, and guessing, as to what, exactly, Biden is saying -- except, as he said on June 2, that he opposes the use of chokeholds to restrain violent suspects, and also opposes more equipment for the police. The only other thing we know for sure is that he hasn't tweeted an iota of specific sympathy for the people other than George Floyd who have died in the recent violence. One such is Patrick Underwood , an African American employee of the Federal Protective Service; he was shot and killed in Oakland, Calif. on May 29.

Yet while the Biden campaign attempts to keep its relationship with Antifa and its ilk fuzzy, other Democrats have made themselves clear. For instance, in 2018, then-Congressman Keith Ellison tweeted out a photograph of himself holding a copy of a book, Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, which the radical-chic types at The New Yorker described as "A how-to for would-be activists, and a record of advice from anti-Fascist organizers past and present." Ellison is now the attorney general for the state of Minnesota.

And on May 31, Ellison's son, Jeremiah, a Minneapolis city councilman, tweeted , "I hereby declare, officially, my support for ANTIFA."

Still, if the Democrats can't quite quit Antifa, most are smart enough to recognize the danger of being too closely associated with hooligans and radicals. Moreover, they need some theory of the case they wish to make, which is that they loudly support the protests, even as they mumble about the violence.

And Democrats have found their favored argument -- the one that conveniently takes them off the hook. Indeed, it's an argument they increasingly deploy to explain everything bad that happens: The Russians did it.

Thus on May 31, former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice said on CNN of the tumult, "In my experience, this is right out of the Russian playbook."

We might allow that it's possible, even probable, that the Russian government has been taking delight in this spate of violence in America. And it's similarly probable that the governments of China, Iran, and Venezuela, too, have been pleased, to say nothing of varying portions of the public in every country. And so sure, more than a few tweets and Facebook posts have probably resulted -- after all, stories ripping the U.S. were right there, for instance, on the front page of China's Global Times .

Still, it's ridiculous to think that hundreds of thousands -- maybe millions -- of Americans are taking their cues from a foreign power; we've got plenty of home-grown radicalism and anger.

Yet even so, the Democrats have persisted in their Russia-dunnit narrative, because it serves their political, and perhaps psychological, need -- the need to externalize criminal behavior. In other words, don't blame us for the killings and lootings -- blame Moscow.

Okay, so back to Antifa and Black Lives Matter. The left wing of the Democratic Party -- including elements within the Biden campaign -- might like them, but there's no evidence that they like Democrats back.

Indeed, if the violence keeps up, it will become obvious that the leftist radicals are not trying to help Biden. To put it another way, the rads would become the objective allies (a political science term connoting an ironic congruence of interest) of Trump.

To be sure, right now, Trump is running five or six points behind Biden in the RealClearPolitics polling average . And yet, just as Dreher, Douthat, and McCarthy suggest, if the violence continues and Trump goes firm while Biden stays mushy, that could change.

Indeed, as we think of genuine radicalism, we would do well to look beyond the parochial confines of American politics, Democrat vs. Republican. Instead, we might ponder the epic panorama of leftist history, which offers radicals so much more inspiration than historically centrist America.

For instance, we might look to Russia. But not to the Russia of Vladimir Putin , but rather, to the Russia of Vladimir Lenin .

In the early 20th century, Lenin's Bolsheviks, awaiting their revolutionary moment, operated according to a simple slogan: "The worse the better." That is, the enemy of Bolshevism was incremental reform, or progress of any kind; the reds wanted conditions to get so bad as to "justify" a communist revolution. And that's what Lenin and his comrades got in October 1917, when they seized power in the midst of the calamities of World War One.

Yes, of course, the communists made conditions worse, not better, for ordinary Russians. And yet things weren't worse for Lenin and his Bolsheviks -- they were now in power. So today, that's the sort of dream that inspires Antifa radicals.

To be sure, an America dominated by Antifa and Black Lives Matter is a distant prospect. But radicals figure that four more years of Trump in the White House will move the nation to even higher levels of chaos -- and thus move them closer to power.

With all that in prospect for radicals -- that is, the worse, the better -- the prospect of Joe Biden losing this year is a small price to pay. Actually, for them, it's no price at all.

In the meantime, for America, there is no better. Only worse.

[Jun 06, 2020] National Justice Exclusive Brooklyn Based Antifa Network Helping Organize Violence Across The Country by Eric Striker

Antifa can't function without covert support of FBI. That's given.
Notable quotes:
"... According to reporting in a Brooklyn publication from 2013, the "anarchist collective" is run by Elysa Lozano, an assistant professor at LaGuardia Community College who wears her violent extremist views on her sleeve, and Khalid Robinson, a man who according to an interview on an anarchist podcast is the organizer of the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement in New York City. ..."
"... Robinson, pictured above with Lozano, can be seen wearing an "antifa" t-shirt sold as part of a fundraiser for the "Tinley Park 5," a group of anarchists who were arrested for brutally injuring 10 people in a premeditated hammer attack in the Illinois suburb of Tinley Park in 2012. ..."
"... It is unknown how much criminal activity is planned at this venue, but it is a bug light for left-wing extremists from across the country and abroad. The group uses images of explosions as its logo , and has close ties to the Kurdish terrorist militia in Syria, the YPG, which has provided many American anarchists with military training undoubtedly being used in the riots as we speak. ..."
"... National Justice ..."
"... National Justice ..."
"... National Justice ..."
"... It's obvious from surveillance video that Floyd was dealing drugs out of his parked car on the corner that fateful morning. The cops apprehending him appear nonchalant, quietly going about their business with a routine arrest. Only when Floyd begins physically resisting do things begin to go south. ..."
"... How is Floyd's life worth all this havoc? The guy was a criminal deviant who brought his demise upon himself. He was not a sterling example of a freedom fighter or a high-minded social reformer. He playacted not being able to walk, collapsing on the sidewalk as he was being escorted to the cop car. Went all jelly-legged. Winced when a cop merely steered him by one of his burly arms which, while handcuffed behind his back were obviously not overly constrained. Play acting. Oh, the poor 230 lb. black boy, built like Hercules himself, acting all hurt when an Asian male puts a little directing pressure on his arm. ..."
Jun 03, 2020 | www.unz.com

As American cities burn and people are murdered in the street with impunity by groups protesting the death of George Floyd, very little reporting has been done on who exactly is responsible beyond tweets from Donald Trump about the mobs being led by "Antifa" (Anti-Fascist) -- an umbrella term anarchist organizations use as propaganda when trying to win liberal support for paramilitary attacks they conduct on nationalist protesters and Trump supporters.

The mainstream media has played its role in intentionally obfuscating who exactly the groups inciting the rioting and killing are by claiming "antifa" is not a group, which is a malicious half-truth. Law enforcement sources, Andy Ngo , and Fox News have identified two organizations as playing an active role in the carnage: The Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement and The Base .

These two groups are interlinked, and currently encouraging and organizing the violence in the New York City area.

Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement and The Base

The Base, whose Facebook page is now explicitly telling people to commit acts of violence, is an above ground "organizational space" located at 1286 Myrtle Ave in Bushwick, Brooklyn.

According to reporting in a Brooklyn publication from 2013, the "anarchist collective" is run by Elysa Lozano, an assistant professor at LaGuardia Community College who wears her violent extremist views on her sleeve, and Khalid Robinson, a man who according to an interview on an anarchist podcast is the organizer of the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement in New York City.

Robinson, pictured above with Lozano, can be seen wearing an "antifa" t-shirt sold as part of a fundraiser for the "Tinley Park 5," a group of anarchists who were arrested for brutally injuring 10 people in a premeditated hammer attack in the Illinois suburb of Tinley Park in 2012.

According to Robinson's interview on the "Solecast," he helped start The Base as "a place for anarchists to meet."

It is unknown how much criminal activity is planned at this venue, but it is a bug light for left-wing extremists from across the country and abroad. The group uses images of explosions as its logo , and has close ties to the Kurdish terrorist militia in Syria, the YPG, which has provided many American anarchists with military training undoubtedly being used in the riots as we speak.

The front is also an operating space for groups like the NYC Anarchist Black Cross, which is composed of "antifa" members and used as an above ground way to raise money and write prisoners letters.

A photograph obtained by open source intelligence shows masked "antifa" members the media claims don't exist posing in front of The Base.

As for Khalid Robinson's Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement, they do not hide what they are about. As Fox News' Lara Logan has reported , they believe in engaging in racial violence against white people and random police officers in the name of overthrowing "white supremacy."

The group has two flags, one featuring a red AK-47 on a black banner, and another showing a red star with the acronym "RAM."

An image of masked RAM members posing with shotguns, AK-47s, machetes and an "antifa" flag was obtained by National Justice .

This group has been operating for years, spreading violent propaganda with the help of social media companies, all while the FBI devotes all of its resources to chasing around imaginary "white supremacist terrorists."

The extent of their terrorist activities is unknown, but they have been very active in the George Floyd riots -- calling it a "black liberation revolt" -- and have chapters across the country.

Related "Antifa" Extremists In Brooklyn

Christian Erazo is another important figure in organizing anarchist violence in New York City.

Erazo, pictured above on the far right in the red and green bandana filming a video announcing plans to disrupt public transportation, was profiled for his activities by National Justice last January for his part in planning the J31 subway riots . In spite of this reporting, the NYPD and the FBI took no action either against the people who planned this chaos, or the Synagogue who allowed them to host their planning sessions.

Erazo, the lead singer of punk band (A) Truth pictured above clutching the "antifa" flag, helps lead multiple violent anarchist projects, such as Brigada 71 (a left-wing soccer hooligan group associated with the New York Cosmos) and NYC Antifa . Brigada 71 spends a lot of time at the East River Bar, a popular hangout for left-wing soccer hooligans, on 97 South 6th Street in Brooklyn,

Both groups are also currently encouraging the violence on social media and are close to the owners of The Base, who let them use the venue for their activities. Meet up spots like The Base play an important role in providing fresh recruits due to its storefront visibility, which invites curious and bored hipsters and radicalizes them in the rapidly gentrifying neighborhood.

For years, Erazo used a warehouse on 258 Johnson Ave in East Williamsburg nicknamed "The Swamp" to host punk rock shows that would serve to recruit new anarchists. While Erazo and his friends did their best to keep the spot a secret, a Brooklyn hipster publication listed "The Swamp" as a cool place to see music as recently as 2015. Erazo is specifically named as its "founder."

According to a source familiar with the anarchist community, when music wasn't playing, the building had a gym and was used to conduct paramilitary training. While there doesn't seem to be any more concerts happening at The Swamp, it is unknown if these anarchist groups are still utilizing the space for other activities.

The Real Reason Its Difficult to Prosecute "Antifa"

Many Americans have complained that neither the police nor the FBI appear interested in investigating or prosecuting anarchist paramilitary groups, even when they are leading the worst and most deadly riots in modern history.

This isn't because it is hard to find out who these people are. It is due to state corruption and privilege. A large number of anarchists are the sons and daughters of politicians, bankers, judges, and other connected elite figures, thus immunizing from the consequences of their crimes.

Recently, New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio's own daughter was arrested among the rioters in the city he governs. Vice presidential contender and Virginia Senator Tim Kaine's son is another example. An "antifa" organizer was exposed by National Justice as the grandson of a judge and nephew of a Congressman who is also now a judge.

Ken Klippenstein, a digital blogger who is a fan of the anarchist groups dubbed "antifa," was leaked documents by FBI agents about with details about an ongoing investigation into the activities of these violent extremists.

With virtually every institution in America expressing support for these terrorist groups, along with their connections to powerful officials, Donald Trump's bluster about labeling them a terrorist group appears to be nothing but a gust of hot air.


ThreeCranes , says: Show Comment June 3, 2020 at 1:18 pm GMT

It's obvious from surveillance video that Floyd was dealing drugs out of his parked car on the corner that fateful morning. The cops apprehending him appear nonchalant, quietly going about their business with a routine arrest. Only when Floyd begins physically resisting do things begin to go south.

So this is the hill that liberals choose to take a stand and die on. Defending a low-life, street drug dealer, who has three cocaine priors on his rap sheet. And when legitimate, unrelated businesses burn, they say, "Good. That's justice for Floyd."

And they can't see how insane this is? How is Floyd's life worth all this havoc? The guy was a criminal deviant who brought his demise upon himself. He was not a sterling example of a freedom fighter or a high-minded social reformer. He playacted not being able to walk, collapsing on the sidewalk as he was being escorted to the cop car. Went all jelly-legged. Winced when a cop merely steered him by one of his burly arms which, while handcuffed behind his back were obviously not overly constrained. Play acting. Oh, the poor 230 lb. black boy, built like Hercules himself, acting all hurt when an Asian male puts a little directing pressure on his arm.

What a despicable farce. There's no hope for a nation in which different sides play by different Rules. The Left obeys no Laws. Acknowledges no limits to their behavior. Acts according to what will best advance their cause. Has no compunction about lying, about destroying their enemies by any means, fair or foul, possible.

If factions within a Nation will not and do not agree on basic Rules of the Contest, then no governance is possible. That Nation will, indeed, degenerate into anarchy. This just is . For some reason, someone wants America to fracture into smaller units.

JimDandy , says: Show Comment June 4, 2020 at 7:17 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes I mean, he did five years in Prison for bursting into a woman's house with 5 other thugs and jamming a gun into her gut during an attempted robbery. (I heard she was pregnant, but I'm not sure.) She was battered, though. This is their great Saint.
Alden , says: Show Comment June 5, 2020 at 4:25 am GMT
@JimDandy She was pregnant black and had a miscarriage because of the beating that huge man gave her.
jbwilson24 , says: Show Comment June 3, 2020 at 1:51 pm GMT
" the NYPD and the FBI took no action either against the people who planned this chaos, or the Synagogue who allowed them to host their planning sessions."

Well, surprise surprise. Violent left wing groups hold planning sessions in Synagogues.

The 'Russian' revolution and others in Eastern Europe followed the same pattern.

It's all political theatre. Antifa, supported by Jewish money, rails against 'white privilege', never daring to point out that most of the powerbrokers and influencers (eg, bankers, Hollywood studio owners, blackface performers, publishing house owners) are Jews.

Beavertales , says: Show Comment June 3, 2020 at 2:25 pm GMT
Leftist revolutionary radicals enjoy the support and protection of the establishment which appoints them 'the good guys'.

If you are a conservative, you have no overt support from professors, journalists, politicians, or trend-setting celebrities. You're labeled 'the bad guys'.

If given an informed choice, the Silent Majority of Americans would side with young conservatives over young anarchists. The problem is that the other side is ahead in a culture war, and the right is only just getting on its feet to fight it.

fnn , says: Show Comment June 3, 2020 at 5:47 pm GMT
@anonymous It just takes a few seconds to search "kurds +antifa" and find more than a few stories.

[Jun 05, 2020] Neoliberal Fascism and the Echoes of History

Both national socialism and neoliberalism are flavors of corporatism, so they have a common parent...
Jun 05, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

... ... ...

Fascism by Trial in the Age of Trump

In a thoughtful analysis, the Irish journalist O'Toole asserts neoliberalism creates the conditions for enabling what he calls a trial run for a full-blown state of contemporary fascism:

To grasp what is going on in the world right now, we need to reflect on two things. One is that we are in a phase of trial runs. The other is that what is being trialed is fascism -- a word that should be used carefully but not shirked when it is so clearly on the horizon. Forget 'post-fascist' -- what we are living with is pre-fascism. Rather than overthrow democracy in one full swipe, it has to be undermined through rigged elections, the creation of tribal identities, and legitimated through a 'propaganda machine so effective that it creates for its followers a universe of "alternative facts" impervious to unwanted realities.' . Fascism doesn't arise suddenly in an existing democracy. It is not easy to get people to give up their ideas of freedom and civility. You have to do trial runs that, if they are done well, serve two purposes. They get people used to something they may initially recoil from, and they allow you to refine and calibrate. This is what is happening now and we would be fools not to see it. 40

Ultra-nationalist and contemporary versions of fascism are gaining traction across the globe in countries such as Greece (Golden Dawn), Hungary (Jobbik), India (Bharatiya Janata Party), and Italy (the League) and countless others. ...

... ... ...

Trump has elevated himself as the patron saint of a ruthless neoliberalism. This is evident in the various miracles he has performed for the rich and powerful. He has systemically deregulated regulations that extend from environmental protections to worker safety rules. He has enacted a $1.5-trillion tax policy that amounts to a huge gift to the financial elite and all the while maintaining his "man of the people" posture. He has appointed a range of neoliberal fundamentalists to head major government posts designed to serve the public. Most, like Scott Pruitt, the former head of the Environmental Protection Agency, and Betsy DeVos, the secretary of Education, have proved to be either corrupt, incompetent, or often both. Along with the Republican Congress, Trump has vastly increased the military budget to $717 billion, creating huge financial profits for the military-industrial-defense complex while instituting policies that eviscerate the welfare state and further expand a war machine that generates mass suffering and death.

Trump has reduced food assistance for those who are forced to choose between eating and taking medicine, and his policies have prevented millions from getting adequate health care. 43 Last but not least, he has become a cheerleader for the gun and security industries going so far as to call for the arming of teachers as a way to redress mass shootings in the nation's schools. All of these policies serve to unleash the anti-liberal and anti-democratic passions, fears, anxieties and anger necessary to mainstream fascism.

... ... ...

The United States is in a dangerous moment in its history, which makes it all the more crucial to understand how a distinctive form of neoliberal fascism now bears down on the present and threatens to usher in a period of unprecedented barbarism in the not too distant future. In an attempt to address this new political conjuncture, I want to suggest that rather than view fascism simply as a repetition of the past, it is crucial to forge a new vocabulary and politics to grasp how neoliberal fascism has become a uniquely American model for the present. One way to address this challenge is to rethink what lessons can be learned by interrogating how matters of language and memory can be used to illuminate the dark forces connecting the past and present as part of the new hybridized political nightmare.

The Language of Fascism

Fascism begins not with violence, police assaults or mass killings, but with language. Trump reminded us of this in 2015 while announcing his candidacy for president. He stated, without irony or shame, that "when Mexico sends its people, they're not sending the best. They're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime...

... ... ...

Neoliberal fascism converges with an earlier form of fascism in its commitment to a language of erasure and a politics of disposability. In the fascist script, historical memory becomes a liability, even dangerous, when it functions pedagogically to inform our political and social imagination...

Unsurprisingly, historical memory as a form of enlightenment and demystification is surely at odds with Trump's abuse of history as a form of social amnesia and political camouflage,,,

... ... ...

At the same time, the corruption of language is often followed by the corruption of memory, morality and the eventual disappearance of books, ideas and human beings. Prominent German historians such as Richard J. Evans and Victor Klemperer have made clear that for fascist dictators, the dynamics of state censorship and repression had an endpoint in a politics of disappearance, extermination and the death camps.

...neoliberal fascism has restructured civic life that valorizes ignorance, avarice and willful forgetting. In the current Trumpian moment, shouting replaces the pedagogical imperative to listen and reinforces the stories neoliberal fascism tells us about ourselves, our relations to others and the larger world. Under such circumstances, monstrous deeds are committed under the increasing normalization of civic and historical modes of illiteracy. One consequence is that comparisons to the Nazi past can whither in the false belief that historical events are fixed in time and place and can only be repeated in history books. In an age marked by a war on terror, a culture of fear and the normalization of uncertainty, social amnesia has become a power tool for dismantling democracy. Indeed, in this age of forgetfulness, American society appears to revel in what it should be ashamed of and alarmed over.

... ... ...

Trump's selective appropriation of history wages war on the past, choosing to celebrate rather than question fascist horrors. The past in this case is a script that must be followed rather than interrogated. Trump's view of history is at once "ugly and revealing."....

The production of new narratives accompanied by critical inquiries into the past would help explain why people participated in the horrors of fascism and what it might take to prevent such complicity from unfolding again. Comparing Trump's ideology, policies and language to a fascist past offers the possibility to learn what is old and new in the dark times that have descended upon the United States. The pressing relevance of the 1930s is crucial to address how fascist ideas and practices originate and adapt to new conditions, and how people capitulate and resist them as well.

...Neoliberal fascism insists that everything, including human beings, are to be made over in the image of the market. Everyone is now subject to a paralyzing language of individual responsibility and a disciplinary apparatus that revises downward the American dream of social mobility. Time is now a burden for most people and the lesson to draw from this punishing neoliberal ideology is that everyone is alone in navigating their own fate.

At work here is a neoliberal project to reduce people to human capital and redefine human agency beyond the bonds of sociality, equality, belonging and obligation. All problems and their solutions are now defined exclusively within the purview of the individual. This is a depoliticizing discourse that champions mythic notions of self-reliance and individual character to promote the tearing up of social solidarities and the public spheres that support them.

All aspects of the social and public are now considered suspect, including social space, social provisions, social protections and social dependency, especially for those who are poor and vulnerable. According to the philosopher Byung-Chul Han, the subjects in a "neoliberal economy do not constitute a we that is capable of collective action. The mounting egoization and atomization of society is shrinking the space for collective action. As such, it blocks the formation of a counter power that might be able to put the capitalist order in question." 65

At the core of neoliberal fascism is a view of subjectivity that celebrates a narcissistic hyper-individualism that radiates with a near sociopathic lack of interest in others with whom it shares a globe on the brink of catastrophe. This project is wedded to a politics that produces a high threshold of disappearance and serves to disconnect the material moorings and wreckage of neoliberal fascism from its underlying power relations.

Neoliberal fascism thrives on producing subjects that internalize its values, corroding their ability to imagine an alternative world. Under such conditions, not only is agency depoliticized, but the political is emptied of any real substance and unable to challenge neoliberalism's belief in extreme inequality and social abandonment. This fosters fascism's deep-rooted investment ultra-nationalism, racial purity and the politics of terminal exclusion.

We live at a time in which the social is individualized and at odds with a notion of solidarity once described by Frankfurt School theorist Herbert Marcuse as "the refusal to let one's happiness coexist with the suffering of others." 66 Marcuse invokes a forgotten notion of the social in which one is willing not only to make sacrifices for others but also "to engage in joint struggle against the cause of suffering or against a common adversary." 67

One step toward fighting and overcoming the criminogenic machinery of terminal exclusion and social death endemic to neoliberal fascism is to make education central to a politics that changes the way people think, desire, hope and act. How might language and history adopt modes of persuasion that anchor democratic life in a commitment to economic equality, social justice and a broad shared vision? The challenge we face under a fascism buoyed by a savage neoliberalism is to ask and act on what language, memory and education as the practice of freedom might mean in a democracy. What work can they perform, how can hope be nourished by collective action and the ongoing struggle to create a broad-based democratic socialist movement? What work has to be done to "imagine a politics in which empowerment can grow and public freedom thrive without violence?" 68 What institutions have to be defended and fought for if the spirit of a radical democracy is to return to view and survive?

[Jun 05, 2020] A large number of anarchists are the sons and daughters of politicians, bankers, judges, and other connected elite figures

Jun 05, 2020 | www.unz.com

SunBakedSuburb , says: Show Comment June 5, 2020 at 4:02 pm GMT

"A large number of anarchists are the sons and daughters of politicians, bankers, judges, and other connected elite figures"

Says a lot about the managerial class that serves the wicked elites.

[Jun 05, 2020] Antifa in Theory and in Practice

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In recent weeks, a totally disoriented left has been widely exhorted to unify around a masked vanguard calling itself Antifa, for anti-fascist. Hooded and dressed in black, Antifa is essentially a variation of the Black Bloc, familiar for introducing violence into peaceful demonstrations in many countries. Imported from Europe, the label Antifa sounds more political. It also serves the purpose of stigmatizing those it attacks as "fascists". ..."
"... Bray's "enlightening contribution" is to a tell a flattering version of the Antifa story to a generation whose dualistic, Holocaust-centered view of history has largely deprived them of both the factual and the analytical tools to judge multidimensional events such as the growth of fascism. Bray presents today's Antifa as though it were the glorious legitimate heir to every noble cause since abolitionism. But there were no anti-fascists before fascism, and the label "Antifa" by no means applies to all the many adversaries of fascism. ..."
"... The implicit claim to carry on the tradition of the International Brigades who fought in Spain against Franco is nothing other than a form of innocence by association. Since we must revere the heroes of the Spanish Civil War, some of that esteem is supposed to rub off on their self-designated heirs. Unfortunately, there are no veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade still alive to point to the difference between a vast organized defense against invading fascist armies and skirmishes on the Berkeley campus. As for the Anarchists of Catalonia, the patent on anarchism ran out a long time ago, and anyone is free to market his own generic. ..."
"... Since historic fascism no longer exists, Bray's Antifa have broadened their notion of "fascism" to include anything that violates the current Identity Politics canon: from "patriarchy" (a pre-fascist attitude to put it mildly) to "transphobia" (decidedly a post-fascist problem). ..."
"... The masked militants of Antifa seem to be more inspired by Batman than by Marx or even by Bakunin. ..."
"... The main technique is guilt by association. High on the list of mortal sins is criticism of the European Union, which is associated with "nationalism" which is associated with "fascism" which is associated with "anti-Semitism", hinting at a penchant for genocide. This coincides perfectly with the official policy of the EU and EU governments, but Antifa uses much harsher language. ..."
"... The moral of this story is simple. Self-appointed radical revolutionaries can be the most useful thought police for the neoliberal war party. ..."
"... In reality, immigration is a complex subject, with many aspects that can lead to reasonable compromise. But to polarize the issue misses the chances for compromise. By making mass immigration the litmus test of whether or not one is fascist, Antifa intimidation impedes reasonable discussion. Without discussion, without readiness to listen to all viewpoints, the issue will simply divide the population into two camps, for and against. And who will win such a confrontation? ..."
"... The idea that the way to shut someone up is to punch him in the jaw is as American as Hollywood movies. It is also typical of the gang war that prevails in certain parts of Los Angeles. Banding together with others "like us" to fight against gangs of "them" for control of turf is characteristic of young men in uncertain circumstances. The search for a cause can involve endowing such conduct with a political purpose: either fascist or antifascist. For disoriented youth, this is an alternative to joining the U.S. Marines. ..."
"... American Antifa looks very much like a middle class wedding between Identity Politics and gang warfare. Mark Bray (page 175) quotes his DC Antifa source as implying that the motive of would-be fascists is to side with "the most powerful kid in the block" and will retreat if scared. Our gang is tougher than your gang. ..."
"... In the United States, the worst thing about Antifa is the effort to lead the disoriented American left into a wild goose chase, tracking down imaginary "fascists" instead of getting together openly to work out a coherent positive program. The United States has more than its share of weird individuals, of gratuitous aggression, of crazy ideas, and tracking down these marginal characters, whether alone or in groups, is a huge distraction. The truly dangerous people in the United States are safely ensconced in Wall Street, in Washington Think Tanks, in the executive suites of the sprawling military industry, not to mention the editorial offices of some of the mainstream media currently adopting a benevolent attitude toward "anti-fascists" simply because they are useful in focusing on the maverick Trump instead of themselves. ..."
"... Antifa USA, by defining "resistance to fascism" as resistance to lost causes – the Confederacy, white supremacists and for that matter Donald Trump – is actually distracting from resistance to the ruling neoliberal establishment, which is also opposed to the Confederacy and white supremacists and has already largely managed to capture Trump by its implacable campaign of denigration. That ruling establishment, which in its insatiable foreign wars and introduction of police state methods, has successfully used popular "resistance to Trump" to make him even worse than he already was. ..."
Oct 11, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org

Photo by jcrakow | CC BY 2.0

" Fascists are divided into two categories: the fascists and the anti-fascists ."

– Ennio Flaiano, Italian writer and co-author of Federico Fellini's greatest film scripts.

In recent weeks, a totally disoriented left has been widely exhorted to unify around a masked vanguard calling itself Antifa, for anti-fascist. Hooded and dressed in black, Antifa is essentially a variation of the Black Bloc, familiar for introducing violence into peaceful demonstrations in many countries. Imported from Europe, the label Antifa sounds more political. It also serves the purpose of stigmatizing those it attacks as "fascists".

Despite its imported European name, Antifa is basically just another example of America's steady descent into violence.

Historical Pretensions

Antifa first came to prominence from its role in reversing Berkeley's proud "free speech" tradition by preventing right wing personalities from speaking there. But its moment of glory was its clash with rightwingers in Charlottesville on August 12, largely because Trump commented that there were "good people on both sides". With exuberant Schadenfreude, commentators grabbed the opportunity to condemn the despised President for his "moral equivalence", thereby bestowing a moral blessing on Antifa.

Charlottesville served as a successful book launching for Antifa: the Antifascist Handbook , whose author, young academic Mark Bray, is an Antifa in both theory and practice. The book is "really taking off very fast", rejoiced the publisher, Melville House. It instantly won acclaim from leading mainstream media such as the New York Times , The Guardian and NBC, not hitherto known for rushing to review leftwing books, least of all those by revolutionary anarchists.

The Washington Post welcomed Bray as spokesman for "insurgent activist movements" and observed that: "The book's most enlightening contribution is on the history of anti-fascist efforts over the past century, but its most relevant for today is its justification for stifling speech and clobbering white supremacists."

Bray's "enlightening contribution" is to a tell a flattering version of the Antifa story to a generation whose dualistic, Holocaust-centered view of history has largely deprived them of both the factual and the analytical tools to judge multidimensional events such as the growth of fascism. Bray presents today's Antifa as though it were the glorious legitimate heir to every noble cause since abolitionism. But there were no anti-fascists before fascism, and the label "Antifa" by no means applies to all the many adversaries of fascism.

The implicit claim to carry on the tradition of the International Brigades who fought in Spain against Franco is nothing other than a form of innocence by association. Since we must revere the heroes of the Spanish Civil War, some of that esteem is supposed to rub off on their self-designated heirs. Unfortunately, there are no veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade still alive to point to the difference between a vast organized defense against invading fascist armies and skirmishes on the Berkeley campus. As for the Anarchists of Catalonia, the patent on anarchism ran out a long time ago, and anyone is free to market his own generic.

The original Antifascist movement was an effort by the Communist International to cease hostilities with Europe's Socialist Parties in order to build a common front against the triumphant movements led by Mussolini and Hitler.

Since Fascism thrived, and Antifa was never a serious adversary, its apologists thrive on the "nipped in the bud" claim: "if only" Antifascists had beat up the fascist movements early enough, the latter would have been nipped in the bud. Since reason and debate failed to stop the rise of fascism, they argue, we must use street violence – which, by the way, failed even more decisively.

This is totally ahistorical. Fascism exalted violence, and violence was its preferred testing ground. Both Communists and Fascists were fighting in the streets and the atmosphere of violence helped fascism thrive as a bulwark against Bolshevism, gaining the crucial support of leading capitalists and militarists in their countries, which brought them to power.

Since historic fascism no longer exists, Bray's Antifa have broadened their notion of "fascism" to include anything that violates the current Identity Politics canon: from "patriarchy" (a pre-fascist attitude to put it mildly) to "transphobia" (decidedly a post-fascist problem).

The masked militants of Antifa seem to be more inspired by Batman than by Marx or even by Bakunin.

Storm Troopers of the Neoliberal War Party

Since Mark Bray offers European credentials for current U.S. Antifa, it is appropriate to observe what Antifa amounts to in Europe today.

In Europe, the tendency takes two forms. Black Bloc activists regularly invade various leftist demonstrations in order to smash windows and fight the police. These testosterone exhibits are of minor political significance, other than provoking public calls to strengthen police forces. They are widely suspected of being influenced by police infiltration.

As an example, last September 23, several dozen black-clad masked ruffians, tearing down posters and throwing stones, attempted to storm the platform where the flamboyant Jean-Luc Mélenchon was to address the mass meeting of La France Insoumise , today the leading leftist party in France. Their unspoken message seemed to be that nobody is revolutionary enough for them. Occasionally, they do actually spot a random skinhead to beat up. This establishes their credentials as "anti-fascist".

They use these credentials to arrogate to themselves the right to slander others in a sort of informal self-appointed inquisition.

As prime example, in late 2010, a young woman named Ornella Guyet appeared in Paris seeking work as a journalist in various leftist periodicals and blogs. She "tried to infiltrate everywhere", according to the former director of Le Monde diplomatique , Maurice Lemoine, who "always intuitively distrusted her "when he hired her as an intern.

Viktor Dedaj, who manages one of the main leftist sites in France, Le Grand Soir , was among those who tried to help her, only to experience an unpleasant surprise a few months later. Ornella had become a self-appointed inquisitor dedicated to denouncing "conspirationism, confusionism, anti-Semitism and red-brown" on Internet. This took the form of personal attacks on individuals whom she judged to be guilty of those sins. What is significant is that all her targets were opposed to U.S. and NATO aggressive wars in the Middle East.

Indeed, the timing of her crusade coincided with the "regime change" wars that destroyed Libya and tore apart Syria. The attacks singled out leading critics of those wars.

Viktor Dedaj was on her hit list. So was Michel Collon, close to the Belgian Workers Party, author, activist and manager of the bilingual site Investig'action. So was François Ruffin, film-maker, editor of the leftist journal Fakir elected recently to the National Assembly on the list of Mélenchon's party La France Insoumise . And so on. The list is long.

The targeted personalities are diverse, but all have one thing in common: opposition to aggressive wars. What's more, so far as I can tell, just about everyone opposed to those wars is on her list.

The main technique is guilt by association. High on the list of mortal sins is criticism of the European Union, which is associated with "nationalism" which is associated with "fascism" which is associated with "anti-Semitism", hinting at a penchant for genocide. This coincides perfectly with the official policy of the EU and EU governments, but Antifa uses much harsher language.

In mid-June 2011, the anti-EU party Union Populaire Républicaine led by François Asselineau was the object of slanderous insinuations on Antifa internet sites signed by "Marie-Anne Boutoleau" (a pseudonym for Ornella Guyet). Fearing violence, owners cancelled scheduled UPR meeting places in Lyon. UPR did a little investigation, discovering that Ornella Guyet was on the speakers list at a March 2009 Seminar on International Media organized in Paris by the Center for the Study of International Communications and the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University. A surprising association for such a zealous crusader against "red-brown".

In case anyone has doubts, "red-brown" is a term used to smear anyone with generally leftist views – that is, "red" – with the fascist color "brown". This smear can be based on having the same opinion as someone on the right, speaking on the same platform with someone on the right, being published alongside someone on the right, being seen at an anti-war demonstration also attended by someone on the right, and so on. This is particularly useful for the War Party, since these days, many conservatives are more opposed to war than leftists who have bought into the "humanitarian war" mantra.

The government doesn't need to repress anti-war gatherings. Antifa does the job.

The Franco-African comedien Dieudonné M'Bala M'Bala, stigmatized for anti-Semitism since 2002 for his TV sketch lampooning an Israeli settler as part of George W. Bush's "Axis of Good", is not only a target, but serves as a guilty association for anyone who defends his right to free speech – such as Belgian professor Jean Bricmont, virtually blacklisted in France for trying to get in a word in favor of free speech during a TV talk show. Dieudonné has been banned from the media, sued and fined countless times, even sentenced to jail in Belgium, but continues to enjoy a full house of enthusiastic supporters at his one-man shows, where the main political message is opposition to war.

Still, accusations of being soft on Dieudonné can have serious effects on individuals in more precarious positions, since the mere hint of "anti-Semitism" can be a career killer in France. Invitations are cancelled, publications refused, messages go unanswered.

In April 2016, Ornella Guyet dropped out of sight, amid strong suspicions about her own peculiar associations.

The moral of this story is simple. Self-appointed radical revolutionaries can be the most useful thought police for the neoliberal war party.

I am not suggesting that all, or most, Antifa are agents of the establishment. But they can be manipulated, infiltrated or impersonated precisely because they are self-anointed and usually more or less disguised.

Silencing Necessary Debate

One who is certainly sincere is Mark Bray, author of The Intifa Handbook . It is clear where Mark Bray is coming from when he writes (p.36-7): " Hitler's 'final solution' murdered six million Jews in gas chambers, with firing squads, through hunger an lack of medical treatment in squalid camps and ghettoes, with beatings, by working them to death, and through suicidal despair. Approximately two out of every three Jews on the continent were killed, including some of my relatives."

This personal history explains why Mark Bray feels passionately about "fascism". This is perfectly understandable in one who is haunted by fear that "it can happen again".

However, even the most justifiable emotional concerns do not necessarily contribute to wise counsel. Violent reactions to fear may seem to be strong and effective when in reality they are morally weak and practically ineffectual.

We are in a period of great political confusion. Labeling every manifestation of "political incorrectness" as fascism impedes clarification of debate over issues that very much need to be defined and clarified.

The scarcity of fascists has been compensated by identifying criticism of immigration as fascism. This identification, in connection with rejection of national borders, derives much of its emotional force above all from the ancestral fear in the Jewish community of being excluded from the nations in which they find themselves.

The issue of immigration has different aspects in different places. It is not the same in European countries as in the United States. There is a basic distinction between immigrants and immigration. Immigrants are people who deserve consideration. Immigration is a policy that needs to be evaluated. It should be possible to discuss the policy without being accused of persecuting the people. After all, trade union leaders have traditionally opposed mass immigration, not out of racism, but because it can be a deliberate capitalist strategy to bring down wages.

In reality, immigration is a complex subject, with many aspects that can lead to reasonable compromise. But to polarize the issue misses the chances for compromise. By making mass immigration the litmus test of whether or not one is fascist, Antifa intimidation impedes reasonable discussion. Without discussion, without readiness to listen to all viewpoints, the issue will simply divide the population into two camps, for and against. And who will win such a confrontation?

A recent survey* shows that mass immigration is increasingly unpopular in all European countries. The complexity of the issue is shown by the fact that in the vast majority of European countries, most people believe they have a duty to welcome refugees, but disapprove of continued mass immigration. The official argument that immigration is a good thing is accepted by only 40%, compared to 60% of all Europeans who believe that "immigration is bad for our country". A left whose principal cause is open borders will become increasingly unpopular.

Childish Violence

The idea that the way to shut someone up is to punch him in the jaw is as American as Hollywood movies. It is also typical of the gang war that prevails in certain parts of Los Angeles. Banding together with others "like us" to fight against gangs of "them" for control of turf is characteristic of young men in uncertain circumstances. The search for a cause can involve endowing such conduct with a political purpose: either fascist or antifascist. For disoriented youth, this is an alternative to joining the U.S. Marines.

American Antifa looks very much like a middle class wedding between Identity Politics and gang warfare. Mark Bray (page 175) quotes his DC Antifa source as implying that the motive of would-be fascists is to side with "the most powerful kid in the block" and will retreat if scared. Our gang is tougher than your gang.

That is also the logic of U.S. imperialism, which habitually declares of its chosen enemies: "All they understand is force." Although Antifa claim to be radical revolutionaries, their mindset is perfectly typical the atmosphere of violence which prevails in militarized America.

In another vein, Antifa follows the trend of current Identity Politics excesses that are squelching free speech in what should be its citadel, academia. Words are considered so dangerous that "safe spaces" must be established to protect people from them. This extreme vulnerability to injury from words is strangely linked to tolerance of real physical violence.

Wild Goose Chase

In the United States, the worst thing about Antifa is the effort to lead the disoriented American left into a wild goose chase, tracking down imaginary "fascists" instead of getting together openly to work out a coherent positive program. The United States has more than its share of weird individuals, of gratuitous aggression, of crazy ideas, and tracking down these marginal characters, whether alone or in groups, is a huge distraction. The truly dangerous people in the United States are safely ensconced in Wall Street, in Washington Think Tanks, in the executive suites of the sprawling military industry, not to mention the editorial offices of some of the mainstream media currently adopting a benevolent attitude toward "anti-fascists" simply because they are useful in focusing on the maverick Trump instead of themselves.

Antifa USA, by defining "resistance to fascism" as resistance to lost causes – the Confederacy, white supremacists and for that matter Donald Trump – is actually distracting from resistance to the ruling neoliberal establishment, which is also opposed to the Confederacy and white supremacists and has already largely managed to capture Trump by its implacable campaign of denigration. That ruling establishment, which in its insatiable foreign wars and introduction of police state methods, has successfully used popular "resistance to Trump" to make him even worse than he already was.

The facile use of the term "fascist" gets in the way of thoughtful identification and definition of the real enemy of humanity today. In the contemporary chaos, the greatest and most dangerous upheavals in the world all stem from the same source, which is hard to name, but which we might give the provisional simplified label of Globalized Imperialism. This amounts to a multifaceted project to reshape the world to satisfy the demands of financial capitalism, the military industrial complex, United States ideological vanity and the megalomania of leaders of lesser "Western" powers, notably Israel. It could be called simply "imperialism", except that it is much vaster and more destructive than the historic imperialism of previous centuries. It is also much more disguised. And since it bears no clear label such as "fascism", it is difficult to denounce in simple terms.

The fixation on preventing a form of tyranny that arose over 80 years ago, under very different circumstances, obstructs recognition of the monstrous tyranny of today. Fighting the previous war leads to defeat.

Donald Trump is an outsider who will not be let inside. The election of Donald Trump is above all a grave symptom of the decadence of the American political system, totally ruled by money, lobbies, the military-industrial complex and corporate media. Their lies are undermining the very basis of democracy. Antifa has gone on the offensive against the one weapon still in the hands of the people: the right to free speech and assembly.

Notes.

* "Où va la démocratie?", une enquête de la Fondation pour l'innovation politique sous la direction de Dominique Reynié, (Plon, Paris, 2017).

[Jun 03, 2020] The 10 Most Important Questions For Rod Rosenstein This Morning

Jun 03, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

The 10 Most Important Questions For Rod Rosenstein This Morning by Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2020 - 09:10 Authored by John Solomon via JustTheNews.com,

Two years ago, then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein chafed when asked whether congressional Republicans might have legitimate reason to suspect the factual underpinnings of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants that targeted Trump campaign adviser Carter Page in the Russia probe.

Seeming a bit perturbed, Rosenstein launched into a mini-lecture on how much care and work went into FISA applications at the FBI and Justice Department.

"There's a lot of talk about FISA applications. Many people I've seen talk about it seem not to recognize that a FISA application is actually a warrant, just like a search warrant. In order to get a FISA warrant, you need an affidavit signed by a career law enforcement officer who swears the information is true ... And if it is wrong, that person is going to face consequences," Rosenstein asserted.

"If we're going to accuse someone of wrongdoing, we have to have admissible evidence, credible witnesses, we have to prove our case in court. We have to affix our signature to the charging document," he added.

Rosenstein did affix his signature to the fourth and last FISA warrant against Page in 2017. And now in 2020, newly declassified evidence shows the FBI did not have the verified evidence or a credible witness in the form of Christopher Steele and his dossier to support the claims submitted to the FISA court as verified.

In fact, DOJ has withdrawn the very FISA application Rosenstein approved and signed after the department's internal watchdog found it included inaccurate, undocumented, and falsified evidence.

This morning (at 10amET), when he appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Rosenstein is likely to strike a humbler tone in the face of overwhelming evidence that the FBI-executed FISAs have been chronically flawed, including in the Russia case he supervised.

"Even the best law enforcement officers make mistakes, and some engage in willful misconduct," Rosenstein said in a statement issued ahead of his appearance. "Independent law enforcement investigations, judicial review and congressional oversight are important checks on the discretion of agents and prosecutors."

Republicans led by Chairman Lindsey Graham of South Carolina are likely to interrogate Rosenstein extensively as they try to determine whether the glaring FISA failures and the FBI's representations in the Russia probe were a case of misplaced trust or a deeper plot by unelected bureaucrats to unseat and/or thwart President Trump.

Here are the 10 most important questions those senators are likely to set out to answer:

  1. Did Rosenstein read the FISA warrant renewal he signed in summer 2017 against Page, review any evidence supporting it, or ask the FBI any questions about the case before affixing his signature?
  2. Does the former No. 2 DOJ official now believe the FISA was so flawed that it should never have been submitted to the court? Does he regret signing it?
  3. Given what he now knows about flaws with the Steele dossier and FBI probe, would Rosenstein have appointed Robert Mueller as the Russia Special Counsel if given a do-over?
  4. Did Rosenstein engage in a conversation with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe in 2017 about wearing a wire on President Trump as part of a plot to remove the 45th president from office under the 25th Amendment?
  5. Who drafted and provided the supporting materials that Rosenstein used to create the scope of investigation memos that guided Mueller's probe?
  6. Does Rosenstein have any concerns about the conduct of fired FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe as he looks back on their tenure and in light of the new evidence that has surfaced?
  7. When did Rosenstein learn that the CIA had identified Page as one of its assets -- ruling out he was a Russian spy -- and that information in Steele's dossier used in the FISA warrant had been debunked or linked to Russian disinformation?
  8. Does Rosenstein believe the FISA court was intentionally misled, or can the glaring missteps be explained by bureaucratic bungling?
  9. What culpability does Rosenstein assign to himself for the failures in the Russia case he supervised, and what other people does he blame?
  10. Does the former deputy attorney general believe anyone in the Russia case should face criminal charges?

You can watch Rosenstein's 2018 statement here. https://youtu.be/Daxd1YsNEO0

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Daxd1YsNEO0

[Jun 03, 2020] Rosenstein Admits He Would Not Have Signed FISA Warrant If He Knew Of Exculpatory Evidence, Throws McCabe Under The Bus

Jun 03, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2020 - 11:10 Update (1115ET): It appears, as Jonathan Turley details in a Twitter thread below , that Rosenstein is throwing McCabe under the bus...

Rosenstein just testified that he would not have signed the warrant application in 2017 on Carter Page because of the misconduct of FBI agents and the lack of evidence.

He said he did not know that the Steele dossier was discredited by that time. He said McCabe particularly "was not candid ... or forthcoming."

Notably, we now know that the Flynn investigation found no criminal acts by December 2016 and now Rosenstein said he would have ended the investigation of Page which was the focus of the early justifications of the Russian investigation.

Rosenstein just said he did not know that investigators by the early January 2017 asked for Flynn to be removed from the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. He signed off on these warrants and applications but was never informed of those critical facts.

Rosenstein insists that the information in appointing Mueller was based on that incomplete information at the time. He admitted that by August 2017 when he signed off on the Mueller investigation there was no evidence at all of collusion with the Russians.

Sen. Feinstein did a good job framing the use (or non-use) of the Steele dossier but went off the rails by stressing that none of the prosecutions relied on the dossier. However, the fact is that there was never any prosecution of any Trump person for colluding or conspiring ...

...with the Russians. There was never any evidence of collusion with the Russian, a point reaffirmed by Rosenstein today. This hearing shows the value of oversight and the still unanswered questions in light of recently released material.

Grassley just said Rosenstein misled him and the public on the Flynn case. Rosenstein insisted that he did not know about the exculpatory evidence on Flynn and "that was news to me." Rosenstein also said that he supports Durham investigating the dossier matter.

* * *

Authored by Daniel Payne via JustTheNews.com,

Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that he would not have signed the renewal of the FISA warrant for Trump associate Carter Page if he had been aware of exculpatory information withheld from the FISA court.

Rosenstein was responding to a question from Sen. Lindsey Graham, who asked him:

"If you knew then what you knew now, would you have signed the warrant application?"

"No, I would not," Rosenstein said.

"And the reason you wouldn't have is because ... exculpatory information was withheld from the court?" Graham asked, to which Rosenstein responded:

"Among other reasons, yes."

Appearing before the committee on Wednesday for a hearing concerning the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation, Rosenstein told senators that the Justice Department "must take remedial action" against any misconduct it uncovers within its ranks, a bracing statement made in reference to investigative reviews that found "significant errors" in official procedures related to the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

Rosenstein in prepared remarks noted that internal investigations had revealed that the FBI "was not following the written protocols" in its execution of Crossfire Hurricane.

"Senators, whenever agents or prosecutors make serious mistakes or engage in misconduct, the Department of Justice must take remedial action. And if existing policies fall short, those policies need to be changed. Ensuring the integrity of governmental processes is essential to public confidence in the rule of law," he said.

[Jun 03, 2020] Rule of law in Murrika is kaput

Highly recommended!
Jun 16, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

freedommusic , 23 minutes ago link

DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Agent Smith, you testified that the Russians hacked the DNC computers, is that correct?

FBI AGENT JOHN SMITH: That is correct.

DEF ATT: Upon what information did you base your testimony?

AGENT: Information found in reports analyzing the breach of the computers.

DEF ATT: So, the FBI prepared these reports?

AGENT: (cough) . (shift in seat) No, a cyber security contractor with the FBI.

DEF ATT: Pardon me, why would a contractor be preparing these reports? Do these contractors run the FBI laboratories where the server was examined?

AGENT: No.

DEF ATT: No? No what? These contractors don't run the FBI Laboratories?

AGENT: No. The laboratories are staffed by FBI personnel.

DEF ATT: Well I don't understand. Why would contractors be writing reports about computers that are forensically examined in FBI laboratories?

AGENT: Well, the servers were not examined in the FBI laboratory.

(silence)

DEF ATT: Oh, so the FBI examined the servers on site to determine who had hacked them and what was taken?

AGENT: Uh .. no.

DEF ATT: They didn't examine them on site?

AGENT: No.

DEF ATT: Well, where did they examine them?

AGENT: Well, uh .. the FBI did not examine them.

DEF ATT: What?

AGENT: The FBI did not directly examine the servers.

DEF ATT: Agent Smith, the FBI has presented to the Grand Jury and to this court and SWORN AS FACT that the Russians hacked the DNC computers. You are basing your SWORN testimony on a report given to you by a contractor, while the FBI has NEVER actually examined the computer hardware?

AGENT: That is correct.

DEF ATT: Agent Smith, who prepared the analysis reports that the FBI relied on to give this sworn testimony?

AGENT: Crowdstrike, Inc.

DEF ATT: So, which Crowdstrike employee gave you the report?

AGENT: We didn't receive the report directly from Crowdstrike.

DEF ATT: What?

AGENT: We did not receive the report directly from Crowdstrike.

DEF ATT: Well, where did you find this report?

AGENT: It was given to us by the people who hired Crowdstrike to examine and secure their computer network and hardware.

DEF ATT: Oh, so the report was given to you by the technical employees for the company that hired Crowdstrike to examine their servers?

AGENT: No.

DEF ATT: Well, who gave you the report?

AGENT: Legal counsel for the company that hired Crowdstrike.

DEF ATT: Why would legal counsel be the ones giving you the report?

AGENT: I don't know.

DEF ATT: Well, what company hired Crowdstrike?

AGENT: The Democratic National Committee.

DEF ATT: Wait a minute. Let me get this straight. You are giving SWORN testimony to this court that Russia hacked the servers of the Democratic National Committee. And you are basing that testimony on a report given to you by the LAWYERS for the Democratic National Committee. And you, the FBI, never actually saw or examined the computer servers?

AGENT: That is correct.

DEF ATT: Well, can you provide a copy of the technical report produced by Crowdstrike for the Democratic National Committee?

AGENT: No, I cannot.

DEF ATT: Well, can you go back to your office and get a copy of the report?

AGENT: No.

DEF ATT: Why? Are you locked out of your office?

AGENT: No.

DEF ATT: I don't understand. Why can you not provide a copy of this report?

AGENT: Because I do not have a copy of the report.

DEF ATT: Did you lose it?

AGENT: No.

DEF ATT: Why do you not have a copy of the report?

AGENT: Because we were never given a final copy of the report.

DEF ATT: Agent Smith, if you didn't get a copy of the report, upon what information are you basing your testimony?

AGENT: On a draft copy of the report.

DEF ATT: A draft copy?

AGENT: Yes.

DEF ATT: Was a final report ever delivered to the FBI?

AGENT: No.

DEF ATT: Agent Smith, did you get to read the entire report?

AGENT: No.

DEF ATT: Why not?

AGENT: Because large portions were redacted.

DEF ATT: Agent Smith, let me get this straight. The FBI is claiming that the Russians hacked the DNC servers. But the FBI never actually saw the computer hardware, nor examined it? Is that correct?

AGENT: That is correct.

DEF ATT: And the FBI never actually examined the log files or computer email or any aspect of the data from the servers? Is that correct?

AGENT: That is correct.

DEF ATT: And you are basing your testimony on the word of Counsel for the Democratic National Committee, the people who provided you with a REDACTED copy of a DRAFT report, not on the actual technical personnel who supposedly examined the servers?

AGENT: That is correct.

DEF ATT: Your honor, I have a few motions I would like to make at this time.

PRESIDING JUDGE: I'm sure you do, Counselor. (as he turns toward the prosecutors) And I feel like I am in a mood to grant them.

( source )

hooligan2009 , 14 minutes ago link

Brilliant! that sums it up nicely. of course, if the servers were not hacked and were instead "thumbnailed" that leads to a whole pile of other questions (including asking wiileaks for their source and about the murder of seth rich).

[Jun 03, 2020] The Philosophy of Antifa

While that talk has many interesting points, it is basically wrong. Fascism is a political movement centered on political party with far right nationalist political ideology and that use mobilization of people.
Inverted totalitarism does not use distinct political party and reject mass mobilization for reaching its goals. That's an important difference.
Notable quotes:
"... ANTIFA defines fascist as, a cult of purity, victimhood, abandonment of liberty, and redemptive violence. Doesn't it sound like they are defining themselves? (Antifa - The Handbook for Antifascists) ..."
Dec 01, 2017 | www.youtube.com

... ... ...

Part 1 - Meet the Antifascists - 0:53 Part 2 - Fascism - 8:18 Part 3 - Violence - 20:47 Part 4 - Free Speech - 39:58 Part 5 - There Is No Peaceful White Nationalism - 53:30

Bibliography:
Ahmed, The Cultural Politics of Emotion - http://tinyurl.com/y9a569vy
Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism - http://tinyurl.com/yab2r3sm
Auden & Isherwood – On the Frontier - http://tinyurl.com/y8c8w3sc
BadMouse Productions: Spotting Fascism – ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0rRg... )
Bray, Antifa: the Antifascist Handbook - http://tinyurl.com/y7nwsr6c
Burgdörfer: "Sterben die weißen Völker?”
Cacho, Social Death - http://tinyurl.com/yalbdhkb
Contrapoints –
“Debating the Alt-Right,” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPa1w... ),
“Decrypting the Alt-Right” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx4BV... ),
“The Left” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuN6G... ),
“Does the Left Hate Free Speech?” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGTDh... ),
“Why White Nationalism is Wrong” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyV0y... )
D’Souza, The Big Lie - http://tinyurl.com/ydavsb82
Faludi, Backlash - http://tinyurl.com/ycnjhv5s
Fang, Delete Your Account Podcast, E63, “Punching Nazis”
Herman & Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent - http://tinyurl.com/ybd3rots
Hermansson, “My Year Inside the Alt-Right” https://alternativeright.hopenothate....
Hitler, Mein Kampf
Hobbes, Leviathan - http://tinyurl.com/y98m5tf7
Kesīqnaeh, Fascism & Anti-Fascism: A Decolonial Perspective http://tinyurl.com/y9m36ckv
King Jr. - Letter From A Birmingham Jail - http://tinyurl.com/ovcktqb
Mill, On Liberty - http://tinyurl.com/y9ajospk
Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism - http://tinyurl.com/y7s6u3xt
Purkis & Bowen (ed.), Changing Anarchism - http://tinyurl.com/y9sdobpp
Raz, “Authority, Law, and Morality” - http://tinyurl.com/ybm5fmhb
Richardson, What Terrorists Want - http://tinyurl.com/y82wpbj6
Robets, Fatal Invention http://tinyurl.com/ybdfgvwh
Satre, “Anti-Semite and Jew” - http://tinyurl.com/y9qmncya
Schmitt, Political Theology and The Concept of the Political http://tinyurl.com/ycsgxlga & http://tinyurl.com/y7v2vojl
Shaun – “The Great Replacement Isn’t Real - ft. Lauren Southern” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbxV... )
Ture, Stokely Speaks - http://tinyurl.com/y7fz2hpj
Vasquez, “The Poor Person’s Defence of Riots” https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/12/...
Wilson, “What I Discovered From Interviewing Imprisoned ISIS Fighters” https://www.thenation.com/article/wha...
A Short Documentary About the Battle of Cable Street: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiZFy...

apprenticehera , 1 day ago

I remember reading in my Abnormal Psychology textbook that in the early 1900s, the mentally ill in the United States were forcefully sterilized to prevent them from "breeding" which made me take a step back and realize that I was never once taught this in school and I was only ever taught that the United States were (almost) always the good guys. Eugenics has a deep rooted history in America and it's terrifying.

Gluemonkey , 6 hours ago (edited)

NOT being taught something in school is not automatically insidious and disturbing. BEING taught something toxic or deflective in school IS automatically insidious and disturbing. In school I was taught roughly 0.000000000000000001% about things that are and things that have been.


Carolina Madeira , 1 day ago

Hello! I´m from Brazil and your videos have helped me to deal these awful days and, also, to understand how Bolsonaro supporters think (if this is possible!) Neonazi and fascists movements were marginal and formed only for small groups in Brazil in last decades, despite always considered dangerous. Now, these movements have been appeared in pro-bolsonaro parades and it´s really scare! Much of this video match with it has happened right now in Brazil!

Kirikan Kuu , 1 week ago

div> We shouldn't give up on the entire system due to amendable flaws and corruption (debt-based commercial banks, multinational companies, cheap labor, etc), and attempt to replace it with a weak and unstable mob rule. People always find a scapegoat, whether it's another ethnic group, authorities, or smart and prosperous individuals, which escalates the situation. Class wars are like other wars, and we'd all end up living in tents and flats, eating powdered crickets and working to death "for the common good" and in order to "end exploitation". Many countries have a mixed economy regulated and supervised by the state, and you have a chance to negotiate a proper wage or become an entrepreneur. Social democracies provide all citizens tax-funded healthcare and university level education, while allowing competition, and being capable of maintaining peace and order, even if the exact same model wouldn't work everywhere, and there could be improvements.

Al Muarikh , 1 week ago div

> 54:30 fun fact: In 1964 Brazil suffered a Military Coup backed by the CIA/US. At the time leading to the coup, the petite-bourgeois that thought themselves "the people" organized some marches. The names of the marches were something like "March of the Families with God for Liberty", and they marched bearing several posters accusing the then President Jango of being a communist, saying that "Brazil wouldn't turn into a Cuba". Brazil was in a decade-long turmoil and the President at the time decided to take some Nationalization attitudes and whatnot, so he was obviously accused of being a communist, despite not even being a socialist. So the great fear of communism was implanted in the Brazilian people's mind via those marches and subsequently, less then a month later, the Fascist Military Coup was widely accepted as the unfortunate best solution against communism. Needless to say that TO THE DAY there's a great denial of a Coup, they created a narrative in which they lead people into believing the Military Junta really saved Brazil from becoming Cuba. The result of it is that it's 2020 and the Brazilian President is an Army Captain, his VP is an Army General, and several of his Ministers are also Generals, during the COVID-19 Pandemic we have an "Operational President" named by the High Command of the Armed Forces who is a General, and guess what? The President and his lackeys are AGAIN shouting about the imminent Communist threat, this time forming armed Paramilitary Groups trained in Ukraine by the Pravyy Sektor. If anyone out there sees this comment, keep it in mind and save it, for in about 1-2 years we'll be having an unambiguous Military Dictatorship in Brazil, AGAIN.

Rackergen , 5 months ago (edited) div tabindex="0" role="arti

cle"> 12:22 "It's important to note that fascism is not a wholly different government from the one you might know and it did not end in 1945. For instance, most of these features I described would also, in milder forms, describe a certain American presidency. That's right. The Reagan administration" *glaces to date of the video*

Ben Rogue , 5 months ago

So, by the 'textbook definition' of Fascism, pretty much every right-leaning politician in the U.S and almost every right-wing pundit is a Fascist. Which isn't surprising, considering how far the overton window has moved rightward and how far right the Democratic party is. You can probably attribute this shift to how pro-capitalist and pro-imperialist the donor class is and how that affects the make-up of the political parties.

Thaïs Caprio , 2 months ago div tabindex="0" role="a

rticle"> 41:20 just wanted to add another example that I know a lot about. In France, the only protest that haven't been repressed by the police are the protests from fascists (La manic pour Tous, Syndicats de Police, Generation Identitaire). Other protests like the Yellow Vests, Feminist night marches, strike protests, etc... (we've had a lotta protests in France these past years) are always repressed. But what I want to talk about is the violence that counter protesters are facing from the police. We have to be careful not to get hit or hurt by fascists but also be careful of violence and arrests from the police. The very violent far right organization (and very very racist) Generation Identitaire got to protest with thousand of policemen to protect them. My girlfriend and I were asked (forced) to leave because we had a gay flag. The police in France is extremely violent, and maybe not as much as in other countries such as Chile, but the violence keeps increasing and it keeps getting more dangerous. As someone who regularly goes to protests, I consider myself very lucky and very privilege for never getting badly hurt by a cop. My lungs do suffer the consequence of the constant breathing of lacrymo gas ahah Anyway, I just wanted to develop an example of another rich European country. (sorry for English mistakes)

Chris Woycik , 1 year ago

"Every border implies the violence necessary to maintain it..." That's a throw-away line that had me stopping and thinking like god damn. LeftTube has definitely made me a more thoughtful person as a whole.

Mark Von , 12 minutes ago (edited)

ANTIFA defines fascist as, a cult of purity, victimhood, abandonment of liberty, and redemptive violence. Doesn't it sound like they are defining themselves? (Antifa - The Handbook for Antifascists)

Matt NA , 1 day ago

I've just started to watch and I'm concerned about that facist checklist. Trump meets quite a few of the criteria with his response to what's going on at the moment...so it is somewhat hypocritical that he wants to label antifa as a terrorist organisation when in fact anti facist movements are not an organisation (as you explained in the beginning). Possibly another diversion tactic so people don't look at at Trump and his reaction to the violence.

The Procastinators , 3 months ago

"Fascism is not a wholly different kind of government from the one you might know ..." Laughs in 2020

Stephanie Jean , 1 hour ago

Trump: Antifa is a terrorist group Intellectuals: It's not a specific group tho...

[Jun 02, 2020] The Antifascist Fascists in Our Streets

Looks like antifa members is Maoists not Fascists.
Notable quotes:
"... Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook ..."
"... These people are self-defeating morons, yes, but they still have the potential to do great damage ..."
"... Last night, here in Washington, the unrest they helped fuel saw a church lit on fire, LaFayette Park near the White House set ablaze, the AFL-CIO building attacked, and the Lincoln Memorial defaced. ..."
Jun 02, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Back in 2018, my friend Zachary Yost suffered his way through Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook , a primer on the group written by (but of course!) Dartmouth lecturer Mark Bray. What he found was a chillingly lucid call to revolution that subordinated all else to the goal of overthrowing capitalism and the "Far Right." So free speech, for example, is dispensable, valuable only to the extent that it enables the coming flames. Yost writes:

By the time he's finished, Bray has thrown everything and the kitchen sink into the category of fascist ideologies that must be targeted, ranging from whiteness to "ableism, heteronormativity, patriarchy, nationalism, transphobia, class rule, and many others." Though cloaked in calls to stop oppression, Bray's book at its core makes the case for the exercise of raw, unbridled power. Under this revolutionary ideology, no dissent can be tolerated. There can be no live and let live -- it is all or nothing.

In fairness, Antifa is a wide and somewhat amorphous umbrella, some of whose members may not subscribe to everything Bray says. But what the more committed among them seem to understand is that, come lawlessness, power will flow naturally to he who has the most muscle, he who's most willing to pick up a brick and throw it, at the expense of the poor and vulnerable. Remember that tonight when we inevitably see more violence in the streets. Senselessness is the point. Preying on the innocent is the goal.

Remember after Charlottesville when some on social media compared these guys to the American soldiers who fought the Nazis at Normandy? I don't want to hear another word about that. Antifa may stand for antifascist, but Yost's piece makes it clear that they're fascist to their marrow. And as with many latter-day fascists and extremists, Antifa are simultaneously cogent at the manifesto level and utterly delusional as to likely outcomes. They aren't going to overthrow capitalism or Donald Trump. They may, however, affect the election in five months, with the most likely beneficiary the president they so despise.

These people are self-defeating morons, yes, but they still have the potential to do great damage.

Last night, here in Washington, the unrest they helped fuel saw a church lit on fire, LaFayette Park near the White House set ablaze, the AFL-CIO building attacked, and the Lincoln Memorial defaced.

This is how a Franco ends up in power: because even churches are being targeted, even the moderate leftists aren't safe. Bully people long enough and they long for a bully of their own. That Antifa has desecrated the protests over George Floyd's death this way is appalling and I wish them nothing but the worst.

Matt Purple is a senior editor at The American Conservative .

Scroop Moth 19 hours ago

I can picture anarchists setting fire to Minneapolis, but I was always under the clear impression that ANTIFA was really, really, focused on outing neo-nazis, punching marchers in the face, and deplatforming the ALT-RIGHT. God's work! Why in the world would they torch Popeyes?
J Villain 18 hours ago
One of the Fox news affiliate stations had reported looking at the paper work for people arrested in their city and said that 80% of the people arrested were from in state. That was after both Trump and Barr had claimed they were almost all from out of state. If they lied about that what reason is there to believe that the rest of their claims are true? What evidence is there other than a report of a pallet of brick (how do you unload it with out a forklift?) being left some where what evidence is there that all of this is co-ordinated and not just random thugs? Why is the assumption that they are left leaning or tied to the Democratic party? At least one of the people caught breaking windows, carrying an umbrella and masked was an off duty police officer which generally lean to the right. I know a 25 year old man was arrested for burning a court house. The young tend to lean left but also tend to act irrationally with out a cause. Is there any actual evidence to point to this being Antifa or are we just supposed to take POTUS's word for it?
RCPreader J Villain 15 hours ago
Trump and Barr merely picked up on claims from the governor of MN and mayor of Minneapolis. They did not originate the claim that the rioters were from out-of-state.

Uh, the assumption that they are left-leaning comes from the fact that they spray-paint left-leaning things, and shout left-leaning things.

I haven't heard anyone claim that they are tied to the Democratic Party, but many Democratic Party politicians have avoided condemning them, and many Democratic Party-backing commentators/journalists have openly defended them.

The NYC Police Dept. reports that they have in their possession communications among Antifa units making detailed plans for riots in places like NYC days before the riots occurred.

Something like a thousand people have been arrested now in these riots. How many of them have been identified as right-wing or right-leaning? I don't know of a single one. You don't think these lefty Dem mayors and the MSM would be parading any evidence they had of right-leaning rioters?

madamX RCPreader 14 hours ago
The Minnesota Freedom Fund is also being funded by politically correct Hollywood leftists. If Minneapolis really is a right-wing insurrection highly disguised, it's fooled the woke crowd unmercifully.
Zgler 14 hours ago
"The destruction of businesses we're witnessing across the US is not mere
opportunism by looters. It plays a critical role in antifa and BLM
ideology"

Grouping Black Lives Matter together with Anti-Fa is a good propaganda effort, but those groups have different focuses. Anti-Fa is a reaction to the neo-Nazis, but it is also home to a lot of anarchists.

Black Lives Matter is focused on African American rights and an opposition to police brutality. If you look at their web site, it is all about civil rights both in the U.S. and internationally. They also have a stated agenda of supporting LGBTQ rights. It's hard to find any ideology in favor of looting. In fact, they are on-record in support of minority-owned (capitalist) businesses and economic development.

WilliamRD 4 hours ago
Lessons from Weimar Germany for the Portland Extremists

https://fee.org/articles/le...

[Jun 01, 2020] How to misindentify fascism by Andrew Joyce

Fascism is an ideology that presuppose mass mobilization (often of the base of previous humiliation and current difficulties) by an ultranationalist party with populist program. Just being ultranationalist is not enough. If element of mass mobilization is absent this is also not a fascism.
Notable quotes:
"... The same administration provoked similar ill-conceived and unhelpful monographs on Fascism from Cass Sunstein ( Can it Happen Here? ), Madeleine Albright ( Fascism: A Warning ), and Harvard duo Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt ( How Democracies Die ). All of these individuals are Jews, and this is not a coincidence. In fact, since the production of Leon Trotsky's Fascism: What it is and How to Fight It (compiled between 1922 and 1933) and the Frankfurt School's project on the "Authoritarian Personality," Jews have been at the forefront of paving the cultural, as well as political, path to Antifa activity. ..."
"... They do so by bastardising public understanding of the nature of Fascist politics, thereby shaping "anti-Fascism" as a vehicle for the undermining of the White nation. When it comes to Fascism, "Jews know it when they see it," a pronouncement we are all encouraged to accept without question. ..."
"... His lack of education and reading in the subject is therefore apparently more than compensated for in the fact he is emotionally distressed by it. Right. ..."
"... Stanley, Sunstein, Levitsky, Ziblatt, and Albright have produced quite typical examples of Jewish propaganda disguised as "anti-Fascist" literature. The key features of such works are invariably a vague definition of Fascism, an attempt to relate "warnings" to some aspect of contemporary politics, melodramatic admonitions about a putative future violent catastrophe that must be avoided, and maudlin appeals to personal family history and "emotional baggage." ..."
"... The family, the acknowledgement of heterosexuality as culturally and biologically normative and preferential, the desirability of mono-ethnic cultures, and the acknowledgement of inequality among human beings are reframed in this kind of "warning literature" as inherently Fascistic. ..."
"... Fascism's unforgivable sin was its spot-on critique of the failure of liberal democracy, which, it argued, was the inevitable result of its corruption by capitalism. ..."
"... In this way, fascism is the thinking person's version of Marxism, stripped of the latter's absurd mismeasures of human nature. Fascism restored the traditional fabric of society, placing the needs of the national community above the selfish whims of the individual. In so doing it gave to otherwise alienated individuals the sense of common purpose and connection to others that are so vital to mental health. ..."
"... And only a strong authoritarian state can claim and effectively wield the power necessary to undo the damage that capitalism does ..."
"... No wonder the mortal adversaries, western imperialism and Soviet communism, were so terrified of this existential challenge to their oppressive systems that they made temporary common cause of ruthlessly annihilating Germany in history's most destructive war. ..."
"... Fascism is the cry of the lower middle class who do not understand how things work or where they came from. It is an urban tryharder phenomenon. Very short attention spans. ..."
"... George Orwell understood this: he was tolerant but realistic, and "conservative" in a natural way, all the time grasping the nature of Capitalism, that man needs to be set free not governed by others. Liberal Democracy is just a means to stablise government instead of civil wars. ..."
"... Vulture Capitalism and Marxist Socialism have the same elite masters and revolting against it in the interest of the people. ..."
"... Paul Gottfried's Fascism: the Career of a Concept. Although Jewish, Prof Gottfried is a paleoconservative and his books are always carefully written. His work on Fascism is probably the best recent work on the subject. I don't know why Dr Joyce didn't mention it. ..."
"... Interesting (and alarming) essay by Dr.. Joyce. Alarming because the sheer relentlessness and vindictiveness of these people is matched only by the vacuity, shallowness and spite of their ostensible "intellectual" product. ..."
May 29, 2020 | www.unz.com

Concluding one of America's more infamous obscenity trials in 1964, Justice Potter Stewart absolved a controversial French motion picture with an opinion that has since passed into common parlance: "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it , and the motion picture involved in this case is not that."

The opinion was celebrated at the time as a victory for freedom of expression, and paved the way for a later deluge of Western cultural degradation. Of greater significance, however, is the fact that almost 60 years later "I know it when I see it" has become a political philosophy in its own right, adopted and pursued by a radical Left intent on curtailing that very same freedom by claiming an exclusive and unaccountable ability to define Fascism. This was the starkest message from The Burkean 's unprecedented recent Irish Antifa Project , which was designed to infiltrate and expose self-styled Antifa networks in mainstream Irish academia and politics.

In my view, the most predictable revelation from the Irish Antifa Project was the extent of historical and cultural ignorance among the profiled activists. None of the intellectually and professionally mediocre individuals exposed by The Burkean appeared capable of articulating what Fascism was, or is alleged to be today. Fascism instead seems to have been adopted by these non-entities as a vague catch-all for anything touching upon capitalism, conservatism, religion, or tradition. Equally vague are the proposed activist methodologies of these individuals, which range from the compiling of databases with the names of those deemed to be Fascists, to tentative but deniable support for violence. With the exception of a small number of fanatical Jews like Trinity College student Jacob Woolf , "anti-Fascism" has evidently been adopted by the majority of those concerned as a kind of half-hearted virtue signaling hobby or political side gig, albeit one with sinister potential.

Unfortunately, the problems posed by an uninformed, unaccountable, and unhinged "anti-Fascist" radical Left aren't helped by the fact confusion about the nature of Fascism is endemic in society as a whole. There are essentially three traditions when it comes to explaining Fascism. One can be found within Fascism itself, and demonstrates how self-defined Fascists see themselves. This material is overwhelmingly historical. Another tradition can be found in contemporary mainstream academia and, although biased, it is at least academic in style, serious, and relatively comprehensive. The work of the late Roger Griffin is perhaps the best available in the English language in terms of this tradition, and is also largely concerned with history.

The third tradition, on the other hand, is popular, highly politicised, always concerned with contemporary politics, and is abridged to the point of being a pop-Left caricature of serious studies of Fascism. It is particularly problematic because it has tremendous traction among the masses and, despite being propaganda for extremist politics of its own sort, always presents itself as objective and neutral.

The individuals profiled by The Burkean are unquestionably disciples of the latter tradition, a recent example of which is Jason Stanley's How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them (2018). Stanley, a Jewish professor at Yale whose background is in language and epistemology and not history or politics, hasn't published any peer-reviewed material on Fascism or anti-Fascism, but his 2018 book proved a moderate publishing sensation because it represented a thinly veiled attack on the Trump administration.

The same administration provoked similar ill-conceived and unhelpful monographs on Fascism from Cass Sunstein ( Can it Happen Here? ), Madeleine Albright ( Fascism: A Warning ), and Harvard duo Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt ( How Democracies Die ). All of these individuals are Jews, and this is not a coincidence. In fact, since the production of Leon Trotsky's Fascism: What it is and How to Fight It (compiled between 1922 and 1933) and the Frankfurt School's project on the "Authoritarian Personality," Jews have been at the forefront of paving the cultural, as well as political, path to Antifa activity.

They do so by bastardising public understanding of the nature of Fascist politics, thereby shaping "anti-Fascism" as a vehicle for the undermining of the White nation. When it comes to Fascism, "Jews know it when they see it," a pronouncement we are all encouraged to accept without question.

Jewish Definitions of Fascism

A common theme in influential books like Stanley's, destined for a modicum of success in the paperback mass market thanks to dramatic titles and relentless marketing, is their incredibly -- and deliberately -- vague definition of Fascism. These Jewish activists know this, of course, but they push ahead regardless. Stanley, for example, excuses the gaps and logical leaps inherent in his dubious study by arguing that "generalization is necessary in the current moment." But if he is defining the "current moment" as Fascist under his generalized definition, isn't he simply using generalization to excuse the same generalization? Isn't this tantamount to saying to his readers: "The present moment is so obviously Fascist that we really don't need to define Fascism"?

Such considerations don't slow Stanley down for a second, and this celebrated Yale professor slips off the hook to pronounce, even more unhelpfully, "I have chosen the label "Fascism" for ultranationalism of some variety." What variety? What's his definition of "ultranationalism"?

It doesn't matter. What is clear in texts like Stanley's is that you aren't here to be encouraged to think or ask questions, but to absorb a discourse and accept a dogma. The authority behind such demands stems predominantly from emotional blackmail -- Stanley cashes in his card as the son of "Holocaust survivors," and explains that "My family background has saddled me with difficult emotional baggage. But it also, crucially, prepared me to write this book."

His lack of education and reading in the subject is therefore apparently more than compensated for in the fact he is emotionally distressed by it. Right.

... ... ...

Conclusion

Stanley, Sunstein, Levitsky, Ziblatt, and Albright have produced quite typical examples of Jewish propaganda disguised as "anti-Fascist" literature. The key features of such works are invariably a vague definition of Fascism, an attempt to relate "warnings" to some aspect of contemporary politics, melodramatic admonitions about a putative future violent catastrophe that must be avoided, and maudlin appeals to personal family history and "emotional baggage."

Underlying the surface veneer, these works are highly focussed efforts to pathologise aspects of White culture and politics deemed oppositional to Jewish interests. These efforts, and their framing, are quite obviously derived from Cultural Marxism, especially Adorno's work with the Frankfurt School on The Authoritarian Personality , and from earlier forms of Jewish activism witnessed from the end of the 19th century and culminating in Weimar Germany (e.g. the work of Magnus Hirschfeld).

The family, the acknowledgement of heterosexuality as culturally and biologically normative and preferential, the desirability of mono-ethnic cultures, and the acknowledgement of inequality among human beings are reframed in this kind of "warning literature" as inherently Fascistic.

It is very worrying that our culture has bequeathed a great deal of respect and legitimacy to Jewish intellectuals, especially in relation to the subject of Fascism. We have allowed them to assert that "they know it when they see it." The fundamental crisis of our civilization is that they see it everywhere, and they won't rest until this phantom of their paranoia, and us with it, are abolished.

Notes

[1] J. Whittam, Fascist Italy , (New York: Manchester University Press, 1995), 81-2.

[2] See, for example, S. Chakotin, The Rape of the Masses: The Psychology of Totalitarian Political Propaganda (1940).


Paul , says: Show Comment May 29, 2020 at 6:54 pm GMT

Given the Zionist treatment of the indigenous Palestinian people, it is odd to hear Jews complain about fascism.
Priss Factor , says: Website Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 12:22 am GMT
True fascism is about exposing and exploring the true nature of power.

Jews are crypto-gangster-fascists who project 'fascist' fantasies on the other.
A diversionary trick.

Observator , says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 12:22 am GMT
Fascism's unforgivable sin was its spot-on critique of the failure of liberal democracy, which, it argued, was the inevitable result of its corruption by capitalism. Eighteenth century liberalism broke the power of absolutism but in time it devolved into a reactionary movement, redirected specifically to defuse the popular revolutionary socialism of the nineteenth century, which Germany revived.

The elephant in the liberal living room is the embarrassing reality that capitalist society is organized on the exploitation of one class by another. Fascism spoke the inconvenient truth that the ideals of the Enlightenment – equality, individuality, democracy – must collapse into institutionalized injustice under the all-pervasive directive of the primacy of the private accumulation of capital over all other concerns.

In this way, fascism is the thinking person's version of Marxism, stripped of the latter's absurd mismeasures of human nature. Fascism restored the traditional fabric of society, placing the needs of the national community above the selfish whims of the individual. In so doing it gave to otherwise alienated individuals the sense of common purpose and connection to others that are so vital to mental health.

And only a strong authoritarian state can claim and effectively wield the power necessary to undo the damage that capitalism does and to contend with the many domestic and foreign adversaries which a truly class-free social revolution inevitable creates.

No wonder the mortal adversaries, western imperialism and Soviet communism, were so terrified of this existential challenge to their oppressive systems that they made temporary common cause of ruthlessly annihilating Germany in history's most destructive war.

Johnnie Tumbleweed , says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 5:02 am GMT
This is one of the best written, most informative and useful articles ever published here. But the photograph of Madelaine Albright in particular should have been accompanied by some sort of warning. "Hideous crone" understates the horror.
obvious , says: Show Comment May 31, 2020 at 1:53 am GMT
@Observator You lost me at "strong authoritarian State". Which human monkeys were those? How is the already strong authoritarian State bad but if only a new set of talking human monkeys is "recognized", that will make everything better and different?

Fascism is the cry of the lower middle class who do not understand how things work or where they came from. It is an urban tryharder phenomenon. Very short attention spans.

George Orwell understood this: he was tolerant but realistic, and "conservative" in a natural way, all the time grasping the nature of Capitalism, that man needs to be set free not governed by others. Liberal Democracy is just a means to stablise government instead of civil wars.

Personal liberty and private order are much more important and effective than grasping schemes.

Malla , says: Show Comment May 31, 2020 at 9:32 am GMT
@obvious "Hitler" is realizing that Vulture Capitalism and Marxist Socialism have the same elite masters and revolting against it in the interest of the people.
Verymuchalive , says: Show Comment May 31, 2020 at 12:55 pm GMT
@Pheasant True, and he makes no mention of Paul Gottfried's Fascism: the Career of a Concept. Although Jewish, Prof Gottfried is a paleoconservative and his books are always carefully written. His work on Fascism is probably the best recent work on the subject. I don't know why Dr Joyce didn't mention it.
The Germ Theory of Disease , says: Show Comment May 31, 2020 at 7:41 pm GMT
Interesting (and alarming) essay by Dr.. Joyce. Alarming because the sheer relentlessness and vindictiveness of these people is matched only by the vacuity, shallowness and spite of their ostensible "intellectual" product.

A few thoughts

1. Actual real Fascism is of course dead as a doornail, and has been since the 1950s at the absolute latest. The word "fascist" is simply a bogeyman, used by Jews and their playthings to frighten the public, to sell books, and to denote whatever naughty thing they don't happen to like at the moment -- as Dr. Joyce shows. (So-called "Islamo-fascism" is, if possible, even funnier as a name-calling stunt, and more mistaken, than calling Trump a fascist.)

2. In macro-historical terms, the only reason we pay any attention at all to real fascism is that it ended in a massive train-wreck, as so many things do (who fusses over the far more impact-laden bloodbaths of Timur the Lame these days?). But unluckily, since the Jews' ox got gored as well in the general wreckage, the Owners Of All Megaphones will never ever shut up about it. That's all this really ever is, innit.

3. Again in macro-historical terms, what Fascism really was, in the broadest sense, was simply one among several rather crude and clumsy attempts made in the early Twentieth Century to make some sort of sense out of the confusing, and very very recent, transformation of economic, political and industrial terms brought about by the sudden onset of the Machine Age. In the same way that it was the unknown effects of the Machine Age which made the Great War such a vaster cataclysm than previous wars, the Machine Age rattled every single bar in every single cage of the European order. Fascism was only one of the rather brutish attempts to navigate the new terrain. (to be continued)

The Germ Theory of Disease , says: Show Comment May 31, 2020 at 8:10 pm GMT
4. We no longer worry about fascism, or have to deal with it, for two reasons. One, it was decisively defeated militarily and discredited ideologically; and two (and more importantly), we no longer live in the Machine Age! We moved very quickly into the Technological/Information Age, and from there into the Immigration/Industrial Outsourcing Age. Fascism was an attempt to solve the problems of undernourished semi-literate White men with large families who lived in urban slums and who worked in giant factories full of deafening machinery. That political constituency has ceased to exist.

5. Centuries from now, the Peruvian robot historians will tell a very different story about the Second World War, which was of course the apotheosis and endgame of fascism, than the story we tell ourselves now -- or rather, allow the Jews to tell for us, when they aren't screaming it at us and drilling it in with sleep-deprivation techniques.

Levels of apportionment can be argued over, but it's certainly true that the Jews bore substantial responsibility for the actions and circumstances that led to the war. It could be argued that one of its chief architects was none other than Henry Morgenthau. In any event, the robots will view the early career of Hitler as a sort of premature German version of Gandhi -- Hitler kicked the Jewish Empire out of Germany, and got the Germans out from under the Jewish yoke, in the same way that Gandhi kicked the British Empire out of India. But the Jewish Empire (which did and does exist in Europe although not on maps, controlling institutions rather than territory, yet making war and peace just like other nations all the same) did not go quietly, and instead mustered its British, American and Soviet satrapies to pursue proxy revenge. The Hitler regime of course then degenerated through its own failures into madness, incompetence, stupidity and evil, but the ball was already in play.

The point of bringing this up is the role of Jewish vindictiveness in keeping Fascism afloat as a zombie all-purpose threat to all and sundry. The "threat of fascist evil" is simply the threat of a nation or people getting the zany unacceptable notion into their heads that their country might after all be better off without Jews in charge.

And that calamity cannot of course even be thought about or spoken of, much less implemented.

Colin Wright , says: Website Show Comment June 1, 2020 at 4:37 am GMT
Defining fascism's easy. 'Antifa' is out there reprising early fascism right now.

You physically attack people who disagree with you. It's not complicated.

[May 31, 2020] Our Grim Future by Pepe Escobar

A pretty silly rant, but some point might worth your attention...
Notable quotes:
"... I don't believe Marxist Social/Communism is the answer, as it has proven to always fail, as it is at complete odds with human nature. It drains creativity and productivity because they aren't rewarded ..."
"... Protests and Maidan open up fabulous opportunities for protest leaders. Chocolate oligarch Poroshenko became president. The little-known leader of the party faction in the parliament, Yatsenyuk, became prime minister. ..."
May 31, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Meanwhile, what is going to happen to assorted fascisms? Eric Hobsbawm showed us in Age of Extremes how the key to the fascist right was always mass mobilization: "Fascists were the revolutionaries of the counter-revolution".

We may be heading further than mere, crude neofascism. Call it Hybrid Neofascism. Their political stars bow to global market imperatives while switching political competition to the cultural arena.

That's what true "illiberalism" is all about: the mix between neoliberalism – unrestricted capital mobility, Central Bank diktats – and political authoritarianism. Here's where we find Trump, Modi and Bolsonaro.

...Even if neoliberalism was dead, and it's not, the world is still encumbered with its corpse – to paraphrase Nietzsche a propos of God.

And even as a triple catastrophe – sanitary, social and climatic – is now unequivocal, the ruling matrix – starring the Masters of the Universe managing the financial casino – won't stop resisting any drive towards change.

... Realpolitik once again points to a post-Lockdown turbo-capitalist framework, where the illiberalism of the 1% – with fascistic elements – and naked turbo-financialization are boosted by reinforced exploitation of an exhausted and now largely unemployed workforce.

Post-Lockdown turbo-capitalism is once again reasserting itself after four decades of Thatcherization, or – to be polite – hardcore neoliberalism. Progressive forces still don't have the ammunition to revert the logic of extremely high profits for the ruling classes – EU governance included – and for large global corporations as well.


-- ALIEN -- , 2 minutes ago

Allowing the continued uncontrolled exploitation of planetary resources will lead to global ecosystem collapse, killing most humans.

Cheap Chinese Crap , 10 minutes ago

Good God, it 's like this guy is giving a seminar in technocratic buzzword salad recognition.

"It takes someone of Marx's caliber to build a full-fledged, 21st century eco-socialist ideology, and capable of long-term, sustained mobilization. Aux armes, citoyens."

Aux armes, indeed. But not to erect an oligarchy of self-appointed experts to rule us with an iron hand. I rather prefer the idea of pulling them off their comfy, government-compensated sinecures and dragging them down into the mud with everyone else.

Anyone who thinks they are better qualified to run your life than you yourself is an enemy of the Enlightenment. Away with them all.

Leguran , 1 hour ago

Something worthwhile to note is missing among Pepe's carnage....

What has happened is that every imaginable organized group from doctors to pilots to lawyers, to farmers, to pharma companies, etc. has carved out a special slice of the economy especially for themselves.

In Feudal times rivers could not be navigated because cockroach lords would charge fees to use the rivers. That is exactly the same arrangement today but instead of using force of arms, laws are used. Our economy is choking on all these impediments.

mtumba , 2 hours ago

I agree that we need a revolution, and that the .01% globalist "elites" have proven to be not only craven, arrogant and greedy - but also stupid beyond redemption.

But I don't believe Marxist Social/Communism is the answer, as it has proven to always fail, as it is at complete odds with human nature. It drains creativity and productivity because they aren't rewarded, and it rewards laziness and inertia, because the absolute minimum of effort results in the barest level needed to survive, which - oddly - is enough for many.

I think it would be great to give actual capitalism a try, with extremely limited govt - a govt that ONLY provides for the common defense and enforcement of contract laws and protection against crimes of violence and property theft. NOT crony-capitalism that takes command over the resources of a nation's klepotcratic govt by the .01% richest and their sycophantic bottom feeder lawyers, lobbyists, corrupt politicians and other enablers.

Snout the First , 3 hours ago

That was sure a lot of words, needlessly making something simple difficult. Here's what it all boils down to:

PKKA , 3 hours ago

Protests and Maidan open up fabulous opportunities for protest leaders. Chocolate oligarch Poroshenko became president. The little-known leader of the party faction in the parliament, Yatsenyuk, became prime minister.

You know that on the project of an epic wall between Ukraine and Russia, Yatsenyuk stole $ 1 billion but did not build a wall. A moron with a certificate from a psycho hospital Andrei Parubiy became the speaker of parliament. You did not know that Parubiy had a certificate of moronity from a psycho hospital? Now you know. Boxer Vitali Klitschko became mayor of Kiev. Vitaly pronounces the words in syllables and wrinkles his forehead for a long time before expressing a thought. You can even physically hear the creak of gears as they spin and creak in Klitschko's head. Do you know what rabble passed in the Ukrainian parliament? Bandits, crooks, nazis, morons, thieves and idiots! So the protests open up fabulous career opportunities and enrichment!

play_arrow
Phillyguy , 4 hours ago

The American public has a front row seat, watching US economic decline. This process has been ongoing since the mid 1970's, as corporate profits slumped. In response the ruling elite enacted a series of Neo-liberal economic policies- multiple tax cuts for the wealthy, attacks on the poor and labor, job outsourcing, financial de-regulation, lack of spending on public and private infrastructure and spending $ trillions of taxpayer money on the Pentagon and strategic debacles in Afghanistan (longest war in US history), Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen. In total, these policies have been a disaster for the average American family.

The ruling elite are well aware of American economic decline, accelerated by the Coronavirus pandemic. Fascism comes to the fore when capitalism breaks down, and under extreme conditions, the ruling elite use fascism as an ideological rationale to harness state power- Legislature and police, to maintain class structure and wealth distribution. Western capitalism is incapable of reversing its economic decline and as a result, we are seeing fascism reemerging in the US, EU and Brazil. Donald Trump is the face of American fascism. Michael Parenti provides an excellent historical analysis of fascism. See: Michael Parenti- Functions of Fascism (Real History) 1 of 4 Jan 27, 2008; Link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0Bc4KJx2Ao

Vigilante , 4 hours ago

How come 'fascist' Trump is being attacked 24/7 by the Deep State though?

They should be on his side if your assertions are correct

Fascism resides mostly on the Left end of the spectrum...and 'Woke' capital is throwing its lot with the 'progressives' these days

bshirley1968 , 4 hours ago

It's your perception he is being attacked. Dude, wake up.

The best the deep state has to run against Trump is Joe Biden? They are that stupid? They are that weak? If they are that stupid and weak, how can they be a conceivable, real threat.

You are being played. You imagine there are good guys that you can trust......and that is why you are being played.

HomeOfTheHypocrite , 3 hours ago

The ruling class is currently divided between those who are ready to prepare fascism and those who want to continue on with neoliberalism. Trump represents one faction of the ruling class. His political opponents in the Deep State represent another. None of them have any genuine concern for the fate of the American worker. Trump, if judged by his actions and not his words, is nothing but a charlatan who mouths populist phrases while appointing billionaire aristocrats to political positions and lavishing investment bankers with trillions of tax dollars.

CatInTheHat , 2 hours ago

This is the problem with both sides cult followers: the insanity behind the idea that these elite somehow have their hands tied behind their backs as they ALL move is toward fascism.

The 2 party system is a ONE party right wing fascist one. Trump is merely a figure head. People listen to what a politician says and NOT what he does behind their backs.

Trump is 1000% Zionazi just like the rest of them

HomeOfTheHypocrite , 2 hours ago

"basically it looks alot like the age old battle between fascism and communism"

Perhaps on the streets, but not within the ruling class. The ruling class, including the Democrats, are utterly opposed to communism or socialism. Every Democratic congressperson with maybe one exception stood and applauded Trump's anti-socialist rants during his State of the Union addresses. Nancy Pelosi: "We're capitalist and that's just the way it is." Elizabeth Warren (supposedly a radical): "I'm capitalist to my bones."

"Let's say for example these protesters managed to organize well enough to stage a coup d'etat and take over - what next ?"

There's little chance of that. They are completely disorganized and lack any sort of political program. But, if you're giving me the task of developing a political program for them, I'll try to offer some suggestions that could be accomplished without a Pinochet or Stalin-style bloodletting.

1. Busting up the monopolies and cartels
2. Raising taxes on the rich
3. A government jobs program to combat unemployment
4. A massive curtailment of the military budget
5. A massive curtailment of the policing and prison budget
6. Free government healthcare (without banning private-sector healthcare)

The first three of these political tasks were accomplished in the US in the 1930s without the need for "black ops, gulags, secret police, and all the rest of it." Major policy changes have not always required mass repression. But they do require a serious enough political party to disassociate itself entirely from the ruling class Democrats and Republicans. During the 30s there was a significant rise in various populist and socialist parties. Much of FDR's policies and statements were a response to the threat they posed to established power. There is a famous quote where he talks about having to "throw a few of these [millionaires] to the wolves" in order to save America from the crackpot ideas of the "communists" and "Huey Longians."

I completely share your concern related to the use of repression to implement social and economic policies. Neither the fascists nor the communists have a thing to offer a free people so long as they rely on tyranny to enforce their program. Above all democracy and the natural rights of individuals must be preserved.

Jedclampetisdead , 5 hours ago

If this country has any chance, we have to execute the Zionist bankers and their minions

new game , 5 hours ago

What is and will be: Corporate Fascism.

I defy anyone to explain other wise.

Go to the World Economic Forum web page and meet your masters.

Billionaires shaping YOUR future with their fortunes from corporations.

Their wealth was had by joint ventures with bought and paid for politicians and lobbyist

crafted legislation to maximize their wealth. This fakdemic absolutely consolidates more wealth

to fewer corporations by design. Serf and kings/queens. The club personified by immense wealth disparity.

In a continuing process, the social scoring via digital systems will limit freedoms to state approved corporate diktats

that clamp like a boot to the neck. **** here, 6 tissue sections and recycled bug **** for food.

brave new gatsy world right now with the roll out out of 3 pronged vaccine controlling your brains emotions.

It is all so obvious to anyone with an ability to see two steps into the future. navigate the future accordingly.

They are in control, the first denial that must be removed to see clearly the next step. sad but true.

simple **** maynard...

[May 26, 2020] fascists are the communist counterpart at the bourgeois mass movement front. They neutralize communism in a way traditional liberalism can't, because of the very nature of class exploitation. That's why fascism is irrational

May 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , May 25 2020 15:19 utc | 83

Mussolini then realized something very simple: the human being is not inherently rational. Reason is something that does not occur naturally to human beings, but is rather something human beings must learn. Therefore, communism could be defeated in elections and in the streets if the massification of reason was contained in due time. Hence the crude, irrational violence of fascism. And it worked: the communists were defeated by violence in Italy, and Hitler would do the same in the 1932-3 elections (who was leading the persecution of communists at the time? Future second-in-command Hermann Göring).

If I could sum up fascism and all its different variants in one word, it would be this: irrationality. Fascism must resort to irrational arguments and narratives in order to manipulate the masses and gain monopoly of violence and, once its hegemony is secure, resort to art and aesthetics to keep the consensus, in the sense that political domination must be presented to the public as a form of art, and not as a field of class struggle. This can be clearly illustrated by the Nazi chain of command: Hitler (political leader, mastermind), Göring (violence, armed forces), Goebbels (propaganda) and... Albert Speer, the ideal Nazi (architect cum military).

[May 24, 2020] Guccifer 2.0's Hidden Agenda

Highly recommended!
Images deleted.
False flag operation by CIA or CrowdStrike as CIA constructor: CIA ears protrude above Gussifer 2.0 hat.
Notable quotes:
"... Guccifer 2.0 fabricated evidence to claim credit for hacking the DNC (using files that were really Podesta attachments) . ..."
"... Guccifer 2.0’s Russian breadcrumbs mostly came from deliberate processes & needless editing of documents . ..."
"... Guccifer 2.0’s Russian communications signals came from the persona choosing to use a proxy server in Moscow and choosing to use a Russian VPN service as end-points (and they used an email service that forwards the sender’s IP address, which made identifying that signal a relatively trivial task.) ..."
"... A considerable volume of evidence pointed at Guccifer 2.0’s activities being in American timezones (twice as many types of indicators were found pointing at Guccifer 2.0’s activities being in American timezones than anywhere else). ..."
"... The American timezones were incidental to other activities (eg. blogging , social media , emailing a journalist , archiving files , etc) and some of these were recorded independently by service providers. ..."
"... A couple of pieces of evidence with Russian indicators present had accompanying locale indicators that contradicted this which suggested the devices used hadn’t been properly set up for use in Russia (or Romania) but may have been suitable for other countries (including America) . ..."
"... On the same day that Guccifer 2.0 was plastering Russian breadcrumbs on documents through a deliberate process, choosing to use Russian-themed end-points and fabricating evidence to claim credit for hacking the DNC, the operation attributed itself to WikiLeaks. ..."
"... Guccifer 2.0 chose to use insecure communications to ask WikiLeaks to confirm receipt of “DNC emails” on July 6, 2016. Confirmation of this was not provided at that time but WikiLeaks did confirm receipt of a “1gb or so” archive on July 18, 2016. ..."
"... The alleged GRU officer we are told was part of an operation to deflect from Russian culpability suggested that Assange “may be connected with Russians”. ..."
"... Guccifer 2.0 fabricated evidence to claim credit for hacking the DNC, covered itself (and its files) in what were essentially a collection of “Made In Russia” labels through deliberate processes and decisions made by the persona, and, then, it attributed itself to WikiLeaks with a claim that was contradicted by subsequent communications between both parties. ..."
"... While we are expected to accept that Guccifer 2.0’s efforts between July 6 and July 18 were a sincere effort to get leaks to WikiLeaks, considering everything we now know about the persona, it seems fair to question whether Guccifer 2.0’s intentions towards WikiLeaks may have instead been malicious. ..."
"... Guccifer 2.0 was always John Brennan 1.0 ..."
"... Was Guccifer II part of the Stefan Halper organization that lured Papadopoulos and maliciously maligned others? ..."
"... I believe Guccifer 2.0 was created by the CIA to falsely pin blame on the Russians for info that Seth Rich gave to WikiLeaks. Read for yourself: http://g-2.space/ ..."
May 24, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Tim Leonard via ConsortiumNews.com,

Why would an alleged GRU officer - supposedly part of an operation to deflect Russian culpability - suggest that Assange “may be connected with Russians?”

In December, I reported on digital forensics evidence relating to Guccifer 2.0 and highlighted several key points about the mysterious persona that Special Counsel Robert Mueller claims was a front for Russian intelligence to leak Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks:

On the same day that Guccifer 2.0 was plastering Russian breadcrumbs on documents through a deliberate process, choosing to use Russian-themed end-points and fabricating evidence to claim credit for hacking the DNC, the operation attributed itself to WikiLeaks.

This article questions what Guccifer 2.0’s intentions were in relation to WikiLeaks in the context of what has been discovered by independent researchers during the past three years.

Timing

On June 12, 2016, in an interview with ITV’s Robert Peston, Julian Assange confirmed that WikiLeaks had emails relating to Hillary Clinton that the organization intended to publish. This announcement was prior to any reported contact with Guccifer 2.0 (or with DCLeaks).

On June 14, 2016, an article was published in The Washington Post citing statements from two CrowdStrike executives alleging that Russian intelligence hacked the DNC and stole opposition research on Trump. It was apparent that the statements had been made in the 48 hours prior to publication as they referenced claims of kicking hackers off the DNC network on the weekend just passed (June 11-12, 2016).

On that same date, June 14, DCLeaks contacted WikiLeaks via Twitter DM and for some reason suggested that both parties coordinate their releases of leaks. (It doesn’t appear that WikiLeaks responded until September 2016).

On June 15, 2016, Guccifer 2.0 appeared for the first time. He fabricated evidence to claim credit for hacking the DNC (using material that wasn’t from the DNC), used a proxy in Moscow to carry out searches (for mostly English language terms including a grammatically incorrect and uncommon phrase that the persona would use in its first blog post) and used a Russian VPN service to share the fabricated evidence with reporters. All of this combined conveniently to provide false corroboration for several claims made by CrowdStrike executives that were published just one day earlier in The Washington Post.

[CrowdStrike President Shawn Henry testified under oath behind closed doors on Dec. 5, 2017 to the U.S. House intelligence committee that his company had no evidence that Russian actors removed anything from the DNC servers. This testimony was only released earlier this month.]

First Claim Versus First Contact

On the day it emerged, the Guccifer 2.0 operation stated that it had given material to WikiLeaks and asserted that the organization would publish that material soon:

By stating that WikiLeaks would “publish them soon” the Guccifer 2.0 operation implied that it had received confirmation of intent to publish.

However, the earliest recorded communication between Guccifer 2.0 and WikiLeaks didn’t occur until a week later (June 22, 2016) when WikiLeaks reached out to Guccifer 2.0 and suggested that the persona send any new material to them rather than doing what it was doing:

[Excerpt from Special Counsel Mueller’s report. Note: “stolen from the DNC” is an editorial insert by the special counsel.]

If WikiLeaks had already received material and confirmed intent to publish prior to this direct message, why would they then suggest what they did when they did? WikiLeaks says it had no prior contact with Guccifer 2.0 despite what Guccifer 2.0 had claimed.

Needing To Know What WikiLeaks Had

Fortunately, information that gives more insight into communications on June 22, 2016 was made available on April 29, 2020 via a release of the Roger Stone arrest warrant application.

Here is the full conversation on that date (according to the application):

@WikiLeaks: Do you have secure communications?

@WikiLeaks: Send any new material here for us to review and it will have a much higher impact than what you are doing. No other media will release the full material.

@GUCCIFER_2: what can u suggest for a secure connection? Soft, keys, etc? I’m ready to cooperate with you, but I need to know what’s in your archive 80gb? Are there only HRC emails? Or some other docs? Are there any DNC docs? If it’s not secret when you are going to release it?

@WikiLeaks: You can send us a message in a .txt file here [link redacted]

@GUCCIFER_2: do you have GPG?

Why would Guccifer 2.0 need to know what material WikiLeaks already had? Certainly, if it were anything Guccifer 2.0 had sent (or the GRU had sent) he wouldn’t have had reason to inquire.

The more complete DM details provided here also suggest that both parties had not yet established secure communications.

Further communications were reported to have taken place on June 24, 2016:

@GUCCIFER_2: How can we chat? Do u have jabber or something like that?

@WikiLeaks: Yes, we have everything. We’ve been busy celebrating Brexit. You can also email an encrypted message to office@wikileaks.org. They key is here.

and June 27, 2016:

@GUCCIFER_2: Hi, i’ve just sent you an email with a text message encrypted and an open key.

@WikiLeaks: Thanks.

@GUCCIFER_2: waiting for ur response. I send u some interesting piece.

Guccifer 2.0 said he needed to know what was in the 88GB ‘insurance’ archive that WikiLeaks had posted on June 16, 2016 and it’s clear that, at this stage, secure communications had not been established between both parties (which would seem to rule out the possibility of encrypted communications prior to June 15, 2016, making Guccifer 2.0’s initial claims about WikiLeaks even more doubtful).

Claims DCLeaks Is A Sub-Project Of WikiLeaks

On June 27, 2016, in an email chain to the Smoking Gun (exposing Guccifer 2.0 apparently being in the Central US timezone), Guccifer 2.0 claimed that DCLeaks was a “sub-project” of WikiLeaks.

There’s no evidence to support this. “Envoy le” is also a mistake as standard French emails read: “Envoye le.” Claims allegedly made by Guccifer 2.0 in a Twitter DM to DCLeaks on September 15, 2016 suggest that he knew this was nonsense:

There was no evidence of WikiLeaks mentioning this to Guccifer 2.0 nor any reason for why WikiLeaks couldn’t just send a DM to DCLeaks themselves if they had wanted to.

(It should also be noted that this Twitter DM activity between DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 is alleged by Mueller to be communications between officers within the same unit of the GRU, who, for some unknown reason, decided to use Twitter DMs to relay such information rather than just communicate face to face or securely via their own local network.)

Guccifer 2.0 lied about DCLeaks being a sub-project of WikiLeaks and then, over two months later, was seen trying to encourage DCLeaks to communicate with WikiLeaks by relaying an alleged request from WikiLeaks that there is no record of WikiLeaks ever making (and which WikiLeaks could have done themselves, directly, if they had wanted to).

The ‘About 1GB’ / ‘1Gb or So’ Archive

On July 4, 2016, Guccifer 2.0 contacted WikiLeaks:

@GUCCIFER_2: hi there, check up r email, waiting for reply.

This was followed up on July 6, 2016 with the following conversation:

@GUCCIFER_2: have you received my parcel?

@WikiLeaks: Not unless it was very recent. [we haven’ t checked in 24h].

@GUCCIFER_2: I sent it yesterday, an archive of about 1 gb. via [website link]. and check your email.

@WikiLeaks: Wil[l] check, thanks.

@GUCCIFER_2: let me know the results.

@WikiLeaks: Please don’t make anything you send to us public. It’s a lot of work to go through it and the impact is severely reduced if we are not the first to publish.

@GUCCIFER_2: agreed. How much time will it take?

@WikiLeaks: likely sometime today.

@GUCCIFER_2: will u announce a publication? and what about 3 docs sent u earlier?

@WikiLeaks: I don’t believe we received them. Nothing on ‘Brexit’ for example.

@GUCCIFER_2: wow. have you checked ur mail?

@WikiLeaks: At least not as of 4 days ago . . . . For security reasons mail cannot be checked for some hours.

@GUCCIFER_2: fuck, sent 4 docs on brexit on jun 29, an archive in gpg ur submission form is too fucking slow, spent the whole day uploading 1 gb.

@WikiLeaks: We can arrange servers 100x as fast. The speed restrictions are to anonymise the path. Just ask for custom fast upload point in an email.

@GUCCIFER_2: will u be able to check ur email?

@WikiLeaks: We’re best with very large data sets. e.g. 200gb. these prove themselves since they’re too big to fake.

@GUCCIFER_2: or shall I send brexit docs via submission once again?

@WikiLeaks: to be safe, send via [web link]

@GUCCIFER_2: can u confirm u received dnc emails?

@WikiLeaks: for security reasons we can’ t confirm what we’ve received here. e.g., in case your account has been taken over by us intelligence and is probing to see what we have.

@GUCCIFER_2: then send me an encrypted email.

@WikiLeaks: we can do that. but the security people are in another time zone so it will need to wait some hours.

@WikiLeaks: what do you think about the FBl’ s failure to charge? To our mind the clinton foundation investigation has always been the more serious. we would be very interested in all the emails/docs from there. She set up quite a lot of front companies. e.g in sweden.

@GUCCIFER_2: ok, i’ll be waiting for confirmation. as for investigation, they have everything settled, or else I don’t know how to explain that they found a hundred classified docs but fail to charge her.

@WikiLeaks: She’s too powerful to charge at least without something stronger. s far as we know, the investigation into the clinton foundation remains open e hear the FBI are unhappy with Loretta Lynch over meeting Bill, because he’s a target in that investigation.

@GUCCIFER_2: do you have any info about marcel lazar? There’ve been a lot of rumors of late.

@WikiLeaks: the death? [A] fake story.

@WikiLeaks: His 2013 screen shots of Max Blumenthal’s inbox prove that Hillary secretly deleted at least one email about Libya that was meant to be handed over to Congress. So we were very interested in his co-operation with the FBI.

@GUCCIFER_2: some dirty games behind the scenes believe Can you send me an email now?

@WikiLeaks: No; we have not been able to activate the people who handle it. Still trying.

@GUCCIFER_2: what about tor submission? [W]ill u receive a doc now?

@WikiLeaks: We will get everything sent on [weblink].” [A]s long as you see \”upload succseful\” at the end. [I]f you have anything hillary related we want it in the next tweo [sic] days prefable [sic] because the DNC is approaching and she will solidify bernie supporters behind her after.

@GUCCIFER_2: ok. I see.

@WikiLeaks: [W]e think the public interest is greatest now and in early october.

@GUCCIFER_2: do u think a lot of people will attend bernie fans rally in philly? Will it affect the dnc anyhow?

@WikiLeaks: bernie is trying to make his own faction leading up to the DNC. [S]o he can push for concessions (positions/policies) or, at the outside, if hillary has a stroke, is arrested etc, he can take over the nomination. [T]he question is this: can bemies supporters+staff keep their coherency until then (and after). [O]r will they dis[s]olve into hillary’ s camp? [P]resently many of them are looking to damage hilary [sic] inorder [sic] to increase their unity and bargaining power at the DNC. Doubt one rally is going to be that significant in the bigger scheme. [I]t seems many of them will vote for hillary just to prevent trump from winning.

@GUCCIFER_2: sent brexit docs successfully.

@WikiLeaks: :))).

@WikiLeaks: we think trump has only about a 25% chance of winning against hillary so conflict between bernie and hillary is interesting.

@GUCCIFER_2: so it is.

@WikiLeaks: also, it’ s important to consider what type of president hillary might be. If bernie and trump retain their groups past 2016 in significant number, then they are a restraining force on hillary.

[Note: This was over a week after the Brexit referendum had taken place, so this will not have had any impact on the results of that. It also doesn’t appear that WikiLeaks released any Brexit content around this time.]

On July 14, 2016, Guccifer 2.0 sent an email to WikiLeaks, this was covered in the Mueller report:

It should be noted that while the attachment sent was encrypted, the email wasn’t and both the email contents and name of the file were readable.

The persona then opted, once again, for insecure communications via Twitter DMs:

@GUCCIFER_2: ping. Check ur email. sent u a link to a big archive and a pass.

@WikiLeaks: great, thanks; can’t check until tomorrow though.

On July 17, 2016, the persona contacted WikiLeaks again:

@GUCCIFER_2: what bout now?

On July 18, 2016, WikiLeaks responded and more was discussed:

@WikiLeaks: have the 1 Gb or so archive.

@GUCCIFER_2: have u managed to extract the files?

@WikiLeaks: yes. turkey coup has delayed us a couple of days. [O]therwise all ready[.]

@GUCCIFER_2: so when r u about to make a release?

@WikiLeaks: this week. [D]o you have any bigger datasets? [D]id you get our fast transfer details?

@GUCCIFER_2: i’ll check it. did u send it via email?

@WikiLeaks: yes.

@GUCCIFER_2: to [web link]. [I] got nothing.

@WikiLeaks: check your other mail? this was over a week ago.

@GUCCIFER_2:oh, that one, yeah, [I] got it.

@WikiLeaks: great. [D]id it work?

@GUCCIFER_2:[I] haven’ t tried yet.

@WikiLeaks: Oh. We arranged that server just for that purpose. Nothing bigger?

@GUCCIFER_2: let’s move step by step, u have released nothing of what [I] sent u yet.

@WikiLeaks: How about you transfer it all to us encrypted. [T]hen when you are happy, you give us the decrypt key. [T]his way we can move much faster. (A]lso it is protective for you if we already have everything because then there is no point in trying to shut you up.

@GUCCIFER_2: ok, i’ll ponder it

Again, we see a reference to the file being approximately one gigabyte in size.

Guccifer 2.0’s “so when r u about to make a release?” seems to be a question about his files. However, it could have been inferred as generally relating to what WikiLeaks had or even material relating to the “Turkey Coup” that WikiLeaks had mentioned in the previous sentence and that were published by the following day (July 19, 2016).

The way this is reported in the Mueller report, though, prevented this potential ambiguity being known (by not citing the exact question that Guccifer 2.0 had asked and the context immediately preceding it.

Four days later, WikiLeaks published the DNC emails.

Later that same day, Guccifer 2.0 tweeted: “@wikileaks published #DNCHack docs I’d given them!!!”.

Guccifer 2.0 chose to use insecure communications to ask WikiLeaks to confirm receipt of “DNC emails” on July 6, 2016. Confirmation of this was not provided at that time but WikiLeaks did confirm receipt of a “1gb or so” archive on July 18, 2016.

Guccifer 2.0’s emails to WikiLeaks were also sent insecurely.

We cannot be certain that WikiLeaks statement about making a release was in relation to Guccifer 2.0’s material and there is even a possibility that this could have been in reference to the Erdogan leaks published by WikiLeaks on July 19, 2016.

Ulterior Motives?

While the above seems troubling there are a few points worth considering:

Considering all of this and the fact Guccifer 2.0 effectively covered itself in “Made In Russia” labels (by plastering files in Russian metadata and choosing to use a Russian VPN service and a proxy in Moscow for it’s activities) on the same day it first attributed itself to WikiLeaks, it’s fair to suspect that Guccifer 2.0 had malicious intent towards WikiLeaks from the outset.

If this was the case, Guccifer 2.0 may have known about the DNC emails by June 30, 2016 as this is when the persona first started publishing attachments from those emails.

Seth Rich Mentioned By Both Parties

WikiLeaks Offers Reward

On August 9, 2016, WikiLeaks tweeted:

ANNOUNCE: WikiLeaks has decided to issue a US$20k reward for information leading to conviction for the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich.

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) August 9, 2016

In an interview with Nieuwsuur that was posted the same day, Julian Assange explained that the reward was for a DNC staffer who he said had been “shot in the back, murdered”. When the interviewer suggested it was a robbery Assange disputed it and stated that there were no findings.

When the interviewer asked if Seth Rich was a source, Assange stated, “We don’t comment on who our sources are”.

When pressed to explain WikiLeaks actions, Assange stated that the reward was being offered because WikiLeaks‘ sources were concerned by the incident. He also stated that WikiLeaks were investigating.

Speculation and theories about Seth Rich being a source for WikiLeaks soon propagated to several sites and across social media.

Guccifer 2.0 Claims Seth Rich As His Source

On August 25, 2016, approximately three weeks after the reward was offered, Julian Assange was due to be interviewed on Fox News on the topic of Seth Rich.

On that same day, in a DM conversation with the actress Robbin Young, Guccifer 2.0 claimed that Seth was his source (despite previously claiming he obtained his material by hacking the DNC).

Why did Guccifer 2.0 feel the need to attribute itself to Seth at this time?

[Note: I am not advocating for any theory and am simply reporting on Guccifer 2.0’s effort to attribute itself to Seth Rich following the propagation of Rich-WikiLeaks association theories online.]

Special Counsel Claims

In Spring, 2019, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who was named to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. general election, delivered his final report.

It claimed:

Guccifer 2.0 contradicted his own hacking claims to allege that Seth Rich was his source and did so on the same day that Julian Assange was due to be interviewed by Fox News (in relation to Seth Rich).

No communications between Guccifer 2.0 and Seth Rich have ever been reported.

Suggesting Assange Connected To Russians

In the same conversation Guccifer 2.0 had with Robbin Young where Rich’s name is mentioned (on August 25, 2016), the persona also provided a very interesting response to Young mentioning “Julian” (in reference to Julian Assange):

The alleged GRU officer we are told was part of an operation to deflect from Russian culpability suggested that Assange “may be connected with Russians”.

Guccifer 2.0’s Mentions of WikiLeaks and Assange

Guccifer 2.0 mentioned WikiLeaks or associated himself with their output on several occasions:

  1. June 15, 2016: claiming to have sent WikiLeaks material on his blog.
  2. June 27, 2016: when he claimed DCLeaks was a sub-project of WikiLeaks.
  3. July 13, 2016: Joe Uchill of The Hill reported that Guccifer 2.0 had contacted the publication and stated: “The press gradually forget about me, [W]ikileaks is playing for time and have some more docs.”
  4. July 22nd, 2016: claimed credit when WikiLeaks published the DNC leaks.
  5. August 12, 2016: It was reported in The Hill that Guccifer 2.0 had released material to the publication. They reported: “The documents released to The Hill are only the first section of a much larger cache. The bulk, the hacker said, will be released on WikiLeaks.”
  6. August 12, 2016: Tweeted that he would “send the major trove of the #DCCC materials and emails to #wikileaks“.
  7. September 15, 2016: telling DCLeaks that WikiLeaks wanted to get in contact with them.
  8. October 4, 2016: Congratulating WikiLeaks on their 10th anniversary via its blog. Also states: “Julian, you are really cool! Stay safe and sound!”. (This was the same day on which Guccifer 2.0 published his “Clinton Foundation” files that were clearly not from the Clinton Foundation.)
  9. October 17, 2016: via Twitter, stating “i’m here and ready for new releases. already changed my location thanks @wikileaks for a good job!”

Guccifer 2.0 also made some statements in response to WikiLeaks or Assange being mentioned:

  1. June 17, 2016: in response to The Smoking Gun asking if Assange would publish the same material it was publishing, Guccifer 2.0 stated: “I gave WikiLeaks the greater part of the files, but saved some for myself,”
  2. August 22, 2016: in response to Raphael Satter suggesting that Guccifer 2.0 send leaks to WikiLeaks, the persona stated: “I gave wikileaks a greater part of docs”.
  3. August 25, 2016: in response to Julian Assange’s name being mentioned in a conversation with Robbin Young, Guccifer 2.0 stated: “he may be connected with Russians”.
  4. October 18, 2016: a BBC reported asked Guccifer 2.0 if he was upset that WikiLeaks had “stole his thunder” and “do you still support Assange?”. Guccifer 2.0 responded: “i’m glad, together we’ll make America great again.”.

Guccifer 2.0 fabricated evidence to claim credit for hacking the DNC, covered itself (and its files) in what were essentially a collection of “Made In Russia” labels through deliberate processes and decisions made by the persona, and, then, it attributed itself to WikiLeaks with a claim that was contradicted by subsequent communications between both parties.

Guccifer 2.0 then went on to lie about WikiLeaks, contradicted its own hacking claims to attribute itself to Seth Rich and even alleged that Julian Assange “may be connected with Russians”.

While we are expected to accept that Guccifer 2.0’s efforts between July 6 and July 18 were a sincere effort to get leaks to WikiLeaks, considering everything we now know about the persona, it seems fair to question whether Guccifer 2.0’s intentions towards WikiLeaks may have instead been malicious.


xxx 2 minutes ago (Edited)

Everything involving the Russian hoax was set up by the Deep States around the world. Implicate, discredit and destroy all those like Rich, Assange, Flynn and those who knew the truth. Kill the messenger....literally.

xxx 10 minutes ago

here's what really happened:

an American hacker breached Podesta's gmail on March 13 2016 and then uploaded it to Wikileaks via Tor sometime between April and May.

the NSA and CIA have hacked into Wikileaks' Tor file server to watch for new leaks to stay ahead of them to prepare. they saw Podesta's emails leaked and launched a counter infowar operation.

Brennan's CIA created the Guccifer 2.0 persona, with phony Russian metadata artifacts, using digital forgery techniques seen in Vault7. Crowdstrike was already on the premises of DNC since 2015, with their overly expensive security scanner watching the DNC network. Crowdstrike had access to any DNC files they wanted. CIA, FBI and Crowdstrike colluded to create a fake leak of DNC docs through their Guccifer 2.0 cutout. they didn't leak any docs of high importance, which is why we never saw any smoking guns from DNC leaks or DCLeaks.

you have to remember, the whole point of this CIAFBINSA operation has nothing to do with Hillary or Trump or influencing the election. the point was to fabricate criminal evidence to use against Assange to finally arrest him and extradite him as well as smear Wikileaks ahead of the looming leak of Podesta's emails.

if CIAFBINSA can frame Assange and Wikileaks as being criminal hackers and/or Russian assets ahead of the Podesta leaks, then they can craft a narrative for the MSM to ignore or distrust most of the Podesta emails. and that is exactly what happened, such as when Chris Cuomo said on CNN that it was illegal for you to read Wikileaks, but not CNN, so you should let CNN tell you what to think about Wikileaks instead of looking at evidence yourself.

this explains why Guccifer 2.0 was so sloppy leaving a trail of Twitter DMs to incriminate himself and Assange along with him.

if this CIAFBINSA entrapment/frame operation ever leaks, it will guarantee the freedom of Assange.

xxx 11 minutes ago

According to Wikipedia, "Guccifer" is Marcel Lazar Lehel, a Rumanian born in 1972, but "Guccifer 2.0" is someone else entirely.

Is that so?

xxx 20 minutes ago (Edited)

The guy from Cyrptome always asserted Assange was some type of deep state puppet, that he was connected somehow. This wouldn't be news to me and its probably why he was scared as hell. The guy is as good as dead, like S. Hussein. Seth Rich was just a puppet that got caught in the wrong game. He was expendable obviously too because well he had a big mouth, he was expendable from the beginning. Somebody mapped this whole **** out, thats for sure.

xxx 28 minutes ago

I am sick and tired of these Deep State and CIA-linked operations trying to put a wrench in the prosecution of people who were engaged in a coup d'etat.

xxx 29 minutes ago

********

xxx 33 minutes ago

At this point what difference does it make? We are all convinced since 2016. It is not going to convince the TDS cases roaming the wilderness.

No arrests, no subpoenas, no warrants, no barging in at 3 am, no perp walks, no tv glare...

Pres. Trump is playing a very risky game. Arrest now, or regret later. And you won't have much time to regret.

The swamp is dark, smelly and deep,

And it has grudges to keep.

xxx 37 minutes ago

Meanwhile- Guccifer 1.0 is still?

- In prison?

- Released?

- 48 month sentence in 2016. Obv no good behavior.

Nice article. Brennan is the dolt he appears.

xxx 41 minutes ago

+1,000 on the investigative work and analyzing it.

Sadly, none of the guilty are in jail. Instead. Assange sits there rotting away.

xxx 44 minutes ago

Why would an alleged GRU officer - supposedly part of an operation to deflect Russian culpability - suggest that Assange "may be connected with Russians?"

Because the AXIS powers of the CIA, Brit secret police and Israeli secret police pay for the campaign to tie Assange to the Russians...

xxx 45 minutes ago

@realDonaldTrump

A lot of interest in this story about Psycho Joe Scarborough. So a young marathon runner just happened to faint in his office, hit her head on his desk, & die? I would think there is a lot more to this story than that? An affair? What about the so-called investigator? Read story!

xxx 45 minutes ago

Why make it harder than it is? Guccifer II = Crowdstrike

xxx 51 minutes ago

Guccifer 2.0 was always John Brennan 1.0

xxx 58 minutes ago (Edited)

Was Guccifer II part of the Stefan Halper organization that lured Papadopoulos and maliciously maligned others?

xxx 1 hour ago

"His name was Seth Rich." The unofficial motto of ZeroHedge...

xxx 1 hour ago

James Guccifer Clapper.

xxx 1 hour ago

Mossad. And their subsidiary CIA.

xxx 1 hour ago

Crowd Strike CEO'S admission under oath that they had no evidence the DNC was hacked by the Russians should make the Russian Hoax predicate abundantly clear.

Justice for Seth Rich!

xxx 1 hour ago

Any influence Assange had on the election was so small that it wouldn't move the needle either way. The real influence and election tampering in the US has always come from the scores of lobbyists and their massive donations that fund the candidates election runs coupled with the wildly inaccurate and agenda driven collusive effort by the MSM. Anyone pointing fingers at the Russians is beyond blind to the unparalleled influence and power these entities have on swaying American minds.

xxx 1 hour ago

ObamaGate.

xxx 1 hour ago (Edited)

Uugh ONCE AGAIN... 4chan already proved guccifer 2.0 was a larp, and the files were not "hacked", they were leaked by Seth Rich. The metadata from the guccifer files is different from the metadata that came from the seth rich files. The dumb fuckers thought they were smart by modifying the author name of the files to make it look like it came from a russian source. They were so ******* inept, they must have forgot (or not have known) to modify the unique 16 digit hex key assigned to the author of the files when they were created..... The ones that seth rich copied had the system administrators name (Warren Flood) as the author and the 16 digit hex key from both file sources were the same - the one assigned to warren flood.

Really sloppy larp!!!

xxx 1 hour ago

This link has all the detail to show Guccifer 2.0 was not Russia. I believe Guccifer 2.0 was created by the CIA to falsely pin blame on the Russians for info that Seth Rich gave to WikiLeaks. Read for yourself: http://g-2.space/

xxx 1 hour ago

This is what people are. Now the species has more power than it can control and that it knows what to do with.

What do you think the result will be?

As for these games of Secret - it's more game than anything truly significant. The significant exists in the bunkers, with the mobile units, in the submarines. Et. al.

But this is a game in which some of the players die - or wish they were dead.

xxx 1 hour ago

And.....?

Public figures and political parties warrant public scrutiny. And didn't his expose in their own words expose the democrats, the mass media, the bureaucracy to the corrupt frauds that they are?

xxx 1 hour ago

Other than the fact that they didn't steal the emails (unless you believe whistleblowers are thief's, one mans source is another mans thief, it's all about who's ox is being gored and you love "leaks" don't you? As long as they work in your favor. Stop with the piety.

xxx 15 minutes ago

That's not the story at all. Did you just read this article?

The democrats were super duper corrupt (before all of this).

They fucked around to ice Bernie out of the primary.

A young staffer Seth Rich knew it and didn't like it. He made the decision to leak the info to the most reputable org for leaks in the world Wikileaks.

IF the DNC had been playing fair, Seth Rich wouldn't have felt the need to leak.

So, the democrats did it to themselves.

And then they created Russiagate to cover it all up.

And murdered a young brave man ... as we know.

xxx 1 hour ago

Assange, another problem Trump failed to fix.

xxx 1 hour ago

Sounds like it came from the same source as the Trump dossier ... MI5.

[May 21, 2020] Mefobills

May 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 8:59 pm GMT 100 Words @Phaeton I pushed the agree button for you.

Here is a link that is more fair to what fascism is.

http://immigration-globalization.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-is-fascism.html

We have a plutocracy which is in bed with corporations, including finance corporations. Our totalitarianism is not fascism.

Fascism arose to fight finance capital. It was the third way between communism and finance capitalism.

People keep bandying the word fascism around because it was changed in meaning post ww2 something like conspiracy after JFK was murdered. The meaning was changed to have a negative reaction in our brains.

Conspiracy is merely people getting together to hatch a plot, or scheme. Fascism was the putting of the polity over capital.

[May 21, 2020] Brave New Normal (Part 2) by C.J. Hopkins

May 21, 2020 | www.unz.com

My columns haven't been very funny recently. This one isn't going to be any funnier. Sorry. Fascism makes me cranky.

I don't mean the kind of fascism the corporate media and the fake Resistance have been desperately hyping for the last four years. God help me, but I'm not terribly worried about a few hundred white-supremacist morons marching around with tiki torches hollering Nazi slogans at each other, or Jewish-Mexican-American law clerks flashing "OK" signs on TV, or smirking schoolkids in MAGA hats.

I'm talking about actual, bona fide fascism, or totalitarianism, if you want to get technical. The kind where governments declare a global "state of emergency" on account of a virus with a 0.2% to 0.6% lethality (and that causes mild, flu-like symptoms, or absolutely no symptoms whatsoever, in over 97% of those infected ), locks everyone down inside their homes, suspends their constitutional rights, terrorizes them with propaganda, and unleashes uniformed goon squads on anyone who doesn't comply with their despotic decrees.

I'm talking about the kind of totalitarianism where the police track you down with your smartphone data and then come to your house to personally harass you for attending a political protest , or attack you for challenging their illegitimate authority , and then charge you with "assault" for fighting back, and then get the media to publish a story accusing you of having "set up" the cops .

I'm talking about the kind of totalitarianism where the secret police are given carte blanche to monitor everyone's Internet activity , and to scan you with their " surveillance helmets ," and dictate how close you can sit to your friends , and menace you with drones and robot dogs , and violently pry your kids out of your arms and arrest you if you dare to protest.

I'm talking about the kind of totalitarianism that psychologically tortures children with authoritarian loyalty rituals designed to condition them to live in fear, and respond to absurd Pavlovian stimuli, and that encourages the masses to turn off their brains and mechanically repeat propaganda slogans, like "wear a mask" and "flatten the curve," and to report their neighbors to the police for having an "illegal" private party and to otherwise reify the manufactured mass hysteria the authorities need to "justify" their totalitarianism.

Yeah, that kind of stuff makes me cranky.

And you know what makes me really cranky? I'll tell you what makes me really cranky. It is people who publicly project themselves as "anti-authoritarians" and "anti-fascists," or who have established their "anti-establishment" brands and "dissident" personas on social media, or even in the corporate media, either zealously cheerleading this totalitarianism or looking away and saying nothing as it is rolled out by the very authorities and media propagandists they pretend to oppose. I don't know exactly why, but that stuff makes me particularly cranky.

I'll provide you with a few examples.

The militant "Portland anti-fascists" who the corporate media fell in love with and made famous for bravely fighting off the Trump-loving Putin-Nazi Menace over the course of the last four years, as soon as the Corona-Totalitarianism began, did what all true anti-fascists do when the state goes full-blown fascist no, they did not "smash the state," or "occupy the streets," or anything like that. They masked-up and started making vegan hand sanitizer .

Popular Internet "anti-imperialists" started accusing everyone opposing the lockdown of being part of some far-right Republican plot to "promote mass death under the banner of freedom" or to "normalize death" to benefit rich people, or being members of a "death cult," or something. Celebrity socialists took to Twitter to warn that we would " shortly have the blood of thousands of people on our hands ," and call us " anti-vaxxers " and " flat earth fucks ." Indie political and military analysts patiently explained why governments needed to be able to pull people out of their homes against their will and quarantine them . Anarchist anthropologists averred that the lockdown wasn't damaging the productive economy; it was only damaging the "bullshit economy," and those complaining about being out of work were people whose work is "largely useless."

Others simply looked away or sat there in silence as we were confined to our homes, and made to carry " permission papers " to walk to work or the corner grocery store, and were beaten and arrested for not "social-distancing," and were otherwise bullied and humiliated for no justifiable reason whatsoever. (We are talking about a virus, after all, that even the official medical experts, e.g., the U.K.'s Chief Medic , admit is more or less harmless to the vast majority of us, not the Bubonic Fucking Plague or some sort of Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu so spare me the "we-had-no-choice-but-to-go-totalitarian" rationalization.)

My intent is not merely to mock these people (i.e., these "radical," "anti-establishment" types who fell into formation and started goose-stepping because the media told them we were all going to die), but also to use them as a clear example of how official narratives are born and take hold.

That's somewhat pertinent at the moment, because the "Brave New Normal" official narrative has been born, but it has not yet taken hold. What happens next will determine whether it does.

In order to understand how this works, imagine for a moment that you're one of these people who are normally skeptical of the government and the media, and that you consider yourself an anti-authoritarian, or at least a friend of the working classes, and now you are beginning to realize that there is no Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu (just as there were no "WMDs," no "Russian hackers," no "pee-tape," etc.), and so it dawns on you that you've been behaving like a hysterical, brainwashed, fascist minion of the very establishment you supposedly oppose or at the very least like an abject coward.

Imagine how you might feel right now.

You would probably feel pretty foolish, right? And more than a little ashamed of yourself. So OK, what would do about that? Well, you would have a couple of options.

Option Number One would be admit what you did, apologize to whomever you have to, and try like hell not to do it again. Not many people are going to choose this option.

Most people are going to choose Option Number Two, which is to desperately try to deny what they did, or to desperately rationalize what they did (and in many cases are still actively doing). Now, this is not as easy at it sounds, because doing that means they will have to continue to believe (or at least pretend to believe) that there is an Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu which is going to kill hundreds of millions of people the moment we stop locking everyone down, and forcing them to "social distance," and so on. They will have to continue to pretend to believe that this Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu exists, even though they know it doesn't.

And this is where that Orwellian "doublethink" comes in. People (i.e., these "anti-authoritarians," not to mention the majority of the "normal" public) are not going to want to face the fact that they've been behaving like a bunch of fascists (or cowards) for no justifiable reason whatsoever. So, what they are going to do instead is desperately pretend that their behavior was justified and that the propaganda they have been swallowing, and regurgitating, was not propaganda, but rather, "the Truth."

In other words, in order to avoid their shame, they are going to do everything in their power to reify the official narrative and delegitimize anyone attempting to expose it as the fiction that it is. They are going to join in with the corporate media that are calling us " extremists ," " conspiracy theorists ," " anti-vaxxers ," and other such epithets. They're going to accuse those of us on the Left of aligning with " far-Right Republican militias ," and " Boogaloo accelerationists ," and of being members of the Russian-backed " Querfront ," and assorted other horrible things meant to scare errant leftists into line.

Above all, they are going to continue to insist, despite all the evidence to the contrary , that we are "under attack" by a "killer virus" which could "strike again at any time," and so we have to maintain at least some level of totalitarianism and paranoia, or else well, you know, the terrorists win.

It is this reification of the official narrative by those too ashamed to admit what they did (and try to determine why they did it), and not the narrative or the propaganda itself, that will eventually establish the "Brave New Normal" as "reality" (assuming the process works as smoothly as it did with the "War on Terror," the "War on Populism," and the "Cold War" narratives). The facts, the data, the "science" won't matter. Reality is consensus reality and a new consensus is being formed at the moment.

There is still a chance (right now, not months from now) for these people (some of whom are rather influential) to stand up and say, "Whoops! I screwed up and went all Nazi there for a bit." But I seriously doubt that is going to happen.

It's much more likely that the Brave New Normal (or some intermittent, scaled-down version of it) will gradually become our new reality. People will get used to being occasionally "locked down," and being ordered to wear masks, and not to touch each other, and to standing in designated circles and boxes, like they got used to the "anti-Terrorism measures," and believing that Trump is a "Russian asset." The coming economic depression will be blamed on the Alien-Terrorist-Death-Flu, rather than on the lockdown that caused it. Millions of people will be condemned to extreme poverty , or debt-enslaved for the rest of their lives, but they'll be too busy trying to survive to mount any kind of broad resistance.

The children, of course, won't know any better. They will grow up with their "isolation boxes," and "protective barriers," and "contact tracing," and they will live in constant low-grade fear of another killer virus, or terrorist attack, or Russian-backed white supremacist uprising, or whatever boogeyman might next appear to menace the global capitalist empire, which, it goes without saying, will be just fine.

Me, I'll probably remain kind of cranky, but I will try to find the humor in it all. Bear with me that might take a while.

C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing and Broadway Play Publishing, Inc. His dystopian novel, Zone 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. Volume I of his Consent Factory Essays is published by Consent Factory Publishing, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Amalgamated Content, Inc. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .


eD , says: Show Comment May 20, 2020 at 8:53 pm GMT

On this particular event, I researched COVID-19 a few months ago, before the lockdowns hit my part of the United States, and realized that it was BS. However, since I am powerless this had no effect on my day to day life. I didn't have the money to spend a year in a non-lockdown country, not that many exist, or retreat to some estate in the countryside. I neither own or control a business or facility that I could defy the lockdowns and keep open. I still need to have to wear a mask to go grocery shopping or starve.

This was the case with other hoaxes such as WMD, so I am not sure who these things are aimed out. I also don't know how many proles (who, remember, mostly don't vote) really believe in them. Since they have no power, it makes no difference if they do or not. Unless you own or operate a business or something like a church that can be closed by a lockdown order, the most you can do is avoid wearing the mask that signals your compliance, and even then they get you if you have to enter a store.

The hoaxes might be aimed at the lower level functionaries, the gym owners, the lower level administrators, the cops, the inspectors who are still needed to physically enforce the edicts on the local level. However, even here, there is a collective action problem with disobedience, its only effective if a mass of them disobey, a lone individual disobeying will face retaliation.

Levtraro , says: Show Comment May 20, 2020 at 9:17 pm GMT

My intent is not merely to mock these people (i.e., these "radical," "anti-establishment" types who fell into formation and started goose-stepping because the media told them we were all going to die), but also to use them as a clear example of how official narratives are born and take hold.

Do you read scientific articles? I know you are not a medical doctor or a scientist so no point asking about your actual experience in dealing with the virus, but you can read. Many informed and intelligent people have formed their opinion of this epidemics by reading the reported scientific evidence, experiments, epidemiological modelling, not the media. I have posted several articles published in top-ranking journals demonstrating the effectiveness of containment in China (recently a new work has been published with an analysis of the dynamics in Germany). These articles also offer the data and computer code freely to reproduce the results or adapt them to other situations.

I don't know where you live and I am sorry that you are experiencing the fascist apocalypse (obwandiyag, above) while sitting at your desk typing out your pieces. Where I live in Europe there was a serious epidemics that is now getting under control thanks to the strategy of containment. There has been no fascist uprising and there have been no politicians suddenly sig-heiling people into the totalitarian nightmare that you describe. We are all tired of this shit but as I can see around me nearly all agree that the infections have to be contained and that the effort to achieve containment has been worth the pain. I guess to stop pathogens that kill or cause great suffering to people from spreading further is a humanitarian demand, regardless of the age or health of the victims.

Also, contrary to the nightmarish situation you describe in your country, here politicians seem to be too eager to come back to their normal routine. They are not looking to perpetuate a state of emergency, quite on the contrary, scientific committes are advising them to carry on a bit further (with many postdocs doing to modelling in the background) and de-escalate in a gradual manner.

But what you describe is truly nightmarish. I see you quote a lot of twitter posts and other media to susbtantiate your fears. So either you go out and fight the fascists hordes sig-hailing you into totalitarianism from twitter, or instead you read scientific papers and calm down.

l
The Kremlin Stooge , says: Show Comment May 20, 2020 at 9:45 pm GMT
Don't forget 'Covidiots'. The frontline-worker-lovin', government-narrative-believin' social-distance welcomin' simpletons are endlessly inventive when it comes to coining contemptuous nicknames for those who don't buy into their embrace of madness. I am happy to be able to say I thought the virus was bogus from the first, and said so to anyone who would listen.

So, now there's a big demographic who stuck paper hearts in their windows the way gold-star mothers used to advertise that Someone In This House Has Gone To War. A demographic that clapped like seals every evening at 7:00 PM to show its support for everyone who was still allowed to do their job. That happily buckled down to a war mentality which excused the withdrawal of individual rights in favour of the public good. As you suggest, embarrassment is on the near horizon – what will the reaction be?

The first thing that should happen is that everyone who was in a political leadership position during this debacle, and went along with it, should be unceremoniously kicked out of office. The WHO leadership should all be fired. Police chiefs should be invited to resign, effective immediately. Everyone who willingly went along with this farce and has a responsibility to more than themselves and their immediate families should be made to publicly apologize, or wear a paper mask with "I'm an idiot" printed on it in lipstick.

Tsar Nicholas , says: Show Comment May 20, 2020 at 9:46 pm GMT
@Levtraro

I live in Europe there was a serious epidemics that is now getting under control thanks to the strategy of containment. There has been no fascist uprising and there have been no politicians suddenly sig-heiling people into the totalitarian nightmare that you describe.

Well, in Britain (which is still part of Europe geographically) all protests, demonstrations and the like have been banned. Local elections have been delayed by one year.

The virus has been circulating since November and the excess mortality rate over and above the background rate did not start until after the lockdown commended in March. Part of this is due to the cancellation of elective surgery for at least three months – no transplants, much reduced diagnoses of new cancer cases, people with heart attacks and stroke staying away from hospitals and so on.

There has been a veritable holocaust in care homes – caused by lack of visits from GPs and a lack of availability of hospital care, and the rush to empty hospitals of older people back to care homes regardless of whether or not they had the infection. Care homes were by (emergency) law not permitted to refuse entry.

Every Thursday we are encouraged to spend several minutes of our house arrest going outdoors and clapping for the National Health Service. It's a bit like a love version of the Two Minutes of Hate in Nineteen Eighty-Four .

Well done on getting your articles published. That boast does little for the reputation of these "top ranking publications."

The Kremlin Stooge , says: Show Comment May 20, 2020 at 9:52 pm GMT
@Levtraro Did you say, "epidemiological modelling'? You mean, like the epidemiological model that started the whole jaw-dropping overreaction in the first place? This epidemiological model?

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/professor-lockdown-modeler-resigns-in-disgrace/

The one that varied by as many as 80,000 deaths over 80 days in subsequent runs without changing any of the feed parameters? That epidemiological model? Yes, that's the sort of scientific work that calms me down every time.

Bragadocious , says: Show Comment May 20, 2020 at 10:03 pm GMT
It's funny how American-expat-in-Germany Hopkins has generally been a huge supporter of European democratic socialism, as opposed to the Trumpian or neoliberal America which he finds so distasteful. And yet, those European countries actually locked down more ruthlessly than America. In Spain, France and the UK you couldn't even get in your car and drive 50 miles without the risk of being stopped. That was never the case here. Freedom of movement was never under threat in the U.S. I wonder what he thinks about that.
SteveK9 , says: Show Comment May 20, 2020 at 10:24 pm GMT
C. J., whatever hope there is in the US, lies in the fact that the country is not homogeneous. I don't think most people have yet realized that this was an epidemic in NYC and nowhere else. There were deaths, but a very small number. Los Angeles County has 11 million people and ~ 1700 deaths. Not every place is requiring a 'mask' of shame yet. Hopefully, a few states 'open up' and nothing happens, and then more, and finally if New Yorkers and a few other places want to cower and cringe for the rest of their lives, they are free to do so.
SteveK9 , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:36 am GMT
Example: Florida vs New York (from RT): DeSantis is the Republican Governor of Florida.

Florida has been one of the first states to roll back lockdown orders and allow many non-essential businesses to reopen.

Many critics in the media predicted that Florida would end up "just like Italy" two weeks after reopening, DeSantis continued. "Well, hell, we're eight weeks away from that and it hasn't happened."

New York, with a population of over 19 million, has had over 250,000 cases and more than 28,000 deaths from the coronavirus. Though it has a larger population – 21 million – and more high-risk elderly residents, Florida has registered just over 47,000 cases and some 2,000 deaths.

And yet the MSM praises Cuomo to the skys, and lambasts DeSantis. Also, ignored is Cuomo's decision to empty hospitals of elderly patients and send them back to nursing homes (to die).

Pissedoffalese , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:33 am GMT
Face Diaper.

Can't remember where I read that (maybe Taki), but every time I see a picture of these fools, I laff my ass off, 'cuz, as described, the masks just keep getting BIGGER. Now, even in my hokey little town of 1,500, well off the beaten-track, idiots are wandering around the streets and the ONE store wearing plexiglass welding face shields (is that even a THING? Would've thought welders needed something more substantial, but thereya go). Mostly, we here don't give a shit, and since there's no business here anyway, nobody was fired or laid off. Sadly, however, there's no chickens at the hardware store until June.

Guess it'll give me time to build a coop if I can get the relatives to move out before I hang myself–7 people in a single-wide, and six of them hate me.

Joy.

nsa , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:51 am GMT
Style Advice Please. Don't have a wu-wu virus face mask, so plan to wear girl's panties over my head when leaving the house with the ears sticking out the leg holes . But am perplexed as to whether the hash mark should go in the front or the back. Sartorial counsel appreciated as do not want to look foolish.
Hail , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:57 am GMT

The kind where governments declare a global "state of emergency" on account of a virus with a 0.2% to 1% lethality

Most of the studies are converging on the 0.1% range; any above 0.2% are now unusual outliers. In the words of Swiss Propaganda Research's "A Swiss Doctor on COVID19" series (which is the link provided in this essay):

According to data from the best-studied countries and regions, the lethality of Covid19 is on average about 0.2%, which is in the range of a severe influenza (flu) and about twenty times lower than originally assumed by the WHO.

From the Lethality page:

Covid-19 infection fatality rates (IFR) based on antibody studies

Population-based antibody seroprevalence studies.

Global May 19 12 countries 0.02% – 0.40%

A single case was at 0.4%, Geneva, reporting as of a certain point in April; given that this is an outlier, I expect that a follow-up done now would report it down in Geneva. Wuhan reported 0.3%. Gangelt, Germany, 0.25% (small study; early outbreak).

The other nine studies in the meta-analysis average <0.1% deaths to those who are corona-positive (0.085%; range: 0.02% to 0.17%). Of course, this is Just The Flu territory, but the Corona-True-Believers still think that's laughable and worthy of derision. But there it is: <0.1%.

The virus is not going to cause any noticeable full-year mortality rise almost anywhere. The Panic-induced deaths might, in some places.

Hail , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:17 am GMT

in order to avoid their shame, they are going to do everything in their power to reify the official narrative and delegitimize anyone attempting to expose it as the fiction that it is. They are going to join in with the corporate media that are calling us "extremists," "conspiracy theorists," "anti-vaxxers," and other such epithets.

they are going to continue to insist, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that we are "under attack" by a "killer virus" which could "strike again at any time,"

What you are describing, and the whole Corona-Reaction phenomenon broadly, is a religious cult. The Corona Cult.

"Is Corona a religious cult? An anthropological study." (Corona as virus-centered apocalypse cult; its ascent to state religion; the mass-conversion event to the cult; a study of the cult) , by me, May 18. (See also, " The Modern-Day Cult of Corona ," by Helen Buyinski.)

I have come to understand that only in terms of religion can Corona be understood. A close look shows Corona fits all the indicators of a cult in the anthropological sense, and vert well. It is a literal religious cult (as in, non-metaphorical).

"Postmodern Western people don't do religion, don't do religious movements, so people haven't realized this is what it is."

Marshall Lentini , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:37 am GMT
@Levtraro

I live in Europe there was a serious epidemics that is now getting under control thanks to the strategy of containment.

He's had "articles published", but can't remember the golden rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

Mr. Anon , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:12 am GMT

They're going to accuse those of us on the Left of aligning with "far-Right Republican militias," and "Boogaloo accelerationists," and of being members of the Russian-backed "Querfront," and assorted other horrible things meant to scare errant leftists into line.

This been mirrored on the alt-right, where people like Hunter Wallace at Occidental Dissent derides anyone who doesn't share his by now weeks-long hyperventillating panic attack as a muh-freedom-loving-cuck, or a leftist fellow-traveller, or a crazy conspiracy-theorist (which is funny given that his commentariat seemed to largely consist of knee-jerk false-flag idiots and flat-earthers).

Biff , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:20 am GMT
@Pissedoffalese

in a single-wide,

I'm guessing you got a double-wide.

Mr. Anon , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:22 am GMT
@Tsar Nicholas

Every Thursday we are encouraged to spend several minutes of our house arrest going outdoors and clapping for the National Health Service. It's a bit like a love version of the Two Minutes of Hate in Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Remember our boys bravely fighting on the Malabar Front!

As you implied, it's just a different side of the same coin. If a second-wave hits, people will be encouraged to go out on their balconies and shout out their hatred for "covid-deniers" and "anti-vaxxers".

obwandiyag , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:31 am GMT
@Levtraro He lives in Germany. Who have a low incidence of the disease, and so he doesn't get it in his face like he would in some other countries.

And I swear to god, for like a whole year before the epidemic, he was writing these "humorous" articles mocking people for thinking that fascism was on the rise.

I guess it's too much to expect consistency.

Biff , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:33 am GMT
@R.C.

throes of the world's free economies.

What is a "free" economy?

Levtraro , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:48 am GMT
@The Kremlin Stooge No, I mean this:

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.368.6488.218 (world)
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb3221 (China)
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba9757 (world)
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb9789 (Germany)
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2004911117 (Italy and S. Korea)
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2284-y (China)
https://foi.org/10.1126/science.abb5793 (USA)
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2293-x (China)
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb4557 (China)
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc3517 (France)
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb6105 (China)
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb8001 (China)

But you can continue getting your info from The National Review and other outlets of the MSM.

JSlade , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:50 am GMT
@Levtraro It's not going back to normal Even the politicians realize that there's no point in lying to us that it will. Many small businesses won't return. Men like Bill Gates and Eric Schmidt will be able to force their autistic view on reality on the rest of us. Just watch CNN for 5 minutes and you'll get a good idea of what the "new normal" is gonna look like. Break through that denial now. Shit is about to get real, or should I say , virtual. Right now you can't even tell difference.
chris , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:17 am GMT
@Adam Smith It's also absolutely brilliant!!!
anonymous [400] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:30 am GMT

did what all true anti-fascists do when the state goes full-blown fascist

Curious, isn't it? These Antifa and other supposed loony lefty groups suddenly are all in with government totalitarianism. I saw some Maoist-RCP front group counter-picket an anti-lockdown rally. It tends to confirm my feeling that those groups are infiltrated and run by government agencies. This certainly was the most successful fear-mongering propaganda campaign of all time, full-spectrum 24/7 hysteria what with their death counts and all. This was also a training exercise. They'll analyze how this played out and refine it for the next time just as 'color revolutions' were refined and turned into a how-to textbook. Any doubt about there being a next time?

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:32 am GMT
Mr. Hopkins, from this 4th article of yours that I've read, I see you are really going places with the truth. I'd have probably made an effort to back-read your older stuff, maybe a couple of columns per day, had I not just seen that you are a lefty, by your own admission. As one expert on this insanity , blogger/commenter E.H. Hail has noted, this Panic/anti-Panic divide cuts across normal political divides though.

You bring up the Cold War as some sort of made-up thing like the "War on Terra" and the "War on Drugs" (my addition), and this War against this "virus of mass destruction", which is wrong (about the Cold War, not the rest), and it seems GloboCap(TM) is your trademark term (making no sense – I have not seen Capitalism operating without Big-Gov anywhere in the world lately, outside the illegal-Mexican run flea markets). However, I will leave that behind, as you may learn something else as you see some of the behavior you note in the antifa people and others of the left that you rightly are disgusted by here.

Therefore, I will keep reading your latest, greatest rants, "rants" said in a most admiring way, and pointing them out to friends and on the Peak Stupidity blog. Can the rest of the non-hysterical among us on the left and right around the world possibly realize from this Panic-Fest response what totalitarianism is all about? I mean, before it's too late, that is – that'd sure be nice. Maybe ideological definitions should be created from scratch out of this.

I like the 2nd half of this article, in which you explain very well, in my opinion, that 2nd option that people who have been so far wrong on this issue will almost all pick. There is no way you will get an "I was wrong" admission, much less an apology, from anyone without the integrity of a Steve Sailer, meaning, well, here on unz, nobody but Steve Sailer. Those people will be obligated to stick to their original story and do that double-thinking, even supporting Totalitarianism when they know quite well what it entails. People don't like to be wrong.

A prediction of mine is that, once it is realized that deaths of old people around the world will be pretty much the same in 2020 as in other years, along with telling us that this is because we DID properly LOCKDOWN and SHELTER-IN-PLACE! per Big-Bro's instructions and then they will bring up "it's baaaack" every so often.

Thank you for another great article, Mr. Hopkins.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:45 am GMT
@eD There is plenty you can do, Ed, by example. Maybe it's my State, in which people are pretty laid back about this, whatever side they are on, but nobody ever told me to wear a mask, even though I didn't right up through last week*. I can go into the Target store right now, and if I get any BS, I'll let myself get pulled out of the store.

It won't happen like that here though, Ed. People are in friendly defiance all over the place. I suggest you do the same thing. All it takes is 300,000,000 people saying "there is nothing I can do", to let this shit get worse. It only takes a couple of dozen or so people in one place – a little too big a crowd for the police to handle without some real trouble – to lead the rest out of this stupidity.

You read the column – I take this just as seriously as Mr. Hopkins.

.

* I've written about this elsewhere, that, because I promised my wife, I've finally worn one of these in stores (part-time), on an airliner, and in busy places. This is solely because she was getting very upset, with a lack of sleep being a factor, with that always ready phone-infotainment around. It was either start lying to her (I wasn't going to), not go to stores or travel for work, have us on extremely bad terms, causing grief to the whole family, or wear it for a while. It's the same stupid blue thing I've kept in my pocket for a week – yes, it's probably spreading more germs that it filters – I don't care.

Amon , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:47 am GMT
Okay boomer.
The Alarmist , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 8:11 am GMT
Cheer up, CJ: You can always try to smuggle a pen into the gulag to write your pieces on toilet paper. Wait! Between the body cavity searches and the lack of toilet paper, you might not be able to keep calm and carry on, but if you're lucky, they'll give you The Complete Works of Paul Krugman , and you can use some of that to wipe and some of it to cut out letters to tell your story.
Parfois1 , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 8:25 am GMT

I guess to stop pathogens that kill or cause great suffering to people from spreading further is a humanitarian demand, regardless of the age or health of the victims.

I fully agree that the first reaction of a decent health system in an epidemic breakout is to contain the infection, look after the sick and protect the most vulnerable. Containment and isolation is the first line of defence when the threat is real or imminent and that has been learned from the historical record when plagues got out of control and decimated towns and villages.

This epidemic was first reported by China as of a particularly nasty virulence, easy transmissibility and causing multi-organ pathologies to such an extent that the Wuhan epicenter's medical facilities were overwhelmed with victims and had to erect two hospitals in record time to look after them. Facing a new and, then unknown, threat, the responsible authorities acted swiftly to isolate the threat, study it and contain it to the regional source of the virus to protect the rest of the country. As a result of a firm policy of containment, the rest of China was barely touched by the epidemic, worked as normal and the number of deaths for the most populated country on Earth was limited to under 4,000. It worked, saved many lives and the Chinese economy only suffered a short hiccup.

While China was in the throes of a potential calamity because of its population's high density, almost all other countries, except its most immediate neighbours, looked on (many in the US with glee), made jokes about the Chan-virus and the ruling elites did nothing to protect their respective peoples. When it hit them, all they could do was to blame China and, too late, followed the Chinese way when the horse had already bolted. What makes this tragically farcical is that the US think-tanks, wheeler-dealers and medical experts had recently "gamed" such scenario in their computer modelling exercise Event 201, almost coincidentally with the beginning of the, still undetected, infections, which were reported later. That delay in taking firm and drastic action to effectively prevent infestation led eventually to high mortality in the densely populated countries of Western Europe (namely Spain, Italy, France, Belgium, Holland and UK) and New York. Amongst all that callous inefficiency there are some "miraculous" exceptions, such as Australia ( casual lockdown, 24 million, only 100 dead) and New Zealand, almost untouched by the coronavirus.

So, timely and systematic containment and isolation as the first defence for the protection of the people works and enables the country to resume normal life again within a short time (look at China's full-steam ahead for weeks now). It was a very efficient short and sharp treatment of a public health issue. In some other countries, particularly the US, it become a heartless political game of point-scoring, the people being the ball to kick around the field.

When the post-morten is done (but even now some lobertarians are already claiming the fictional SS, the "Sweden Success") the political football game will be replayed with unruly vigour instead of having a hard-headed look at the disaster and its lessons and how a public health issue was transformed into a political one, or was it the other way around? A political scheme of sorts transformed into a public health issue to serve as cover for some ulterior purpose as I suspect.

I have no doubts that the CV-19 is a real danger for any unprotected population and reports from the coalface about the victims' suffering are a sobering reminder of our mortality, therefore the measures, if taken by the health authorities for the welfare of the people, are legitimate and deserving our approval. But the politicization of a disaster for a hidden agenda is another matter altogether and Hopkins is right to highlight the totalitarian facet lurking behind the promoters of the pandemic, whether the source of it or the opportunistic gain of function from it.

Kratoklastes , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 8:30 am GMT
@eD

I am not sure who these things are aimed at

Karens and Cucks. That's who these things are aimed at: obese dim-witted middle-aged she-beasts whose sexual value has gone through zero and who want to scold the world and the beta-males who are 'head' of their households.

The Karens buy in immediately because it gives them social power; the cucks are cucked and so are largely irrelevant (except to the extent that their beta-ness prevents them from offering a counterbalance).

The net effect on the household is that the kids get – via Karen – the worldview of retards like Sanjay .Gupta and Dr Phil.

The net effect on society is that finger-wagging fat 40-something women becomes a norm outside of middle-school classrooms (it's been a norm inside classrooms for a generation, which is why kids can't read despite spending $15k of public funds per student per year).

This is why I refer to CNN etc as HousewifeTV . Like women's magazines, it has less intellectual content than Dora the Explorer – but stupid obese 40-something women lap it up. (Stupid obese 40-something men are also a waste of space, but they're benign by comparison – because nobody cares if you tell them to fuck off).

Jim Richard , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 9:51 am GMT
The real illness out there: The need to be led.
Parfois1 , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 9:51 am GMT
@Levtraro My comment #30 is a reply to Levtraro's comment #5.
Yusef , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 10:04 am GMT
@Levtraro "Many informed and intelligent people have formed their opinion of this epidemics by reading the reported scientific evidence, experiments, epidemiological modelling, not the media."

I applaud you for reading the scientific literature rather than getting your information from the MSM.

However, something fishy is going on in the world of science. If this goes on much longer, I will no longer refer to it as "the world of science."

Have you seen this? https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6490/489.full "Study claiming new coronavirus can be transmitted by people without symptoms was flawed"–Kai KupferschmidtFeb. 3, 2020.

One of the contributors to the flawed study is quoted as having said, " people felt this had to be communicated quickly." This is shocking and absolutely unacceptable. These guys should be dismissed and facing criminal charges. People panicked over these kind of reports. They can almost be justified because if the virus could have done all the things reputable scientists were attributing to it, we were dealing with something the nature of which we'd never dealt with before. "There's no doubt after reading [the NEJM] paper that asymptomatic transmission is occurring," Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told journalists. "This study lays the question to rest." Heads need to roll.

It is interesting to me you mention studies demonstrating the efficacy of the Chinese lockdowns after the lockdowns took place. Shouldn't we have had those studies in hand beforehand , and isn't there a possibility, in this new more lax climate of releasing results without peer review or complete disclosure (a la Moderna and others) of "covering their posteriors" to avoid admission of failure and cowardice?

You think the containment measures saved us, not that the virus's virulence was hyped. ( NB https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6490/489.full . "These findings explain the rapid geographic spread of SARS-CoV-2 and indicate that containment of this virus will be particularly challenging." The virus appears to have already spread throughout the world before containment measures were enacted. Do we care about that when we evaluate the effectiveness of the containment measures?)

I would just like to ask: How sure are you this is not all because you fit the category Mr. Hopkins describes here, "In other words, in order to avoid their shame, they are going to do everything in their power to reify the official narrative and delegitimize anyone attempting to expose it as the fiction that it is. "?

onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 10:34 am GMT
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." ~ Ayn Rand

"The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater. " Frank Zappa

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." William Pitt the Younger, former British prime minister

"Opium and morphine are certainly dangerous, habit-forming drugs. But once the principle is admitted that it is the duty of government to protect the individual against his own foolishness, no serious objections can be advanced against further encroachments. A good case could be made out in favor of the prohibition of alcohol and nicotine. And why limit the government's benevolent providence to the protection of the individual's body only? Is not the harm a man can inflict on his mind and soul even more disastrous than any bodily evils? Why not prevent him from reading bad books and seeing bad plays, from looking at bad paintings and statues and from hearing bad music?" Ludwig Von Mises

"The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." Thomas Jefferson

"When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty." Thomas Jefferson

"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases. The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." Thomas Jefferson

"When you abandon freedom to achieve security, you lose both and deserve neither." Thomas Jefferson

"Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be "reformed"or "improved",simply because of their innate criminal nature." onebornfree

Regards, onebornfree

Levtraro , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 10:45 am GMT
@obwandiyag I noted that. Those pieces mocking the Russiagate-Nazi-Putin-Fascist hysteria were very funny indeed. But now he is yelling that the fascist regime is here because of the virus. It's kind of second order funny.
Vojkan , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 10:47 am GMT
@Marshall Lentini There's no purpose in arguing with those people. As said in the comment just above yours, they're a cult and facts have no grip on cultists.
Levtraro , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 10:51 am GMT
@Marshall Lentini The studies are no correlational. Read them to correct your error. I posted a cool set of top-notch research in another comment on this thread. Normally these articles are behind a paywall but publishing houses are letting all of them free for everyone to read.
CJ Hopkins , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 11:07 am GMT
@Hail I have revised (and asked Ron Unz to revise) the "0.2% – 1% lethality" cited in my original text to read "0.2% – 0.6% lethality" to reflect a low/high range of estimates, from the Swiss Propaganda Research data on the low end to the revised Imperial College IFR on the high end. Because so many people are jumping down each other's throats with numbers, I thought both ends of the range should be sourced.
Herald , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 11:24 am GMT
@obwandiyag Maybe Unz should have an "obwandiyag" button. It would likely be a very popular feature.
Levtraro , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 11:36 am GMT
@Parfois1 Thanks for your thoughtful reply to my comment. I agree there is substantial risk of opportunistic state aggrandizement due to the pandemics. But state-apparatchiks are nearly always looking for aggrandizement opportunities, especially in the USA where apparatchiks think they are exceptional, like to meddle in other people's businesses, go on pontificating incessantly, and essentially work for powerful minorities.
Vojkan , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:07 pm GMT
@Hail Great piece by Helen Buyniski. I wonder how the Bill Gates' pro-vaxx cultists at rt.com feel about it.
Johnny Walker Read , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:10 pm GMT
Yes C.J, Bolshevism and its evil twin Fascism have come to America. It has come openly through the Democrat Party Governors who are using the current scamdemic and the gullibility of well over half the population to destroy their state economies. It has come covertly through a president who promised to return America to its former glory days by draining the swamp, but instead has refilled it and gone along with every insider policy there is. A president who is now promising forced vaccinations via our military and "others"(UN troops?).
So get ready America, hell is coming to breakfast

https://www.youtube.com/embed/e63Tk-5UKPc?feature=oembed

Digital Samizdat , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:12 pm GMT
@Hail I call them the Branch Covidians -- 'We ain't coming out!'
onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:19 pm GMT
@onebornfree "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." Thomas Jefferson

Lockdown the entire Federal government to the "chains of the constitution", plus all local and state governments NOW!

" Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.For the purpose of Section 242, acts under "color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties . ".

See [@ 2/3rds of way down page] : "Sue The Mayors, City Governments, State Governors! A Coronavirus Plandemic Lockdown Solution?":
http://onebornfree-mythbusters.blogspot.com/2020/05/onebornfrees-special-scam-alerts-no141.html

See: "Why Government Doesn't Work"
https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Why_Government_Doesn%27t_Work

Regards, onebornfree

nickels , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:24 pm GMT
Alexander Dugin nailed it.
Welcome to the Medical Narco Facist States of Amerikkka.
anon [194] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:36 pm GMT
Leftotards are just waking up to the realization that they are the Billionaire Establishments Bxtch. These Antifa / anti-facist idiots are the useful idiots of the Billionaire funded Democratic party., and also their warped and pampered college professors.

What drives these fools is their need of a UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME period !!! none of these idiots give a rats arse about fascism as most dont even know what it is, else they wouldnt cry for Totalitarian Communism.

onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:37 pm GMT
"What if the government has it wrong -- on the medicine and the law?

What if face masks can't stop the COVID-19 virus? What if quarantining the healthy makes no medical sense? What if staying at home for months reduces immunity?

What if more people have been infected with the virus in their homes than outside them?

What if there are as many credible scientists and physicians who disagree with the government as those who agree with it?

What if the government chooses to listen only to scientists and physicians who would tell it what it wanted to hear? What if the government silences scientists and physicians, and even fires one, who attempt to tell it what it didn't want to hear?

What if the government wants to stoke fear in the populace because mass fear produces mass compliance? What if individual fear reduces individual immunity?

What if a healthy immunity gets stronger when challenged? What if a pampered immunity gets weaker when challenged? What if we all pass germs and viruses -- that we don't even know we have -- on to others all the time, but their immune systems repel what we pass on to them?

What if the COVID-19 virus has run its course and run into natural immunities? What if many folks have had symptom-free episodes with many viruses and are now immune from them? What if the government refuses to understand this because it undermines the government's power to control us? . What if -- when the pandemic is over -- folks sue the government for its destruction of life, liberty and property only to learn that the government gave itself immunity from such lawsuits? What if -- when the pandemic is over -- the government refuses to acknowledge its end? "

From: "What If the Government Has It Wrong?":
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/05/andrew-p-napolitano/what-if-the-government-has-it-wrong/

Regrds, onebornfree

theMann , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:40 pm GMT
I am not sure how anything is going to play out at this point, but I will make two observations

1. People don't like being played, or made fools of. Maybe most of them will pretend they weren't completely suckered, same as after 9/11, but maybe a critical mass of anger is building.

2. I begin conversations with every mask wearing moron by commenting "I liked social distancing better under its original name – segregation. But let us practise standing apart, or in Afrikaans, apartheid." Then I follow up with pointing out any mask is contaminated once you take it off, so, go work on radioactives, or something. The point is, no rational argument is going to work with the hysterical little girls pretending to be adults.

Marshall Lentini , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:41 pm GMT
@Levtraro

The studies are no correlational.

I'd say this has no relevance to what I said, but first it would have to make some normal sense. To be extra clear: that "lockdowns" stopped the spread of this virus is an assertion , and one disproved by Sweden and Belarus.

Somehow the two facts of a) two-week or greater incubation period and b) delayed or "adequate" response by various nations do not add up in the covidiot's mind to "the virus was already running its course by the time of lockdowns", because it's better for you to play chicken and the egg since you've already committed to the melodrama of coronamania. It's hard admitting one was wrong, especially when the price tag isn't presented right away.

I posted a cool set of top-notch research in another comment on this thread.

Indeed, I've looked at each these top-notch articles. But let me start with the first.

The title of the first top-notch article is The lockdowns worked -- but what comes next? . Now I'm unaware of any other field but Coronavirus Studies in which it's acceptable simply to announce , rather than propose , the thing which an alleged research paper is supposed to examine and substantiate. But when it comes to the rona, the rules (like that pesky one about correlation not implying causation) go out the window.

The second line is: The world is holding its breath. I'm also not aware of any other field which permits a cheap, moralistic tagline in its papers to preface alleged research. This is, of course, a huge red flag which you're not supposed to question. "A specter is haunting Europe "

(Well, technically the second line is: Science's COVID-19 coverage is supported by the Pulitzer Center – very gracious of them to mention, and pretty much tipping their hand as far as their motives. Ever looked at the Board of Directors at Pulitzer? Lots of NYT "assistant managing editors".)

The rest is more of the same – a mix of petitio principii, moralism, bad metaphors, and ominous assumptions about how civilization should work in the opinion of this "Kai Kupferschmidt". Here's a charming example of the totally non-fascist, un-totalitarian "model" supported by your author:

For now, the most likely scenario is one of easing social distancing measures when it's possible, then clamping down again when infections climb back up, a "suppress and lift" strategy that both Singapore and Hong Kong are pursuing. Whether that approach can strike the right balance between keeping the virus at bay and easing discontent and economic damage remains to be seen.

What you're doing here is passing off opinion pieces as research, while ignoring the mountain of actual research that the opposition have been doing in the meantime as lunatics like you preach never-ending cycles of lock-and-lift, or excuse me, "suppress and lift", as Herr Kupferschmidt would have it.

But that's all immaterial to me. I do not care about research. I am totally comfortable with a ~1%, even a 5% death rate affecting the elderly and grossly infirm. I don't care about R or any other variable. I care about not having to wear masks or stand in boxes or read moralistic tripe like this that ham-handedly tries to justify it. I am not interested in "research" whose aim is my bondage to prophylactic theater, as someone here put it – not that any of what you're offering qualifies as anything other than sunk cost fallacy propaganda, in my book.

Phaeton , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 1:43 pm GMT
Things are very easy.

Smoking kills 8 million people per year in the world (plus many more millions of addicts). Have they forbidden tobacco? No.

Alcoholism kills 3 millions people per year in the world. Have they forbidden alcohol? No.

(these numbers according to WHO).

"Covid-19", with all the fraudulent data, have killed (sure?) 331.000 people up to this date. What have they done? All what Mr. Chopkins have said (i.e. shutting down the world's economy, taking out our freedom, and much more).

In other words: they don't freaking care about our health. Why is that so difficult to understand for people?

Old and Grumpy , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:01 pm GMT
I live here in PA, where the new normal resistance is real. The cops for the most part are looking the other way, except in Philadelphia. My local Amish hardware store was thankfully mask free zone. There is no social distancing at the ag auctions, nor are there masks. Someone (a pissed off Democrat no less) told me a "Karen" was at the Monday hay auction snapping pictures, and the auctioneer had people escort him out. Who'd a thunk the Amish and Mennonites leading the big old FU to Tommy Wolf and his freak health secretary? Those two clowns might just give Trump PA in the fall.
Blip Blop , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:16 pm GMT
Could we quit the constant libeling of "muh fascism?" Fascism was just an objectively more decent system than what we have now. At least those leaders made some attempt to benefit their people. Our current anarcho-tyrannical capitalist-socialist order squeezes us like rags to get the last drop of shekel from our crushed souls. You also cannot ignore the undercurrent of child abuse by our elites. The Fascists were quite moral and kind in comparison.
anonymous [235] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:18 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat This needs to go viral.
Johnny Walker Read , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:19 pm GMT
Hope you don't mind, I'm definitely using that one
theMann , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:27 pm GMT
@Marshall Lentini Helen Buyinski's article is exceptionally accurate and detailed.

Any chance Unz Review can reprint it?

Anonymous [102] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:34 pm GMT
@Adam Smith This whole Covid 19 thing has been a giant Pain in the Ass to everyone. Unfortunately it is too real to ignore. What bothers me is the whining by folks like Mr. Hopkins, who failed to speak up about the Patriot Act and the complaints by the intelligence depts because Apple security is too tight, or countless intrusions by our government masking anti-terrorism activities or any number of wasted political investigations, the list is endless. We are as close to Fascism and Totalitarianism as we have ever been. Lets face the fact that our government is no better than the countless regimes we have criticized over the years. We are a screwed up nation that has drifted so far from the constitution, that we no longer resemble the United States of America.
Che Guava , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:36 pm GMT
Your comment is the one thing that truly made me LOL today.

Thank you.

Two reasons I did not use the button. I want to hit agree with a later comment and am tired now. Also, LOL with or LOL at?

nsa, you sure hit the first category there!

Agent76 , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:40 pm GMT
May 21, 2020 How Governments Are Hunting the Infected

https://www.youtube.com/embed/HfqdSG4dtsg?feature=oembed

05 Apr 2020 Dr. Fauci revealed his fears of a 'surprise outbreak' back in 2017 and warned the upcoming Trump administration would face 'challenges' with infectious diseases in a Georgetown speech

In his speech titled 'Pandemic Preparedness in the Next Administration,' Dr. Fauci told attendees at Georgetown University in January 2017 that the upcoming presidential administration would face 'challenges' with infectious diseases.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8188429/Dr-Fauci-revealed-fears-surprise-outbreak-three-YEARS-pandemic.html?ito=email_share_article-top

Agent76 , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:44 pm GMT
@Phaeton This is where all of the fake numbers are coming from in this Plandemic.

Nov 4, 2019 Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Segment 4, Communications Discussion and Epilogue Video

Event 201 is a pandemic tabletop exercise hosted by The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. The exercise illustrated the pandemic preparedness efforts needed to diminish the large-scale economic and societal consequences of a severe pandemic.

http://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/media

https://www.youtube.com/embed/LBuP40H4Tko?feature=oembed

schnellandine , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:49 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat

I call them the Branch Covidians -- 'We ain't coming out!'

I don't see that's it's funny or sane to use as disparagement of cowards a reference to folks who evinced more balls than you ever will.

Che Guava , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:54 pm GMT
@Herald I agree, but already used my hourly button.
botazefa , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 2:59 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman

* I've written about this elsewhere, that, because I promised my wife, I've finally worn one of these in stores (part-time), on an airliner, and in busy places. This is solely because she was getting very upset, with a lack of sleep being a factor, with that always ready phone-infotainment around.

Collectively failing to stand up to our wives for the past 60 years is what got us into this mess. We've somehow managed to normalize hysterics.

David , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:03 pm GMT
A couple days ago Brattleboro, Vermont made wearing masks in stores mandatory for customers. A lady at the select board meeting said masks need to be normalized, "Because it's just such a simple visible sign that people are being safe in our community."

Vermonters are natural jackbooted hippies and are really getting off on covid-19.

I wish Judy Chicago were alive to design these masks.

Brattleboro, population 12,000, had ten fatal opioid overdoses in 2019 and four in April 2020. There have been three deaths in the whole county due to covid-19. Two were from NYC.

Andrew Sullivan had a post about Pepys in 1665, a year of plague in London. He recounts Pepys living life to the full -- working, partying, womanizing -- while whole families drop dead around him. Pepys lists off dozens of people in his day to day life dying while he himself does nothing, or very little, to "stay safe." His morale was never better.

Sullivan then concludes his piece, "And today, in the richest country on Earth, with medical technology beyond Pepys's wildest imagination, and a plague killing a tiny fraction of the population, some are wielding weapons in public to protest being asked to stay at home for a few more weeks and keep a social distance. Please. Get a grip."

See Pepys didn't stay home, wear a mask, or keep social distance. And he was fine, while a quarter of London's population died. So objecting to being forced to do those things is foolish since almost nobody knows anybody who's died from this "pandemic."

Miro23 , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:08 pm GMT
@Hail

The other nine studies in the meta-analysis average <0.1% deaths to those who are corona-positive (0.085%; range: 0.02% to 0.17%). Of course, this is Just The Flu territory, but the Corona-True-Believers still think that's laughable and worthy of derision. But there it is: <0.1%.

Well, now we know. So what was it all about? Was it a genuine mistake – or was it a bio-weapon that fizzled (but still delivered the anti-Chinese pre-prepared media frenzy).

Probably the latter. Recent CIA projects are more successful at raising media frenzies than delivering results (for example: full MSM and Western government support for the miserable Venezuelan coup attempt).

nsa , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:13 pm GMT
@onebornfree Yo, onebornfree,
Did you cash your free-shit-from-the-guv check like all the rest of us unscrupulous $1200 whores (used to be $20 whores but there has been considerable inflation since that magic year, 1913)?
aandrews , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:19 pm GMT
" and those complaining about being out of work were people whose work is 'largely useless.'"

It's not the being out of work part that's actually the problem. It's the being broke part, which is a consequence of the being out of work part, that sucks.

onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:21 pm GMT
@onebornfree "Blue Pill People":

https://www.youtube.com/embed/dC_lZLzCrOI?feature=oembed

Regards, onebornfree

onebornfree , says: Website Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:26 pm GMT
@nsa "Did you cash your free-shit-from-the-guv check like all the rest of us unscrupulous $1200 whores "

Sorry to disappoint – I don't take "free", "shut up and be a good slave", fake money from governments. I make my own way [barely] and got off the slave plantation gravy train to hell a long time ago.

Regards, onebornfree

botazefa , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:29 pm GMT
@Kratoklastes I think you can ditch the obesity correlation.

Maybe what you are noticing is that the gen-x children of 70s and 80s single moms are often man hating bitches or self hating faggots. Divorce on demand has consequences, such as an instinct to blame men for everything possible.

*my use of 'faggots' is in the gen-x vernacular to mean a wimpy little sissy

Emslander , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:39 pm GMT
@onebornfree See, I think your questions are very good, but it's like asking a 27-year-old fat woman with a BA degree what she'd think if it could be shown that there had been no gas chambers at Dakau. The question is an aggressive challenge to her weak brain cells and is, therefore, a crime.

What if the moral history of the twentieth century were the exact opposite of what we were all taught? What if unpasteurized milk is better for you? What if the substantive content of modern life adds up to a negative number?

The problem with conversion is that you have to admit that everything you think you know is incorrect.

Culpepper , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:55 pm GMT
@schnellandine Perhaps it is the aspect of paranioa that makes it apt
Nancy Pelosi's Latina Maid , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 3:56 pm GMT
Hopkins can't make the connection between belittling the "white-nationalist morons" and this "new normal" he now decries. What did you think was gonna happen in America once white people were kicked to the curb?

I'm a proud supporter of those white men who put their lives and reputations on the line in Charlottesville to stand up for my people. Our "new normal" happened many years ago, with

• gay marriage
• "hate" speech
• socialized medicine inc. federally-funded abortions
• central and fractional banking
• taxation slavery
• the enforced associations and affirmative action of civil rights

Our nation was founded on the voting rights of white male landowners. Everything since then is abnormal.

Vojkan , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:01 pm GMT
@obwandiyag One certainly can't reproach you inconsistency in disingenuousness. It is pretty much obvious to everyone except you that the fascism the author is seeing rising and the fascism he dismisses as a fantasy are distinct.
botazefa , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:07 pm GMT
@Johnny Walker Read

A president who is now promising forced vaccinations via our military and "others"(UN troops?).

I heard about the Trump floating the idea of the military *assisting* with vaccines.

But forced vaccinations? What's your reference.

DuckDuckGo has no relevant matches on 'trump forced vaccinations'.

Are you making it up?

Whitewolf , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:24 pm GMT
@anonymous

Curious, isn't it? These Antifa and other supposed loony lefty groups suddenly are all in with government totalitarianism.

Not curious or surprising in the least. They have always been funded by the same people that control the government.

anonymous [400] Disclaimer , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:31 pm GMT
@Yusef

something fishy is going on in the world of science.

Scientists are for sale as they are usually on one payroll or another. Interested parties shop around for ones that will say what they want them to say. Sure there's independent ones and those who report the facts but the waters get muddied and the average person doesn't know whose word to trust. Ditto with so-called studies which often have a predetermined outcome according to those financing them. Lots of academic corruption and fraud goes on. Don't take what the folks in white lab coats tell you as gospel but match it up against your own common sense. Just look at the history of the harmful quack nonsense the 'experts' of the day have promoted in the past hundred years or so.

SolontoCroesus , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:35 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman ""because I promised my wife, I've finally worn one of these in stores (part-time), on an airliner, and in busy places. This is solely because she was getting very upset,""

A Corona Marano.

Yusef , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:35 pm GMT
@onebornfree "What if we all pass germs and viruses -- that we don't even know we have -- on to others all the time, but their immune systems repel what we pass on to them?"

This one isn't a "what if" but a known and important fact about our amazing world. We are slathered in bacteria, viruses, and many, many other micro- and macro- organisms. At one time I was even able to see several species of benign lice on my skin and the skin of others, without using a magnifying glass or microscope. If I recall correctly, there are at least seven species of these Not only are they not harmful, they are helpful. They live on dried, dead skin, among other things.

That's the general case, friends. The bacteria and viruses surrounding us are not usually detrimental. We must have them around. They are a part of the general good health of the planet and all living things.

The viruses are absolutely fascinating. They play a role in the evolution of life on planet earth we are only beginning to fathom. It is a form of madness to think they are all pathogenic. Overwhelmingly they are not.

The viruses can't be eradicated the way we eradicated small pox, for example.

I have my own theory about this mess, which I hold only with remorse. We only know about it because we looked for it. We wouldn't have observed anything out of the ordinary this year based on the epidemiological distributions and incidences of sicknesses and deaths. There's nothing wrong with looking around and discovering new things, but this is clearly not a realm readily usable for forming immediate public policy, especially not drastic and unprecedented public policy.

Everyone who played a part in making this into immediate, drastic and unprecedented public policy needs to be held accountable. We need a very thorough review of the interplay of these multiple factors, and a good house cleaning is in order. I don't know what I will do if once more I see us refusing to admit our mistakes, but even worse will be refusing to learn from them.

As always, these two steps are the only way forward. I can't believe we in the USA are failing in this area. It seemed to me it was here, if anywhere, our form of society had an advantage. (Well, maybe not the politicians, but in business, make a big mistake and in the USA, you're out. That was not a bad thing. The others in business saw the mistake, avoided it, learned and went on.)

Regards,

Getaclue , says: Show Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:41 pm GMT
@Anonymous The Face Mask "Study" that was released in the New England Journal of Medicine has now been DEBUNKED as a FRAUD and as garbage even by the Scientists who put it out -- they've admitted this now. However, you probably haven't heard this because the Mainslime Media has ignored it and is still using it to cause us to be forced to wear these insanely stupid Masks.

As you say this is whole thing is "too real to ignore" -- but the reason it is? Because it is a complete and total pre-planned "Elite" FRAUD on the Peons, to strip them of all rights and impoverish them, being hoisted on a Cold Virus the NWO ChiComs released that is about as bad as a Seasonal Flu. People need to wake up–especially supposedly intelligent people who come to this site and publish articles and comments. Here is the retraction of the phony "Study" used to Face Mask us all (never done as to a Cold Virus– as even Dr. Fauci said on TV–because it does nothing –might even make you sick .): https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomatic-patient-transmitting-coronavirus-wrong

Getaclue , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:46 pm GMT
@onebornfree The reason for ordering/coercing Face Mask wearing by the Public has now been DEBUNKED as a FRAUD! The actual Scientists have admitted it was total and complete garbage. The Mainslime Media, no surprise, is ignoring this and still using the debunked "study" that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on January 30th– the CDC used it to reverse the ALWAYS applied standard based on Science that wearing in mass Face Masks by the Public does NOTHING as to a Cold Virus. Here is the article as to the what happened: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomatic-patient-transmitting-coronavirus-wrong
Hail , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:48 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman

friendly defiance

Good phrase. Good thought.

We know that Corona is a giant with feel of the softest clay you can find, but that's just on the facts and the science. Corona-Alternative-Facts just don't care.

Is the Corona With Feet of Clay defeated by a thousand small acts by nobodies doing friendly defiance?

Such as, declining to take those extra few steps to avoid someone. Walking in a straight line as a dissident act .

While on the subject. Please, Corona-Believers, no more of that halting entirely to keep well out of the way, followed by glowering at the other person as he passes; that's just bizarre. The Corona Halt-and-Stare.

Hail , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:53 pm GMT
@Levtraro

Where I live in Europe there was a serious epidemics that is now getting under control thanks to the strategy of containment

[Disagree.]

Dumbo , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:59 pm GMT
Covid-19 is really Rohrschach-19. It seems that the "panic" went both ways. One one side the extreme hysteric reaction with the "lockdown" of healthy people, the theatrics of the authorities and media with a disease that apparently kills mostly people over 80, but on the other hand also the protesters about "fascist takeover" and "totalitarianism". Look, it wasn't that bad, as far as totalitarianism goes. Except perhaps in North Korea, no one was shot. Maybe with Bill Gates' vaccine things will get worse, but, so far, it wasn't that bad. I think the "Transdemic", i.e. pretending that transexuals are "women" and all the craziness about "anti-racism" is much worse.

Now, for those who had a small business, yes, it was bad, and being locked at home for weeks has not been fun (also, rather pointless). But in Germany, where I believe the author lives, the lockdown has been quite light, and while many places closed there was never a prohibition to be outside. Even masks were only used later on and only in supermarkets, shops, etc. So, while inconvenient, it was not really Nazi Germany II.

Anyway, it's a quite strange situation really, and I wonder what will happen next, my impression is that people are becoming more cynical and will not accept a "second wave" lockdown, which makes me think if either there is a great conspiracy, or our elites are really dumb and incompetent. Or maybe it's both things? Like in the title of that book, a "conspiracy of dunces". They are evil and Machiavellic but they are also a bit dumb.

Poco , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 4:59 pm GMT
@Bragadocious Hopkins is a leftist. Leftists like big government. He fails to realize that big government always means more authoritarianism.
Hail , says: Website Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:00 pm GMT
@Mr. Anon

If a second-wave hits

Knut Wittkowski ( writing April 26 and May 5 ) on the "second wave":

With 30% already immune, the next wave, if any, will be minor, at most.

[Studies] show that there is enough immunity to make sure that a second wave – if any – is mild.

A "second wave" CAN be created artificially created by the media by hyper focus on a few stories (much like the original wave; it was another foretold-apocalypse-washout as proved by the easy handling of the whole thing in Stay-Open Sweden).

Media-filtered reality.

__________

From a comment I wrote elsewhere on April 5 :

The media cannot keep its Corona Cocaine Binge, and its ongoing CoronaBloodlust, going for months on end. But it may well get a "second wind" at it, when the "second wave" of Corona cases comes in the fall. A CoronaPanic Second Wave .

I'll tell you what would be ironic, is if the Nov. 2020 presidential election ends up being a referendum on Corona Shutdowns:

Yes Corona Shutdowns: BIDEN

No Corona Shutdowns: TRUMP

This scenario seems at once so crazy as to be laughable, and yet also plausible to actually happen. Somehow both at the same time. God help us.

I'm not sure how realistic this exact scenario looks now. Does anyone care about Biden anymore? Would he really position himself as the Pro-Shutdowns guy if the media begins artificially creating a second panic wave?

Phaeton , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:06 pm GMT
@Blip Blop I can't "agree-button" at you yet but I completely agree with you. I live in Spain and this is complete madness. I see so many kids wearing masks, that I would get depressed if it weren't because I see other parents avoiding all this stuff, which give me hope. Today I saw a pregnant woman wearing a mask, and I have wondered if this unborn human being is suffering because of her (of course she is probably thinking that she is doing the best for him/her).

Here in my country masks have been mandatory everywhere in public areas (unless you can keep the famous 2 meters with others) since yesterday, but people have used them for almost two months already.

J. Gutierrez , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:07 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman – I have not seen Capitalism operating without Big-Gov anywhere in the world lately, outside the illegal-Mexican run flea markets).

I agree with you, and will add the many self operating street vendors throughout Mexico. Capitalism at it's finest

From beautiful Deer Park, Texas with love, J.G.

Dumbo , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:11 pm GMT
@Dumbo Of course, I say this if this is just an exception, but if this really becomes the "new normal", then it's not good. And in fact I think this was just a "laboratory", in preparation for something worse later on
Poco , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:20 pm GMT
@Levtraro Third order funny is that you two can't tell the difference. He's essentially mocking hysterical reactions to two seperate hoaxes that reify already existing authoritarianism.
Getaclue , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:21 pm GMT
@Levtraro Tired of the "Models" and Statistics of all the NWO bought off "Experts" funded by Gates Foundation and Rockefeller -- all of them are little more than Prostitutes/Whores.

I have actually hired "Experts" for decades -- who pays them and funds their "grants" etc. directly effects their "opinions". You can literally get them to "Model" whatever and testify to anything–for $$$ -- grant or otherwise– and I am talking about World Class Credentialed "Experts". This is the REALITY -- if you argue otherwise you are either an Agenda driven partisan, ignorant or have never dealt with them.

As the other person stated above -- "Expert" Neal Ferguson has been completely discredited (boffing the Married Leftist "Activist" proved he totally did not believe in the "Social Distancing" garbage either -- it appears in NO infectious disease Textbook and no one in the Field has ever taught it) -- this TOTAL BS of claiming the lock downs worked in periodicals/magazines run by them? Please peddle it elsewhere! -- We in fact know they don't work -- you don't Quarantine Healthy People -- and in some cases, thankfully proving this, the timing showed that the lock downs clearly could not have been the reason for downturns (California etc. -- clearly Herd Immunity was already in play one of the greatest Scientists ever in the past as to Small Pox and other pandemics stated they should not be used, do some research?) -- what people like Ferguson do is put themselves in a position so that regardless of what happens they can claim they are right. Funny how that works? His "Models" were garbage–the actual data he used as "garbage in" has now been analyzed and, yes, it was garbage.

So we have the same networked "Experts" now covering for themselves and Ferguson, and putting out, in their own Magazines/Periodicals they control, what you then cite in your comment -- it is all CYA BS -- peddle it elsewhere.

Here is another example of the "Experts" at work. On January 30th the New England Journal of Medicine published a "Study" that claimed, unlike any Cold Virus EVER, this one was different– that there were "asymptomatic spreaders" -- the "Study" was then used by the CDC to put out the "wear Face Masks" change of position directive (Dr. Fauci also used it as he had previously said publicly on TV they were useless– which they have always been known to be in the past .). It is still being used to this day to order and coerce the wearing of Face Masks. Problem? It was a total and complete FRAUD.

Even the Scientists who actually did it have now admitted it was "FLAWED" and total garbage. Unfortunately, the NWO Globalist Media and "Experts" are still using it to justify forcing the Face Mask wearing and resulting fear mongering. They need to arrest Ferguson for what he did and start really penalizing these "Experts" who are nothing but Agenda driven shills. Here is the retraction as to the phony "flawed" Study: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/paper-non-symptomatic-patient-transmitting-coronavirus-wrong

Sick of Orcs , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:39 pm GMT
@Nancy Pelosi's Latina Maid Who does Hopkins think will defend White interests? Here's a short list of who won't:

(((ACLU)))
(((SPLC)))
(((fake news)))
(((local news)))
Faux news
Trump
Gop
commiecrats
flubbertarians
The courts
The (((courts)))
police departments
academia
(((advertisers)))
(((social media)))
celebutards

Good luck to orcs, mestizos and chingchongs who think they'll do better.

Yusef , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 5:48 pm GMT
@Getaclue I had to think about it a bit, but you've got a point. That flawed study did promote face mask wearing in public even though there is not a word in it about face masks or ordering/coercing their wearing.

(There's a picture with a Chinese-looking woman who is wearing a face mask at the top of the page.)

The NEJM is an interesting publication. I believe it serves an important function within the medical community but it is important not to take its reports as authoritative or necessarily even scientific.

Before the results were debunked the studious would have noticed how very small the sample size was. Am I right to see there were less than ten people in that group, and that one woman– one woman!– was at the heart of the "evidence." Wow. This was used to support a novel (for the USA) public policy affecting millions and millions of people.

Also note the irreplaceable genius of our hero and savior Dr. Anthony Fauci as he is quoted at the end of the article. He still believes asymptomatic transmission occurs even after the slender thread of evidence upon which that belief might have been supported has been kicked out from under him. He obviously didn't need scientific support in the first place– he has an agenda.

It is lucky I am a nobody in nowhereville and will never be anywhere near these creeps. I don't think I could restrain myself if I had any opportunity whatsoever to, um, commit a terrible violent crime. (Can I admit this? My posts are moderated and if this offends, please feel free to delete that one part. Please allow me to say the rest.)

450.org , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:01 pm GMT
I can't believe how many CDC and WHO employees are on here advocating no face mask.

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/491725-who-no-evidence-wearing-a-mask-can-protect

The World Health Organization (WHO) says healthy people don't need to wear face masks to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, and masks should only be for those who are sick, their caretakers and health care workers.

In guidance released by WHO Monday, the United Nations public health agency said "there is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can prevent them from infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19."

WHO said the use of medical masks among the general public could create a false sense of security and cause people to ignore social distancing measures and hygiene practices. Currently in the U.S., the overwhelming majority of states have issued stay-at-home orders to stop the spread of the virus, and federal guidance advises citizens to stay home and not gather in groups of more than ten through April 30.

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-do-face-masks-work.html

This is from late March before the CDC changed its tune.

The CDC currently states that healthy people do not need to wear face masks unless they are caring for someone who is ill with the new coronavirus.

So, it appears the WHO and the CDC are indeed fascist as is noted that they are in agreement with the fascists at this venue.

Also, nothing is more fascist than the government ordering slave wage peasants back into filthy disease-infested slaughterhouses (slaughterhouses are incubators for COVFEFE-19 -- they are America's wet markets) under the aegis of the Defense Protection Act.

Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:23 pm GMT
@Bragadocious Sweden is more "left" than Germany, France or the UK. They didn't lock down anyone. The UK government is more "right" than any UK government since John Major was PM.

The notion that the US government, or Trump for that matter, isn't authoritarian, is absurd. Presidents, by nature of the position, are authoritarian. The same goes for legislative bodies. The only issue is whether you recognize the authority they exert.

Stan d Mute , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:25 pm GMT
@Phaeton

In other words: they don't freaking care about our health. Why is that so difficult to understand for people?

I'm sure that was rhetorical, but I'll answer it anyway. People (in general) don't understand because they are stupid. Profoundly and probably irreversibly stupid, compounded exponentially by a media propaganda barrage praising the retards for their great intelligence. When more than half the total US population has an IQ below 100, yet thinks itself brilliant because the talking heads on MSNBC tell them so, the CoronaCaust is the logical outcome really.

I'd bet my favorite dog that significantly fewer than 50% could adequately explain the germ theory of disease, infectious pathogens, or the human microbiome. They could, however, expound interminably on the glories of Beyonkey's latest autotuned hit or point out how you are a racist for noticing the facts in evidence that they pretend not to see.

Given the dysgenic trends in human reproductive rates compounded by modern medicine enabling every retard to survive and reproduce, we should all get ourselves very used to being governed by the irrational terrors of simpletons.

Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:28 pm GMT
@Biff Probably not what R.C. is referring to, but my definition would be an economy free of the international banking cartel and its big casinos like Wall Street.
schnellandine , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:29 pm GMT
@Culpepper

Perhaps it is the aspect of paranioa that makes it apt

You remind me of an absurd TV special years ago that played audio of some wiretapped guys theorizing that ATF was out to get them and their guns. The underlying video was of their guns, stolen, in an ATF warehouse . The lead-in narration discussed how paranoid these crazy gun nuts had been. They now sat in concrete and steel cages, their guns taken, gleeful psyop tool mocking their wiretapped concerns as 'paranoid' for being 100% correct regarding a threat which was active at the time they expressed concern that it might be happening .

In other words, pretty much the same psyop that media ran on you successfully re the Mt. Carmel invasion and massacre, assuming you're sincere. Associating paranoia with them is beyond ignorant. They had an irrational/delusional fear that they were going to be persecuted worse than they were?

Curmudgeon , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:31 pm GMT
A good column overall, Mr. Hopkins, but what is going on now is not "real fascism". Real fascists would have taken care of the usurious bankers by now, not given them more money to f*ck us over.
Stan d Mute , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:32 pm GMT
@botazefa

Collectively failing to stand up to our wives for the past 60 years is what got us into this mess. We've somehow managed to normalize hysterics.

This is indeed the root cause. I have yet to spot a Man in a mask (except for the brilliant trolls wearing pantyliners and klan hoods).

Yusef , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:33 pm GMT
@450.org "Also, nothing is more fascist than the government ordering slave wage peasants back into filthy disease-infested slaughterhouses (slaughterhouses are incubators for COVFEFE-19 -- they are America's wet markets) under the aegis of the Defense Protection Act."

I happen to agree with you here, and am offended if you think I or most people commenting against you would disagree. The gov't shouldn't be able to order people to work any more than the gov't should be able to order people not to work.

"I can't believe how many CDC and WHO employees are on here advocating no face mask."

You can't believe– or understand– but that's because you are not paying close attention. And that's a shame.

Do you see the CDC and WHO were advocating no face mask for the reason there was no evidence of their being effective? Do you see the CDC and WHO changed and began advocating face masks when very slim evidence which turned out to be faulty emerged? Do you see the CDC and WHO have not reversed their position now we are again in the situation of there being no evidence of the effectiveness of face masks?

Jake , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:37 pm GMT
Bravo.
Alden , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 6:59 pm GMT
@Hail Good news, The Atlantic just laid off 68 employees due to lack of advertising revenue. Noticed my local newspaper is half the size it was in February due to lack of advertising pages.
Alden , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:11 pm GMT
@Kratoklastes Just because your age, ugliness, obesity, stupidity and a surly personality means you can't get laid is no reason to hate women.
Alden , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:16 pm GMT
@Yusef End of February I asked 2 Drs about wearing a mask when flying. One said don't wear a mask or worry. The other said as long as you're not in the international terminal near the Chinese airlines sections, don't wear a mask or worry.
idrankwhat , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 7:57 pm GMT
@CJ Hopkins There are credible estimates of much lower IFR:

https://unherd.com/2020/05/oxford-doubles-down-sunetra-gupta-interview/

Joe Levantine , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 8:05 pm GMT
@eD There are things that regular people can do to fight the the new abnormal. I still offer my hand to anyone who is willing to take it. I go for my daily walks in a group of two or three without keeping any social distancing and I argue my case with any cop who tells me that I am disobeying the law, reminding him that we are in the same side against the crooks, the cowards, the fools, the freaks and the tyrants who are trying to mould us into obedient slaves. Though in the interest of full disclosure, I should clearly state that I sensed the totalitarianism of the American government around thirty years ago and left the United States on a one way ticket to a third world whose virtue is a government that is weak enough not to overpower its society.

Resistance should be primarily in your mind. While I would not blame anyone for avoiding a confrontation with American mad dog policemen, having watched with horror how four of those brutes attacked retired ex long time CIA high official Mr. Ray McGovern when he asked the senators in charge of vetting Gina Haspel a legitimate question only to be attacked by these senseless brutes, dragged out the room and pulled down to the floor suffering a dislocated shoulder, I would not allow myself to admonish American citizens for avoiding any attempt at talking reason to these goons in blue uniforms. But I think that you will have won at least a half victory if you simply play the routine without making yourself hostage to the fear mongering and by clearly stating to your company that you are wearing the mask for the sake of putting the gullible at ease.

Unless the United States moves into a system of decentralisation with more empowerment to the state and local communities, the Fascist clutches of the federal government backed by the technocracy will keep whittling away at the freedoms of the citizens dooming them to a life of slavery.

Phaeton , says: Show Comment Next New Comment May 21, 2020 at 8:14 pm GMT
@Stan d Mute As you said, it was retorical. I have to say that I am extremely surprised to see how irrational people can be, though. Because it is not only that they are ignorant about a topic, which is something normal. It is that you can't argue with them. And I am not talking only about people who watch mainstream media, but also many people from the so-called alternative world.

Just an example: yesterday a relative was worried because her friends had "attacked" her in a Whatsapp group (because in person most of them are a cowards who wouldn't say anything) for criticizing the measure of making masks mandatory in all Spanish public places if we can't have a separation of 2 meters. They were all defending that all people should wear masks in public, doesn't matter if you are alone in the street (strangely enough, none of them talk about Sweden and Iceland). THIS IS THE LEVEL in the country where I live. These people are attacking people without knowing, as you say, even the most elemental knowledge of mainstream immunology. If they, instead of watching news 24/7, would have read a couple of chapters of any good book about this topic, they would see, at least, some of the lies regarding vaccines (I feel like crying everytime someone confuses "treatment" with "prevention").

The last sentence in your comment is quite scary. For some reason I have recalled about one of the stories about what happened to Laozi. I copy this fragment from Wikipedia (yeah, I know ): "The third story in Sima Qian states that Laozi grew weary of the moral decay of life in Chengzhou and noted the kingdom's decline. He ventured west to live as a hermit in the unsettled frontier at the age of 80."
I wonder what he would do if he would see the unbelievably decline of today.

To be honest, the only thing that give me hope today is seeing young people, around 16-20, completely ignoring the social distancing and masking psyop.

[May 17, 2020] Crisis of Character A White House Secret Service Officer Discloses His Firsthand Experience with Hillary, Bill, and How They Operate

May 17, 2020 | www.amazon.com

>


Brian K. Miller , Reviewed in the United States on October 12, 2016

The people who need to read this book won't even open the cover

Even as I sit down to type these words I know I am wasting my time. The people who need to read this book will not read it, and even if they did, they would refuse to believe it. They are so blinded by their sycophantic adoration of Secretary Clinton that they cannot accept as real any fact which serves to contradict their assumption of her divinity. I do not understand this depth of willful ignorance. All my life I have been a truth seeker and a fact checker. I know exactly how screwed up my own internal landscape is, and I even know how it got that way. Therefore, when I form an opinion on the real world I force myself to go and seek alternatives, to verify every fact, and to always seek the greater context those facts live within. Context is everything.

"Crisis of Character" by Gary J. Byrne is an exceptional book. It is one man's version of reality and it never pretends to be anything else. The constant search of the writer is in his seeking to define the moral context of everything he experiences. He does not expect perfection. He does expect accountability.

The "Introduction" opens with some background describing how and why he decided to write this book. In the first chapter he immediately jumps to a telling event that happened on a typical day of his tenure as a Secret Service Uniformed Division (SSUD) officer trusted with the last line of defense of the First Family and the White House itself. The chapter goes deeper into his background, chronicling how his father's influence and his childhood travels formed his internalized value system. There are multiple anecdotes from his time as an enlisted member of the Air Force Security Police (AFSP). These stories are both personally revealing and very solid examples of the many diverse situations the AFSP finds itself in. This is a real-life account of one man's service as an elite member of an elite fighting group.

Chapter 3 begins the main portion of the book. This is the story of his career with the SSUD which opens with his powerful memories of beginning his career protecting President G. H. W. Bush and the Bush family during the tenure of our 41st President. Life under the Clintons begins in Chapter 5 and carries on for about the next third of the book. One of the most interesting aspects of this story for me was how hard he worked to protect both the reputation of the Clintons and the security of the White House. As the story unfolds it becomes clear that during this period of time his attitude was much different than it is now. Events surrounding Monica Lewinsky, the ill-fated relief mission to Somalia, and the dramatic shift in priorities between the Bush administration and the Clinton administration challenged his assumptions about American life, American politics, and the values he learned from his father. It was only after he grew trapped between his own internalized moral code, the requirements of his job, and the complete lack of a moral code displayed by the Clintons that he finally sought to be transferred out of the White House. A good man driven to despair by the morally bankrupt couple chosen to lead the free world.

Chapter 14 begins his retelling of the fallout from the Ken Starr investigation into the activities of Bill and Hillary Clinton. This portion of the book struggles very hard to come to grips with how the Clintons managed to manipulate the media, the legal system, their inner cadre of loyalists, and the American people, into believing they were something other than criminals who failed in their responsibility to live up to the expectations of the American people. There is a great deal of information here about how the Clintons managed time and time again to avoid the consequences of their own corrupt and perverse behaviors. I found this portion of his story both genuinely heartbreaking and deeply infuriating. For the past three years my faith in our political process has been fighting to stay alive. Sadly, Gary Byrne's retelling of the Clinton impeachment proceedings has destroyed any small spark of faith I had remaining in our system. Clearly we have become a failed state. All that is left is for the right crisis to push us into a brutal, bloody, implosive collapse.

Chapter 16 begins the next phase in his life. Now he is working as an instructor, teaching advanced tactical training to federal agents from multiple law enforcement agencies as well as state and county agencies who contract with James J. Rowley Training Center (JJRTC). There are a couple of small anecdotes about his life as both an instructor and an in-rotation SSUD officer who still must from time to time serve protection details. Then 9/11 happens and his world turns upside down once again. As the SSUD is reorganized from top to bottom and political will surpasses policing as their core structure, he moves into the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) hoping that here he will have the tools and opportunities to genuinely help people and make a real difference in the world. Unfortunately, just before he makes the jump, the FAMS also falls victim to post 9/11 reorganization and even here, politics surpasses mission as the core foundation for policy creation and implementation. Nonetheless, the greater salary and the occasional victory are enough to keep him going until he retires.

The book closes with one last dire warning about the consequences of putting the Clintons back into the White House. His firsthand experience with the Clintons multiple and massive failures both within federal administrations and under Hillary Clinton's service as Senator and Secretary of State have given Gary J. Byrne a unique and deeply moving perspective on how political power functions in the United States of America. Honestly, there is a great deal to be learned by reading, "Crisis of Character". There are lessons here that are relevant to Hillary Clinton's unsuitability for the role of President, and there are lessons here for each of us individually in understanding the consequences that result from making decisions based on pure emotion, on poor comprehension of the situation we find ourselves in, and on trusting others to do our thinking for us.

A powerful book that needs to be read by everyone who supports Hillary Clinton, but won't be, because none of them want to see beyond the false front she has convinced them is real. It's not just that Hillary Clinton is a con artist and a criminal. The greater context of this book is the horrifying results that occur when we ourselves refuse to face the real world consequences of our own ignorance.

Texas Sweetheart , Reviewed in the United States on August 1, 2016
She really is a nasty person

Great book. She really is a nasty person. They are both severely lacking in the morals, ethics, character and truth departments. Always interesting to get the perspective of a secret service agent. The Clintons were lucky to be surrounded by dedicated agents willing to give up their lives, despite the way they were treated and what they were subjected to covering up. Gary Byrne earned every penny this book brings him. Shame on the Clintons. They are a disgrace.

K. Olgren , Reviewed in the United States on July 1, 2016
you'll be disappointed, but if you are open to read a ...

While it is true that the book covers his whole life, and the Clintons were just a small part of it, I found the entire book riveting. I couldn't put it down and read it in a matter of days. I also disagree with the reviewers who said there was nothing new in it. I never would have imagined Hillary Clinton was as hateful as she was, and the things people on her detail had to do to deal with her temper -- I felt sorry for them, and knowing that they are still following her and always will, I will always feel sorry for the people working beneath her.

This book is a worthwhile read. If you want a Clinton scoop from cover to cover, you'll be disappointed, but if you are open to read a man's fascinating life-story, you will enjoy it. I agree with another reviewer who said the low ratings were people who want to vote for Clinton. Honestly, I don't think either candidate we have to choose from has the right temperament for the Presidency, but we got stuck with the choice that we got.

In terms of the book itself, it was well done, a riveting page-turner throughout his entire life story. It is worth what it cost to read it.

[May 16, 2020] Globalist Totalitarianism has been erected upon the frame created by the British Empire, which created the nascent forms of globalist corporatism right down to corporations owning entire nations and sub-continents: see the East India Company

May 16, 2020 | www.unz.com

Jake , says: Show Comment May 11, 2020 at 12:34 pm GMT

"An obvious explanation was the ongoing Covid-19 epidemic."

That was just the convenient excuse. Every little totalitarian, like very humongous totalitarian, knows to never let a crisis go to waste. And that goes double for a fake crisis or an overblown crisis or managed crisis.

Globalist Totalitarianism – which could make the USSR at its worst seem almost pastoral – intends to murder all populist opposition. Globalist Totalitarianism is much more Brave New World than it is 1984. Globalist Totalitarianism intends for large swaths of the hoi polloi to have easy access to becoming stoned, because the doped are very easy to control in ways that matter to billionaires. Globalist Totalitarianism requires Sexual Revolution in all its facets, because that too makes multitudes easy slaves to control.

Globalist Totalitarianism requires total control of mass media, big tech, big pharma, food production and distribution. If the masses keep avoiding the propaganda, they can be starved into submission and denied medicines. They even can be weeded out, their numbers cut significantly, by illnesses created in labs owned and operated by the Globalists.

Historic nationalities, ethnicities, and folk cultures have no meaning, no rights, before Globalist Totalitarianism. Masses of humans – slaves to the economic desires of the Empire's Elites – are moved around the Empire as its Elites desire, both to produce cheap labor and to disrupt, implode, any entity that could become more than a minor irritant to the Empire's Elites.

Globalist Totalitarianism has been erected upon the frame created by the British Empire, which created the nascent forms of globalist corporatism right down to corporations owning entire nations and sub-continents: see the East India Company.

[May 14, 2020] Tucker on Obamagate

May 14, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Patient Observer May 11, 2020 at 8:50 am

Don't fuck with the Tuck:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/fHh19Baj_pM?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent

The guy is on fire. Per Carlson, Obama orchestrated the Russian collusion propaganda. I suspect that the lovely Ms. Hilary was a conspirator as well.

Carlson has the number 1 television news show with 4.56 million viewers on average.

https://www.nytimes.com/svc/oembed/html/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2020%2F04%2F28%2Fbusiness%2Fmedia%2Fvirus-tucker-carlson-sean-hannity-fox-ratings.html

Like Like

Mark Chapman May 11, 2020 at 9:54 am
Absolutely remarkable; in fact, 'stunning', as he uses it, is not too much of a stretch. The 'liberal elites' just go right on lying even though the sworn testimony of FBI interviewers is available for anyone to read, as well as the chilling manipulations of Strozk and Page, both of whom should be in prison and perhaps will be. And that fucker Schiff should swing. I can't believe the transformation of Carlson from Bush shill to the reincarnation of Edward R. Murrow. He makes this case so compellingly that nobody could watch that clip and not believe that Flynn was railroaded from the outset. And what were they allegedly going to jail Flynn's son for? Does anyone know? Were they just going to make something up? That is terrifying, and almost argues for the disbanding of the FBI, although it demonstrably still contains honest agents – as Carlson asks rhetorically, how many times have they done this already, and gotten away with it?

It's hard to imagine anyone would vote Democrat now.

Like Like

Cortes May 11, 2020 at 10:10 am
The son was being lined up for prosecution for alleged FARA violations regarding work on Turkey, I think. The son was working with the General.

Like Like

Mark Chapman May 11, 2020 at 11:45 am
Couldn't have been too much of a crime, if they offered to let him go in exchange for Flynn pleading guilty to lying. Actually, you'd kind of think their business was prosecuting crimes whoever committed them, and that offering to excuse a crime in exchange for a guilty plea is .kind of a crime.

Man, they have to clean house at the FBI. And there probably are several other organizations that need it, too. Not the political culling based on ideology that was a feature of the Bush White House, but the crowd that's in now just cannot be allowed to get off with nothing.

Like Like

uncle tungsten May 12, 2020 at 2:55 am
Greetings Mark and all, I am a new arrival as Jen suggested the company is fine here for barflies to ponder the world. Can I surmise that if Flynn and son were the FBI targets for nefarious business dealings then surely Biden and son fall in to that same category. After all Biden and son filched millions after arranging a USA loan of $1Billion to Ukraine and then did it again after the IMF loaned a few million more. Carpetbagging and its modern day practice is a crime in the USA last I looked.

If that conspicuous bias isn't enough cause to dismember the FBI then consider the Uranium One deal that Hillary Clinton and family set up or perhaps the Debbie Wasserman Shultz fostering the Awan family spy and blackmail ring.

Like Like

Mark Chapman May 12, 2020 at 9:37 am
Good day, Uncle, and welcome! For some reason I can't fathom, the Democrats seem to own or control all the 'respectable' media in the USA. FOX News is an exception, and has been a mouthpiece for the Republicans since its inception. But the Democrats control the New York Times and the Washington Post, which together represent the bulk of American public feeling to foreigners, and probably to the domestic audience as well. They are extremely active on conflicts between the two parties, ensuring the Democratic perspective gets put forward in calm, reasonable why-wouldn't-a-sensible-person-think-this-way manner. At the same time they cast horrific aspersions at the Republicans. Not that either are much good; but the news coverage is very one-sided – the position of the Democrats on the sexual-assault furor over the Kavanaugh appointment compared with their wait-and-see attitude to very similar accusations against Biden is a classic example.

Like Like

rkka May 13, 2020 at 9:33 am
Mark,

I don't think its the Democrats that control the NYT &WP, so much as plutocrats. They're also the ones who fund both the Democrats & the Republicans. The only significant difference between the parties is largely in the arena of the social "culture war" issues. But on the issues plutocrats care about, like economic policy & foreign policy, the differences are shades of grey, rather than actual distinctions.

Just remember the coverage of both papers in the run up to George W Shrub's catastrophic Iraq war. They're stenographers, not journalists.

Like Like

Mark Chapman May 13, 2020 at 11:12 am
That may well be true, but the NYT and WP historically champion the Democrats, endorse the Democratic candidate for president, and pander to Democratic issues and projects. The Wall Street Journal is the traditional Republican print outlet, and there might be others but I don't know them. CNN is overwhelmingly and weepily Democratic in its content – Wolf Blitzer's eyes nearly roll back in his head with ecstasy whenever he mentions Saint Hillary – while FOX News is Repubican to the bone and openly contemptuous of liberals. It could certainly be, on reflection probably is, that the same cabal of corporatists control them all, and a fine joke they must think it. And I certainly and emphatically agree there is almost no difference between the parties in execution of external policy.

[May 14, 2020] Dirty Dozen: The 12 revelations that sunk Mueller's case against Flynn

Notable quotes:
"... Ideally, they should each be prosecuted with an attempt to discern their connections to the political establishment, and specifically to the Clintons. What does that woman have to do to get jailed – blow somebody away on the 6 o'clock news? ..."
May 14, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

et Al May 11, 2020 at 8:22 am

JusttheNews.com: Dirty Dozen: The 12 revelations that sunk Mueller's case against Flynn
https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/dirty-dozen-12-revelations-sunk-muellers-case-against

After a prescient 2017 tip from inside the FBI, a slow drip of revelations exposed the deep problems with the Flynn prosecution.
####

All at the link.

I should add that the author, seasoned investigative reporter John Soloman, wrote much of this over at TheHill.com and was targeted for review over his clearly labelled 'opinion' pieces reporting on the Bidens in the Ukraine. The Hill's conclusion is piss weak and accuses him of what just about every other journalist in the US does and reads in particular of holding him up to a much higher standard than others. As you will see from his twatter bio, he's worked for AP, Washington Post, The Washington Times and The Hill. Some things you are just not supposed to investigate, let alone report.

https://thehill.com/author/john-solomon

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/483600-the-hills-review-of-john-solomons-columns-on-ukraine

Mark Chapman May 11, 2020 at 9:37 am
At an absolute minimum, the FBI officials involved – except those who did their jobs properly and stated their judgments at the outset that there was no evidence Flynn was not telling the truth, or believed he was – should be fired and their pensions, if applicable, rescinded.

Ideally, they should each be prosecuted with an attempt to discern their connections to the political establishment, and specifically to the Clintons. What does that woman have to do to get jailed – blow somebody away on the 6 o'clock news?

[May 11, 2020] Tucker: Adam Schiff should resign

This is nationwide gaslighting by Clinton gang of neoliberals who attempted coup d'état, and Adam Schiff was just one of the key figures in this coupe d'état, king of modern Joe McCarthy able and willing to destroy a person using false evidence
What is interesting is that Tucker attacked Republicans for aiding and abetting the coup d'état against Trump
May 11, 2020 | www.youtube.com

RionE23 , 2 days ago

I'm sick of politicians getting a free pass by "resigning" no, they break the law they go to jail.. just like the rest of us.

shannon11590 , 1 day ago

Adam Schiff simply needs to be criminally prosecuted and imprisoned for the countless number of criminal acts that he committed while in Congress.

[May 11, 2020] Anti-Russian hysteria as the key feature of American neofascism. In a way RussiaGate is a neofascist putsch

May 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

FDR warned his son before his death of his understanding of the British takeover of American foreign policy, but still could not reverse this agenda. His son recounted his father's ominous insight:

"You know, any number of times the men in the State Department have tried to conceal messages to me, delay them, hold them up somehow, just because some of those career diplomats over there aren't in accord with what they know I think. They should be working for Winston. As a matter of fact, a lot of the time, they are [working for Churchill]. Stop to think of 'em: any number of 'em are convinced that the way for America to conduct its foreign policy is to find out what the British are doing and then copy that!" I was told six years ago, to clean out that State Department. It's like the British Foreign Office ."

Before being fired from Truman's cabinet for his advocacy of US-Russia friendship during the Cold War, Wallace stated:

"American fascism" which has come to be known in recent years as the Deep State. "Fascism in the postwar inevitably will push steadily for Anglo-Saxon imperialism and eventually for war with Russia. Already American fascists are talking and writing about this conflict and using it as an excuse for their internal hatreds and intolerances toward certain races, creeds and classes."

In his 1946 Soviet Asia Mission , Wallace said " Before the blood of our boys is scarcely dry on the field of battle, these enemies of peace try to lay the foundation for World War III. These people must not succeed in their foul enterprise. We must offset their poison by following the policies of Roosevelt in cultivating the friendship of Russia in peace as well as in war."

[May 10, 2020] Ehret For Victory Day, It's Time To Think About Finally Winning WWII

May 10, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Matthew Ehret via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

75 years ago Germany surrendered to allied forces finally ending the ravages of the Second World War.

Today, as the world celebrates the 75th anniversary of this victory, why not think very seriously about finally winning that war once and for all?

If you're confused by this statement, then you might want to sit down and take a deep breath before reading on. Within the next 12 minutes, you will likely discover a disturbing fact which may frighten you a little bit: The allies never actually won World War II

Now please don't get me wrong. I am eternally thankful for the immortal souls who gave their lives to put down the fascist machine during those bleak years but the fact is that a certain something wasn't resolved on the 9th of May, 1945 which has a lot to do with the slow re-emergence of a new form of fascism during the second half of the 20th century and the renewed danger of a global bankers' dictatorship which the world faces again today.

It is my contention that it is only when we find the courage to really look at this problem with sober eyes, that we will be able to truly honor our courageous forebears who devoted their lives to winning a peace for their children, grandchildren and humanity more broadly.

The Ugly Truth of WWII

I'll stop beating around the Bush now and just say it: Adolph Hitler or Benito Mussolini were never "their own men".

The machines they led were never fully under their sovereign control and the financing they used as fuel in their effort to dominate the world did not come from the Banks of Italy or Germany. The technologies they used in petrochemicals, rubber, and computing didn't come from Germany or Italy, and the governing scientific ideology of eugenics that drove so many of the horrors of Germany's racial purification practices never originated in the minds of German thinkers or from German institutions.

Were it not for a powerful network of financiers and industrialists of the 1920s-1940s with names such as Rockefeller, Warburg, Montague Norman, Osborn, Morgan, Harriman or Dulles, then it can safely be said that fascism would never have been possible as a "solution" to the economic woes of the post-WWI order. To prove this point, let us take the strange case of Prescott Bush as a useful entry point.

The patriarch of the same Bush dynasty that gave the world two disastrous American presidents (and nearly a third had Donald Trump not annihilated Jeb at the last minute in 2016) made a name for himself funding Nazism alongside his business partners Averell Harrimen and Averell's younger brother E. Roland Harriman (the latter who was to recruit Prescott to Skull and Bones while both studying at Yale). Not only did Prescott, acting as director of Brown Brothers Harriman, provide valuable loans to keep the bankrupt Nazi party afloat during Hitler's loss of support in 1932 when the German population voted into office the anti-Fascist General Kurt von Schleicher as Chancellor, but was even found guilty for "Trading with the enemy" as director of Union Banking Corporation in 1942!

That's right! As demonstrated in the 1992 Unauthorized Biography of George Bush , eleven months after America entered WWII, the Federal Government naturally conducted an investigation of all Nazi banking operations in the USA and wondered why Prescott continued to direct a bank which was so deeply enmeshed with Fritz Thyssen's Bank voor Handel en Scheepvart of the Netherlands. Thyssen for those who are un-aware is the German industrial magnate famous for writing the book "I Paid Hitler". The bank itself was tied to a German combine called Steel Works of the German Steel Trust which controlled 50.8% of Nazi Germany's pig iron, 41.4% of its universal plate, 38.5% of its galvanized steel, 45.5% of its pipes and 35% of its explosives. Under Vesting Order 248, the U.S. federal government seized all of Prescott's properties on October 22, 1942.

The U.S.-German Steel combine was only one small part of a broader operation as Rockefeller's Standard Oil had created a new international cartel alongside IG Farben (the fourth largest company in the world) in 1929 under the Young Plan . Owen Young was a JP Morgan asset who headed General Electric and instituted a German debt repayment plan in 1928 that gave rise to the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and consolidated an international cartel of industrialists and financiers on behalf of the City of London and Wall Street. The largest of these cartels saw Henry Ford's German operations merging with IG Farben, Dupont industries, Britain's Shell and Rockefeller's Standard Oil. The 1928 cartel agreement also made it possible for Standard Oil to pass off all patents and technologies for the creation of synthetic gasoline from coal to IG Farben thus allowing Germany to rise from producing merely 300 000 tons of natural petroleum in 1934 to an incredible 6.5 million tons (85% of its total) during WWII! Had this patent/technology transfer not taken place, it is a fact that the modern mechanized warfare that characterized WWII could never have occurred.

Two years before the Young Plan began, JP Morgan had already given a $100 million loan to Mussolini's newly established fascist regime in Italy- with Democratic Party kingmaker Thomas Lamont playing the role of Prescott Bush in Wall Street's Italian operation. It wasn't only JP Morgan who loved Mussolini's brand of corporate fascism, but Time Magazine's Henry Luce unapologetically gushed over Il Duce putting Mussolini on the cover of Time eight times between 1923 and 1943 while relentlessly promoting fascism as the "economic miracle solution for America" (which he also did in his other two magazines Fortune and Life). Many desperate Americans, still traumatized from the long and painful depression begun in 1929, had increasingly embraced the poisonous idea that an American fascism would put food on the table and finally find help them find work.

A few words should be said of Brown Brothers Harriman.

Bush's Nazi bank itself was the spawn of an earlier 1931 merger which took place between Montagu Norman's family bank (Brown Brothers) and Harriman, Bush and Co. Montague Norman was the Governor of the Bank of England from 1920 to 1944, leader of the Anglo-German Fellowship Trust and controller of Germany's Hjalmar Schacht (Reichsbank president from 1923-1930 and Minister of Economy from 1934-1937). Norman was also the primary controller of the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) from its creation in 1930 throughout the entirety of WWII.

The Central Bank of Central Banks

Although the BIS was established under the Young Plan and nominally steered by Schacht as a mechanism for debt repayments from WWI, the Swiss-based "Central Bank of Central Banks" was the key mechanism for international financiers to fund the Nazi machine. The fact that the BIS was under the total control of Montagu Norman was revealed by Dutch Central Banker Johan Beyen who said "Norman's prestige was overwhelming. As the apostle of central bank cooperation, he made the central banker into a kind of arch-priest of monetary religion. The BIS was, in fact, his creation."

The founding members of the Board included the private central banks of Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Belgium as well as a coterie of 3 private American banks (JP Morgan, First National of Chicago, and First National of New York). The three American banks merged after the war and are today known as Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase.

In its founding constitution, the BIS, its directors and staff were given immunity from all sovereign national laws and not even authorities in Switzerland were permitted to enter its premises.

This story was conveyed powerfully in a 1998 History Channel documentary entitled Banking with Hitler.

A Word on Eugenics

Nazi support in the build up to, and during WWII didn't end with finance and industrial might, but extended to the governing scientific ideology of the third Reich: Eugenics (aka: the science of Social Darwinism as developed by Thomas Huxley's X Club associate Herbert Spencer and Darwin's cousin sir Francis Galton decades earlier). In 1932, New York hosted the Third Eugenics Conference co-sponsored by William Draper Jr (JP Morgan banker, head of General Motors and leading figure of Dillon Read and co) and the Harriman family. This conference brought together leading eugenicists from around the world who came to study America's successful application of eugenics laws which had begun in 1907 under the enthusiastic patronage of Theodore Roosevelt. Hiding behind the respectable veneer of "science" these high priests of science discussed the new age of "directed evolution of man" which would soon be made possible under a global scientific dictatorship.

Speaking at the conference, leading British Fascist Fairfield Osborn said that eugenics:

"aids and encourages the survival and multiplication of the fittest; indirectly, it would check and discourage the multiplication of the unfitted. As to the latter, in the United States alone, it is widely recognized that there are millions of people who are acting as dragnets or sheet anchors on the progress of the ship of state While some highly competent people are unemployed, the mass of unemployment is among the less competent, who are first selected for suspension, while the few highly competent people are retained because they are still indispensable. In nature, these less-fitted individuals would gradually disappear, but in civilization, we are keeping them in the community in the hopes that in brighter days, they may all find employment. This is only another instance of humane civilization going directly against the order of nature and encouraging the survival of the un-fittest".

The dark days of the great depression were good years for bigotry and ignorance as eugenics laws were applied to two Canadian provinces , and widely spread across Europe and America with 30 U.S. states applying eugenics laws to sterilize the unfit. Eugenics' successful growth was due in large measure to the fierce financial support of the Rockefeller Foundation and the science magazine Nature which had been created in 1865 by T.H. Huxley's X Club. The Rockefeller Foundation went onto fund German eugenics and most specifically the rising star of human improvement Joseph Mengele.

The Nazi Frankenstein Monster is Aborted

Describing his January 29, 1935 meeting with Hitler, Round Table controller Lord Lothian quoted the Fuhrer's vision for Aryan co-direction of the New World Order saying:

"Germany, England, France, Italy, America and Scandinavia should arrive at some agreement whereby they would prevent their nationals from assisting in the industrializing of countries such as China, and India. It is suicidal to promote the establishment in the agricultural countries of Asia of manufacturing industries"

While it is obvious that much more can be said on the topic, the Fascist machine didn't fully behave the way the Dr. Frankensteins in London wished, as Hitler began to realize that his powerful military machine gave Germany the power to lead the New World Order rather than play second fiddle as mere enforcers on behalf of their Anglo masters in Britain. While many London and Wall Street oligarchs were willing to adapt to this new reality, a decision was made to abort the plan, and try to fight another day.

To do this a scandal was concocted to justify the abdication of pro-Nazi King Edward VIII in 1936 and an appeasing Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was replaced with Winston Churchill in 1940. While Sir Winston was a life long racist, eugenicist and even Mussolini-admirer, he was first and foremost a devout British Imperialist and as such would fight tooth and nail to save the prestige of the Empire if it were threatened. Which he did.

The Fascists vs Franklin Roosevelt

Within America itself, the pro-fascist Wall Street establishment had been loosing a war that began the day anti-fascist President Franklin Roosevelt was elected in 1932. Not only had their attempted February 1933 assassination failed , their 1934 coup d'etat plans were also thwarted by a patriotic General named Smedley Darlington Butler. To make matters worse, their efforts to keep America out of the war in the hopes of co-leading the New World Order alongside Germany, France and Italy was also falling apart. A As I outlined in my recent article How to Crush a Bankers' Dictatorship , between 1933-1939, FDR had imposed sweeping reforms on the banking sector, thwarted a major attempt to create a global Bankers' dictatorship under the Bank of International Settlements, and mobilized a broad recovery under the New Deal.

By 1941, Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor polarized the American psyche so deeply that resisting America's entry into WWII as Wall Street's American Liberty League had been doing up until then, became political suicide. Wall Street's corporatist organizations were called out by FDR during a powerful 1938 speech as the president reminded the Congress of the true nature of fascism:

"The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism – ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power Among us today a concentration of private power without equal in history is growing. This concentration is seriously impairing the economic effectiveness of private enterprise as a way of providing employment for labor and capital and as a way of assuring a more equitable distribution of income and earnings among the people of the nation as a whole."

While America's entry into WWII proved a decisive factor in the destruction of the fascist machine, the dream shared by Franklin Roosevelt, Henry Wallace and many of FDR's closest allies across America, Canada, Europe, China and Russia for a world governed by large-scale development, and win-win cooperation did not come to pass.

Even though FDR's ally Harry Dexter White led in the fight to shut down the Bank of International Settlements during the July 1944 Bretton Woods conference, the passage of White's resolutions to dissolve BIS and audit its books were never put into action. While White, who was to become the first head of the IMF, defended FDR's program to create a new anti-imperial system of finance, Fabian Society leader, and devout eugenicist John Maynard Keynes defended the Bank and pushed instead to redefine the post-war system around a one world currency called the Bancor, controlled by the Bank of England and BIS.

The Fascist Resurgence in the Post-War World

By the end of 1945, the Truman Doctrine and Anglo-American "special relationship" replaced FDR's anti-colonial vision, while an anti-communist witch hunt turned America into a fascist police state under FBI surveillance. Everyone friendly to Russia was targeted for destruction and the first to feel that targeting were FDR's close allies Henry Wallace and Harry Dexter White whose 1948 death while campaigning for Wallace's presidential bid put an end to anti-colonialists running the IMF.

In the decades after WWII, those same financiers who brought the world fascism went straight back to work infiltrating FDR's Bretton Woods Institutions such as the IMF and World Bank, turning them from tools of development, into tools of enslavement. This process was fully exposed in the 2004 book Confessions of an Economic Hit man by John Perkins.

The European banking houses representing the old nobility of the empire continued through this reconquering of the west without punishment. By 1971, the man whom Perkins exposed as the chief economic hit man George Schultz, orchestrated the removal of the U.S. dollar from the Gold-reserve, fixed exchange rate system director of the Office of Management of Budget and in the same year, the Rothschild Inter-Alpha Group of banks was created to usher in a new age of globalization. This 1971 floating of the dollar ushered in a new paradigm of consumerism, post-industrialism, and de-regulation which transformed the once productive western nations into speculative "post-truth" basket cases convinced that casino principles, bubbles and windmills were substitutes for agro-industrial economic practices.

So here we are in 2020 celebrating victory over fascism.

The children and grandchildren of those heroes of 1945 now find themselves attached to the biggest financial collapse in history with $1.5 quadrillion of fictitious capital ripe to explode under a new global hyperinflation akin to that which destroyed Weimar in 1923 , but this time global. The Bank of International Settlements that should have been dissolved in 1945 today controls the Financial Stability Board and thus regulates the world derivatives trade which has become the weapon of mass destruction that has been triggered to unleash more chaos upon the world than Hitler could have ever dreamed.

The saving grace today is that the anti-fascist spirit of Franklin Roosevelt is alive in the form of modern anti-imperialists Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping and a growing array of nations united under the umbrella of the New Deal of the 21st Century which has come to be called the "Belt and Road Initiative".

Had Prescott's grandson Jeb (or Prescott's spiritual grand daughter Hillary) found themselves in the position of President of the USA at this moment, it is unlikely that I would be writing this now, as I'm fairly certain WWIII would have already been launched. However, with President Trump having successfully survived nearly four years of Deep State subversion, and having called repeatedly for a positive alliance with Russia and China, a chance still exists to take the types of emergency actions needed at this moment of existential crisis to do what FDR had always intended, and win World War II.

[May 05, 2020] How the Dems have cancelled democracy and decency

Dems are a joke.
May 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
The dems are incapable of finding a credible stand in for Biden. Some flunky might come to the fore but thet will most likely be the result of a 'committee' decision as the dems have cancelled democracy and decency.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 5 2020 18:31 utc | 4


Jackrabbit , May 5 2020 20:31 utc | 15

Seeing everyone get worked up over Biden is funny. Do you think you'll get a better candidate? Bernie dropped out for a reason. He was never a real candidate. There will not be any real candidate for change.

Killary's pretended "health problems" in 2016 seem like a fore-shadowing of Biden's. May be she really is the ultimately "the one" in 2020.

All we can do is watch and LOL.

!!

ptb , May 5 2020 19:09 utc | 9

nah, as long as DC Democrats run the show, it'll be Biden all the way.
VP nominee: Jeb Bush in drag.

burnemall , May 5 2020 19:17 utc | 10
Burn em all!
Elephant , May 5 2020 19:20 utc | 11
It doesn't matter who the nominee is, and that's true for both parties. As I believe we all know, Wall Street, the military-industrial complex and, to some extent, the bureaucracy, are what drives the agenda. The goons heading up the parade are simply an odd form of bread and circus.
Lozion , May 5 2020 19:30 utc | 12
I say its time for Cthulhu.

https://cthulhuforamerica.com/

After all, Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn..
Right?

Jen , May 5 2020 20:08 utc | 14
Lozion @ 14:

Cthulhu couldn't destroy the US any more than its politicians and other leaders in its other institutions (in education, in the entertainment and media industries, in the financial sector, in the defence industry) have already done so perhaps his time has come.

Yog Sothoth for Vice President!

[May 05, 2020] I find it amazing to see someone who is Jewish, like George Soros, allying with anti-Semitic and even neo-Nazi movements in Latvia, Estonia, and most recently, of course, Ukraine

That strange alliance is typical for neofascist movements.
May 05, 2020 | www.unz.com

Mefobills , says: Show Comment May 2, 2020 at 6:15 pm GMT

@FB The Baltic Countries have fallen for neo-liberal BS economy.

Hudson describes the mechanism:

https://michael-hudson.com/2015/10/rewriting-economic-thought/

__________________

They are not only making the election over resentment against the Russian-speaking population, but the fact that many are Jewish.

I find it amazing to see someone who is Jewish, like George Soros, allying with anti-Semitic and even neo-Nazi movements in Latvia, Estonia, and most recently, of course, Ukraine. It's an irony that you could not have anticipated deductively. If you had written this plot in a futuristic novel twenty years ago, no one would have believed that politics could turn more on national and linguistic identity politics than economic self-interest. The issue is whether you are Latvian or are Russian-Jewish, not whether you want to untax yourself and make? Voting is along ethnic lines, not whether Latvians really want to be forced to emigrate to find work instead of making Latvia what it could have been: an successful economy free of debt. Everybody could have gotten their homes free instead of giving real estate only to the kleptocrats.

Adûnâi , says: Show Comment May 2, 2020 at 11:49 pm GMT
@Mefobills > "I find it amazing to see someone who is Jewish, like George Soros, allying with anti-Semitic and even neo-Nazi movements in Latvia, Estonia, and most recently, of course, Ukraine."

What is anti-semitic about Ukrainian nationalists? What is Nazi about them? They lick Kolomoyski's ass. They elect Zelenski the Jewish clown. They are fine with their women's whoring themselves in the universities and in Poland. What gives?

> "Voting is along ethnic lines, not whether Latvians really want to be forced to emigrate to find work instead of making Latvia what it could have been: an successful economy free of debt."

One word: NazBol. Not popular. I guess, we'll die then. Because nationalists would rather lick Negros' anuses than be racist. Our nations are retarded, suicidal, and worship a Jew on a cross, would you expect a sense of self-preservation of them?

Our race in its current state is far more boring than the Muslims. You have no kings, no leaders, no politics, no parties. Only Christianity. You cannot act, you cannot think when your skull's content has rotted away, and Christianity has taken the brain's place.

[May 03, 2020] Flynn told the investigators that he knew that the call was inevitably monitored and that a transcript existed. However, he did not recall discussing sanctions with Kislyak. There was no reason to hide such a discussion

Highly recommended!
For any intelligence professional, especially for a person who was the head of DIA, Flynn behaviour is unexplainably naive. The idea that he did not understand that he is dealing with Clinton mafia, as well as that Clinton mafia will try to implicate him is just absurd. So his behaviour is mystery. As well as the fact that he allowed them to come bypassing regular channels in President administration.
As we do not have the whole picture we can only speculate. Probably he was already on the hook for his Turkish lobbing and that was exploited.
May 03, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

"New Documents Show Strzok Countermanded Closure Of Flynn Case For Lack Of Crime" [ Jonathan Turley ]. "It was previously known that the investigators who interviewed Flynn did not believe that he intentionally lied. That made sense. Flynn did not deny the conversations with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Moreover, Flynn told the investigators that he knew that the call was inevitably monitored and that a transcript existed. However, he did not recall discussing sanctions with Kislyak. There was no reason to hide such a discussion.

Trump had publicly stated an intent to reframe Russian relations and seek to develop a more positive posture with them. It now appears that, on January 4, 2017, the FBI's Washington Field Office issued a 'Closing Communication' indicating that the bureau was terminating "CROSSFIRE RAZOR" -- the newly disclosed codename for the investigation of Flynn. That is when Strzok intervened." • Read on for detail, which is ugly.

[Apr 29, 2020] Historians increasingly see the term totalitarian as polemical, used more to discredit governments than to offer meaningful analyses of them

Notable quotes:
"... New York Times ..."
"... The Origins of Totalitarianism ..."
"... Origins of Totalitarianism ..."
"... Totalitarian Dictatorship and Autocracy ..."
"... These seeming paradoxes illustrate that the idea of totalitarianism is a useless tool in assessing the decency of governance in any twenty-first-century state. If we are to survive in this brave new world, in which technology makes it ever easier for governments to manipulate individual decisions, but in which we also demand that the state take an ever-larger role in ensuring our safety from ourselves, we must acknowledge that the Manichean worldview implied in the term totalitarianism is an outdated relic of the Cold War. ..."
Apr 29, 2020 | bostonreview.net

Last Thursday, Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman issued a warning in the New York Times . "The pandemic will eventually end," he wrote, "but democracy, once lost, may never come back. And we're much closer to losing our democracy than many people realize." Citing the Wisconsin election debacle -- the Supreme Court ruled that voters would have to vote in person, risking their health -- Krugman argued that Donald Trump and the Republican Party are using the crisis for their own, authoritarian ends.

This is the perennial critique of Trump: that he is a totalitarian at heart and, if given the chance, 'would want to establish total control over society.'

Krugman is not alone. As early as last month, when cases of COVID-19 first began to surge in the United States, Masha Gessen wrote in the New Yorker that the virus was fueling "Trump's autocratic instincts." They argued, "We have long known that Trump has totalitarian instincts . . . the coronavirus has brought us a step closer." This is indeed the once and future critique of the Trump presidency: that Trump is a totalitarian at heart and, if given the chance, "would want to establish total control over a mobilized society." A few days ago, Salon published an article arguing that the president is using the virus to prepare "the ground for a totalitarian dictatorship." Even Meghan McCain, as unlikely a person as any to agree with Gessen, indicated recently that Trump has "always been a sort of totalitarian president" and that he might use the virus to "play on the American public's fears in a draconian way and possibly do something akin to the Patriot Act."

These critiques make ample use of the term totalitarianism -- "that most horrible of inventions of the twentieth century," in Gessen's summation . They and other commentators also use it to describe Fidel Castro's Cuba to Vladimir Putin's Russia, which Gessen left in 2013. As right-wing populism has surged around the world in recent years, the term has had something of a renaissance. Hannah Arendt's 1951 classic The Origins of Totalitarianism became a best seller again after Donald Trump's election in November 2016.

This uptick in the term's use runs counter to the trend among historians, for whom the idea of totalitarianism carries increasingly little weight. Many of us see the term primarily as polemical, used more to discredit governments than to offer meaningful analyses of them. Scholars often prefer the much broader term authoritarianism, which denotes any form of government that concentrates political power in the hands of an unaccountable elite. But the fact that historians who study such governments eschew the term totalitarianism, even as it enjoys wide public currency, points not only to a disconnect between the academy and the general public, but also to a problem that Americans have in thinking about dictatorship. And it underscores our collective uncertainty about the proper role of government in crises such as these.

section separator

Historians increasingly see the term totalitarian as polemical, used more to discredit governments than to offer meaningful analyses of them.

The terms totalitarian and totalitarianism have a winding history. In 1922 King Victor Emmanuel III of Italy appointed Benito Mussolini, leader of the Italian fascist party, as prime minister. In subsequent years, Mussolini established an authoritarian government that provided a roadmap for other twentieth century dictators, including Adolf Hitler, and made the term fascist an enduring descriptor of right-wing authoritarianism. A year after Mussolini's appointment, Giovanni Amendola, a journalist and politician opposed to fascism, used the term totalitario , or totalitarian, to describe how the fascists presented two largely identical party lists at a local election, thereby preserving the form of competitive democracy (i.e., offering voters a choice), while, in reality, gutting it. Other writers soon took up the idea and it became a more generic descriptor of the fascist state's dictatorial powers. Mussolini himself eventually adopted the term to characterize his government, writing that it described a regime of "all within the state, none outside the state, none against the state." In the next two decades, the terms began to circulate internationally. Amendola used them in 1925 to compare Mussolini's government and the young Soviet regime in Moscow. Academics in the English-speaking world began to employ them in the 1920s and '30s in similar comparative contexts.

In a sign of how much the meaning of the words drifted, however, those who later adopted them into political philosophy did not necessarily consider fascist Italy to have been totalitarian. Hannah Arendt, for instance, dismissed Mussolini's movement: "The true goal of Fascism was only to seize power and establish the Fascist 'elite' as uncontested ruler over the country." Even now, scholars point to the survival of pre-fascist government and bureaucratic structures, as well as lower levels of terror and violence directed against the populace, as evidence that Mussolini's Italy was not genuinely totalitarian.

Instead, Arendt considered totalitarianism to be a way of understanding fundamental similarities between Stalinism and Hitlerism, despite their diametrical opposition on the political spectrum. This archetypal comparison remains the bedrock of studies of totalitarian dictatorship. In Origins of Totalitarianism , Arendt laid out what she saw as its internal dynamic:

Totalitarianism is never content to rule by external means, namely, through the state and a machinery of violence; thanks to its peculiar ideology and the role assigned to it in this apparatus of coercion, totalitarianism has discovered a means of dominating and terrorizing human beings from within.

This state of affairs, which Arendt diagnosed as the result of an increasingly atomized society, bears a striking resemblance to the state described in George Orwell's 1984 (another bestseller in the Trump era). Airstrip One, as Orwell renamed Great Britain, is dominated by an omniscient Big Brother who sees, hears, and knows all. Through a reform of language, Airstrip One even tries to make it impossible to think illegal thoughts. Newspeak, it is hoped, "shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it." Orwell and Arendt considered the obliteration of the private and internal life of individuals to be the ne plus ultra of totalitarian rule.

Of course, what Arendt and Orwell described are systems of government that have never actually existed. Neither Nazism nor Stalinism succeeded in controlling or dominating its citizens from within. Moreover, while later scholarship has partially borne out Arendt's analysis of National Socialism, her understanding of Stalinist rule has proved less insightful.

The other classic account of totalitarianism is Totalitarian Dictatorship and Autocracy , published in 1956 by Carl Friedrich and Zbigniew Brzezinski. In it, the political scientists developed a six-point list of criteria by which to recognize totalitarianism: it has an "elaborate ideology," relies on a mass party, uses terror, claims a monopoly on communication as well as on violence, and controls the economy. Like Arendt, Friedrich and Brzezinski believed totalitarianism to be a new phenomenon -- to take Gessen's words, an invention of the twentieth century. Their goal was to understand structural similarities between different modern dictatorships.

Even Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union -- the two archetypal examples -- were so different that historians wonder if their comparison as totalitarian really yields interesting insights.

While scholars critiqued Friedrich and Brzezinski's model -- for example, its one-size-fits-all list fails to appreciate these regimes' dynamism -- the debate over the usefulness of the term totalitarianism continued. In the decades since, historians and political scientists have gone back and forth, defining the concept in new ways and showing how those definitions fail in one way or another.

But, at base, these definitions have typically assumed, in the words of historian Ian Kershaw, a "total claim" made on the part of the totalitarian state over those it rules. That is, Arendt's basic characterization -- that totalitarian regimes aspire to total control over the public, private, and internal lives of their citizens -- continues to inform scholarly debate.

Arendt's, I would venture, is also the term's folk definition: that is, in people's minds, totalitarianism distinguishes a subset of authoritarian regimes that seek to (and perhaps even sometimes succeed at) dominating the individual in every conceivable way. China's new social credit score, which curtails the rights of people who engage in so-called antisocial behaviors, is a current example of this sort of thing. It is also a clear illustration of the role technology plays in totalitarian fantasies. But China's government also has many other characteristics, such as a market economy, that traditional understandings of totalitarianism explicitly reject.

This pared-down definition of totalitarianism is still only of dubious utility. Even Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union -- the two archetypal examples -- were so different that historians wonder if their comparison as "totalitarian" really yields interesting insights. Studies of everyday life in both countries have underscored the limits of the totalitarian model. These revisionist histories, in the words of Soviet historian Sheila Fitzpatrick, "introduced into Soviet history the notions of bureaucratic and professional interest groups and institutional and center-periphery conflict, and they were particularly successful at demonstrating inputs from middle levels of the administrative hierarchy and professional groups. They were alert to what would now be called questions of agency." Similarly nuanced approaches to Nazism have uncovered ways power worked within the regime that throw the totalitarian hypothesis into doubt.

In my own area of research, Germany after World War II, totalitarianism plays a fraught role. During the Cold War and its immediate aftermath, politicians, journalists, and scholars all painted East Germany as a totalitarian government on par with the Nazi state. But that characterization is simply wrong. For instance, the East German and Nazi secret police forces, the Stasi and the Gestapo, functioned in fundamentally different ways. The Gestapo was a relatively small organization that relied on thousands of spontaneous denunciations. It practiced brutal torture and was embedded in a system of extralegal justice that was responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands of German citizens (not to mention the millions more killed in the Holocaust). The Stasi was quite different. It employed a vast bureaucracy -- three times larger than the Gestapo in a population four times smaller -- and cultivated an even larger network of collaborators. Around 5 percent of East Germans are estimated to have worked for the Stasi at some point, blurring the lines between persecutors and persecuted. Against those unlucky enough to wind up in a Stasi prison, the secret police employed methods of psychological torture. But it never induced the same level of terror as did the Gestapo. Nor was it responsible for anywhere near the same number of deaths. For most East Germans, the Stasi's presence was more of a nuisance -- a "scratchy undershirt," historian Paul Betts argues.

Of course, the Stasi's ubiquity and its vast surveillance apparatus have equally been taken as proof that the totalitarian hypothesis does indeed apply to East Germany. But there is ample evidence that East Germans enjoyed robust private lives, along with a sense of individual self. East Germans wrote millions of petitions to their government, for instance, complaining about everything from vacations to apartments. They showed up to quiz members of parliament about government policy. When the regime tried to outlaw public nudity in the 1950s, as historian Josie McLellan has described, East Germans disobeyed, protested, and eventually forced the government to relent. Kristen Ghodsee, among others, has contended that in many ways life was better for women in Eastern Bloc countries than in the West. And the dictatorship never tried to bring the Protestant Church, to which millions of East Germans belonged, under its full control. My own research reveals that gay liberation activists were able to pressure the dictatorship to make significant policy changes.

In short, whatever criteria one uses to define totalitarianism, East Germany does not fit. It was a dictatorship, but certainly not a totalitarian one. In fact, the classification of East Germany has proved such a nettlesome problem, it has spawned a veritable cottage industry of neologisms. Scholars describe it, variously, as a welfare dictatorship, a participatory dictatorship, a thoroughly dominated society, a modern dictatorship, a tutelary state, and a late totalitarian patriarchal and surveillance state.

If the obliteration of the wall between public and private is the defining characteristic of totalitarianism, can any contemporary society be described as other than totalitarian?

This brings us back to current usage. The problem is that the term totalitarian fulfills two quite different purposes. The first, as just discussed, is taxonomic: for scholars, it has helped frame an effort to understand the nature of various twentieth-century regimes. And in this function, it finally seems to be reaching the end of its useful life.

But the term's other purpose is ideological and pejorative, the outgrowth of a Cold War desire to classify fascist and communist dictatorships as essentially the same phenomenon. To catalog a state as totalitarian it to say it is radically other, sealed off from the liberal, capitalist, democratic order that we take to be normal. When we call a state totalitarian, we are saying that its goals are of a categorically different sort than those of our own government -- that it seeks, as Gessen suggests, to destroy human dignity.

The ideological work that the term totalitarian performs is significant, providing a sleight-of-hand by which to both condemn foreign regimes and deflect criticism of the regime at home. By claiming that dictatorship and democracy are not simply opposed but categorically different, it disables us from recognizing the democratic parts of dictatorial rule and the authoritarian aspects of democratic rule, and thus renders us less capable of effectively diagnosing problems in our own society.

We love to denounce foreign dictatorships. George W. Bush invented the " Axis of Evil ," for example, to provide a ready supply of villains. These "totalitarian" regimes -- Iran, Iraq, and North Korea -- we were told, all threatened our freedoms. But the grouping was always nonsensical, as the regimes bore few similarities to one another. While Iran, in particular, is authoritarian, it also bears hallmarks of pluralistic democracy. Pointing out the latter does not diminish the former -- rather it helps us understand how and why the Islamic Republic has shown such tenacity and staying power. To simply call such regimes totalitarian not only misses the point, but also whitewashes American complicity in creating and propping up authoritarian regimes -- Iran not least of all. Indeed, the United States supported a number of the past century's most brutal right-wing dictatorships.

Moreover, by thinking of totalitarianism as something that happens elsewhere, in illiberal, undemocratic places, we ignore the ways in which our government can and has behaved in authoritarian ways within our own country. Black Americans experienced conditions of dictatorial rule in the Jim Crow South and under slavery, to name but the most prominent examples.

The language of totalitarianism thus obscures how dictatorship and democracy exist on the same spectrum. It is imperative that we come to a clearer understanding of the fact that hybrid forms of government exist which combine elements of both. These managed democracies, to take political theorist Sheldon Wolin's term -- from Putin's Russia, to Viktor Orbán's Hungary, to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's Turkey -- have hallmarks of democratic republics and use a combination of new and old methods to enforce something akin to one-party rule. These states are certainly not totalitarian, but neither are they democracies.

Likewise, the Republican Party's efforts to manage U.S. democracy through gerrymandering and voter suppression is similar to Putin's, Orbán's, and Erdoğan's tactics of securing political power. Its strategies push the republic further toward the authoritarian end of the political spectrum. And, indeed, the sophisticated data-mining techniques of Cambridge Analytica , which assisted the 2016 Trump campaign to manipulate voter choices, would have made the Stasi, the Gestapo, or the NKVD green with envy.

In fact, if the obliteration of the wall between public and private is the defining characteristic of totalitarianism, can any contemporary society be described as anything other than totalitarian? What, after all, does agency mean in a world in which Facebook aspires to know what we want before we know it ourselves or in a country in which the NSA collects vast troves of data on our own citizens? To my mind, totalitarianism's usefulness as a distinctive category of government simply evaporates when we begin to look at all the ways in which technology has compromised individual privacy and agency in the twenty-first century.

Fear of totalitarianism gives the right cover to denounce measures to control the virus: if freedom means freedom from government, then the worst government is one that makes a total claim on its citizens, even in the interest of saving them from a plague.

Use of the term also prevents us from thinking productively about COVID-19 and how governments ought to respond to it. For a state of quarantine necessarily forces everyone to give up -- whether voluntarily or no -- their rights of movement, assembly, and, to some extent, expression. It requires the private choices individuals make -- whether to have friends over for dinner, go on a morning jog, or buy groceries -- to become public in painful and sometimes even embarrassing ways. Technology companies are starting to employ their products' tracking features to trace the virus's spread, an application that many worry poses an unacceptable breach of privacy.

Yet, the destruction of the private sphere in the interest of the public good is precisely what theorists tell us lies at the heart of totalitarianism. Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben made precisely this point, arguing recently that the extraordinary response to COVID-19 is totalitarian: "The disproportionate reaction . . . is quite blatant. It is almost as if with terrorism exhausted as a cause for exceptional measures, the invention of an epidemic offered the ideal pretext for scaling them up beyond any limitation." Of course, we now know the measures the Italian government introduced went neither far nor fast enough. Now there are over 160,000 confirmed cases in Italy and over 20,000 confirmed deaths from the virus.

The confusion the idea of totalitarianism sows over responses in the United States has also been evident since last month. On March 22, right-wing commentator Andrew Napolitano asserted that measures to combat COVID-19 were motivated by "totalitarian impulses." Meanwhile, state officials have been busy postponing primary elections, a measure that under normal circumstances would undoubtedly be denounced as totalitarian in nature.

If we are going to arrive at a more sophisticated answer to the question of how to govern democratically in the twenty-first century, we must begin by acknowledging that all modern governments attempt to control and influence the lives of their citizens, and all governments make use of exceptional powers to combat crises. The problem with the idea of totalitarianism is that it makes no accommodation for the reasons behind such exercise of coercive power.

It is, of course, quite right to worry about Donald Trump's response to the virus. His dilly-dallying, his narcissism, and his inability to take responsibility for anything may cost one hundred thousand or more lives. Commentators like Krugman are correct, insofar as Trump and his cronies are indeed trying to use the crisis to cement their authority. But the ways they are going about it are not totalitarian in any sense of the word. In fact, the idea of totalitarianism, as commentators such as Napolitano reveal, gives the radical right cover to denounce measures to control the virus. It is the last stage in the late-twentieth-century neoliberal critique of government: if freedom is only ever freedom from government interference, then the worst form of government is that which makes a total claim on its citizens, even in the interest of saving them from a plague. Thinking in terms of totalitarianism -- instead of the broader and more flexible term authoritarianism -- leads one into such frustrating mental thickets, in which democratic policies can plausibly be denounced as totalitarian.

These seeming paradoxes illustrate that the idea of totalitarianism is a useless tool in assessing the decency of governance in any twenty-first-century state. If we are to survive in this brave new world, in which technology makes it ever easier for governments to manipulate individual decisions, but in which we also demand that the state take an ever-larger role in ensuring our safety from ourselves, we must acknowledge that the Manichean worldview implied in the term totalitarianism is an outdated relic of the Cold War.

[Apr 28, 2020] MoA - To Finally Kill The Nuclear Deal With Iran The U.S. Will Try To Rejoin It

Notable quotes:
"... I guess when an administration has shown over and over again that it does not respect, international law, domestic law, the US constitution, logic, meaning or the English Language then it can say anything and do anything. ..."
"... The power of the United States is rapidly fading. The country is on the eve of a massive social crisis, as its ruling class fails even to understand the extent of the system's failure. ..."
"... Israel is nobody's real need. Zionism is a philosophical oddity stranded by the tides of history, a mid Victorian nonsense entirely composed of racism and silly ideas about human inequality. ..."
Apr 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

, Apr 27 2020 16:54 utc | 9

!! a "deal" with "Not Agreement-Capable" entity.

... is that akin to the portion of a George Carlin comedy sketch ?

"From 1778 to 1871, the United States government
entered into more than 500 treaties with
the Native American tribes;
all of these treaties have since been violated
in some way or outright broken by the US government,

while at least one treaty was violated
or broken by Native American tribes."


Red Ryder , Apr 27 2020 17:07 utc | 11

The EU rapprochement with Iran is all about the huge market the EU wants. Their interest in the JCPOA was always about Iran developing, and the EU benefiting for its trade and investment potential.

Crippling Iran again with snapback sanctions certainly would end Iran-EU relations for a decade or longer.

With the EU economy in the toilet due to the pandemic, now more than ever the EU needs Iran free of sanctions, not laden with crippling new ones.

Only one country benefits from the economic strangulation of Iran--Israel.

Huginn , Apr 27 2020 17:16 utc | 12
In these times of memory holes, sometimes it pays to remember:
As much as I'd like to be optimistic that justice might actually be served for both Epstein and his myriad clients/co-conspirators, I think the powers-that-be will again squash this - or liquidate Epstein - before things get out of hand for them.

The American justice system has been corrupted in much the same way the political system has been, and it's primary objective is to protect the rulers from the common folk, not to actually deliver true justice.

I'll watch with anticipation, but I haven't had any satisfaction from either a political or justice perspective since at least the 2000 coup d'etat, so I won't hold my breath this time.

Does this seem precient?

Peter AU1 , Apr 27 2020 17:17 utc | 13
Glasshopper

You have got to be a paid to be putting to be putting that shit up here. US doesn't accept peace deals.

Nathan Mulcahy , Apr 27 2020 17:22 utc | 14
Economist Michael Hudson explains how American imperialism has created a global free lunch, where the US makes foreign countries pay for its wars, and even their own military occupation.

https://moderaterebels.com/transcript-economics-american-imperialism-michael-hudson/

Stonebird , Apr 27 2020 19:17 utc | 28
Background reading on Pompeo and his mafia.

This is part of Tom's description of the Article on Pompeo, Esper and the gang of 1986 (west pointers). They are well embedded.
In fact, one class from West Point, that of 1986, from which both Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo graduated, is essentially everywhere in a distinctly militarized (if still officially civilian) and wildly hawkish Washington in the Trumpian moment.
In case you missed it the first time, I repeat this link from the beginning of April,
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176686/tomgram%3A_danny_sjursen%2C_trump%27s_own_military_mafia_/

-----------------
Red Ryder | Apr 27 2020 17:07 utc | 14

One addition there. The EU lost "market share" in Iran due to US sanctions. (As they did with Russia). What they would like to do is to get it back. (France was one of the bigger losers)

El Cid , Apr 27 2020 19:24 utc | 29
Before any aggression, the United States want Iran to be hermetically sealed with sanction just like Iraq was before our invasion. Everybody knows the US's intentions because we've seen it before. There will be NO domestic support for war on Iran as Americans die due to no public healthcare and massive unemployment and poverty. Iran and the Middle East view a war on Iran as an Israeli wet dream. Israel is viewed as the intellectual author of aggression against Iran, and Iran will respond appropriately. So, is AIPAC willing to get Israel destroyed? Is AIPAC on a suicide mission? Looks that way.
Noah Way , Apr 27 2020 19:38 utc | 33
@ #8 Grasshopper

Israel and Saudi Arabia are de facto allies aiming to carve up the entire Middle East between them. Forget about Sunni / Shia / Hebrew, that is a manufactured excuse to war for resources (oil first, then water).

Proof? Mutual "enemies" (oil-rich Iran and Syria, which is the nexus for pipelines) and mutual ally (Uncle Sam). Also not a single complaint from Israel over the $100b US-Saudi Arms deal. As to Palestine, that is a human rights issue and has no weight because water is not recognized as a strategic resource (yet).

RT , Apr 27 2020 19:56 utc | 35
I guess when an administration has shown over and over again that it does not respect, international law, domestic law, the US constitution, logic, meaning or the English Language then it can say anything and do anything.
bevin , Apr 27 2020 20:11 utc | 38
"The Iranians are not helping the Palestinians one iota. They are splitting the opposition."
Glasshopper@29

Whoever has been helping Hezbollah has been helping the Palestinians. And whoever has been holding Syria together, despite the pressure of the imperialists and their sunni-state puppets, has also been helping the Palestinians by bringing some kind of balance into regional power calculations.

It is imperative that Iran continues not only to provide political support to the Palestinian cause but to democratise the Gulf, to the extent of bringing about the demise of the autocracies, and the Arabian world generally.

Israel has already exerted its maximum influence. The power of the United States is rapidly fading. The country is on the eve of a massive social crisis, as its ruling class fails even to understand the extent of the system's failure. (There will be no war to divert attention from the crisis.) And Israel will be left to solve its own problems as its 'allies' find themselves increasingly pre-occupied with real problems.

Supporting Israel and building it up as an imperialist base has been part of an era in which the empire was hegemonic and thus able to define international events in terms of domestic politics.

That era has ended. The USA is still powerful but it is no longer anything more than one of the major participants in geopolitical competition. Even to maintain its position it is going to have to do, what other powers have done and concentrate its resources on its real needs.

Israel is nobody's real need. Zionism is a philosophical oddity stranded by the tides of history, a mid Victorian nonsense entirely composed of racism and silly ideas about human inequality. Israel has one choice, to divest itself of its fascist government and its fascistic culture and seek accommodation within the neighbourhood or to wither away as its population emigrates leaving only the committed fascists to play with Armageddon.

Long before that happens the imperialists will have taken its weapons away from it.

It may very well be the case that the ordinary Iranian is no more committed to fighting on behalf of Palestinians than the average American is committed to risking all, or anything, for the sake of Israel. But Iran's commitment to Palestine is a powerful political statement and one that counters the divisive tactics of the wahhabis and their imperial friends. Iran has taken up the mantle that Nasser briefly wore, in the vanguard of a muslim and Arab nationalist movement. This makes it very difficult for the sunni tyrants actually to commit forces to defend Israel or attack Iran. Their duplicity is a measure of their own weakness.

Does anyone imagine that the pro-Israeli policies pursued by the Sauds are actually popular? The Gulf and Saudi policies of sucking up to Israel are far more damaging to them than Iran's stance is to it.

Arch , Apr 28 2020 5:12 utc | 61
@jiri #75

The United States announced its withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also known as the "Iran nuclear deal" or the "Iran deal", on May 8, 2018.

This document discusses the legal rationale for the US withdrawal from tje JCPOA in detail:


https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R44761.pdf

Since when does announcing your "withdrawal" from a contract NOT mean "leaving the agreement" ?

Piotr Berman , Apr 28 2020 6:26 utc | 65
Iran should sign a peace deal with the Israelis.
Posted by: Glasshopper | Apr 27 2020 16:42 utc | 8

Some people should stick to what they do well, like hopping on glass. A simple observation: peace deal with "the Israelis" is not possible. Gulfie princes tried. No cigar. They genuinely tried to be nice with Israel, out of "anti-Semitic delusion that Jews control USA". I conjecture that Glasshopper made a similar assumption -- why would Iran consider a "peace deal with the Israelis" if its direct conflict is with USA (and the Gulfies)? How it would help them unless "Jews control USA"?

As a mental experiment, let Grasshopper sketch a putative "deal with Israelis". Kushner plan?

Yeah, Right , Apr 28 2020 6:36 utc | 66
@70 BraveNewWorld, you haven't added up the numbers correctly. Take China, Russia and Iran out of the equation leaves you with five (including the EU as a whole, which is not a given). Take the USA out as well and it doesn't matter how sycophantic the Europeans are, Pompeo can only muster four votes.

And he needs five to refer the issue to the UNSC.

That's why Pompous wants to waddle his way back in: no matter which way he looks at this, without the USA sitting at the table he is one-short.

John Bolton, the gift that keeps giving.....

Yeah, Right , Apr 28 2020 7:12 utc | 67
Actually, I've just read the JCPOA and UNSC Resolution 2231 and neither has any mention of a "majority vote" requirement for a referral to the UNSC for a vote on "snapping back" sanctions. It appears that any one JCPOA participant can refer the issue of alleged non-compliance to the UNSC, provided that they first exhaust the Joint Commission dispute mechanism.

But I do note this in the JCPOA (my bold): "Upon receipt of the notification from the complaining participant, as described above, including a description of the good-faith efforts the participant made to exhaust the dispute resolution process specified in this JCPOA , the UN Security Council, in accordance with its procedures, shall vote on a resolution to continue the sanctions lifting"

Seems to me that there is a procedural "out" there for the UN Secretariat i.e. it may use that highlighted section to decide that the participant is a vexatious litigant whose participation in the Joint Commission was not in good faith, ergo, the UN can refuse to even take receipt of the complaint.

Everything else then becomes moot.

The USA would raise merry-hell, sure, it would. But that would be no more outrageous a ploy by the UN than was the USA's own argument that it can have its cake and eat it too.

After all, if a participant to the JCPOA referred its complaint to the UNSC without first going through the Joint Commission then it is a given that the UNSC is under no obligation to receive that complaint. No question.

So why can't the UNSC also refuse to accept a complaint when it is clear that the complainant has not gone through the Joint Commission process in "good faith"?

One for the lawyers and ambassadors to argue, I would suggest, but it is not a given that the USA can ram this through even if everyone were to agree that it were still a participant in the JCPOA.

Yeah, Right , Apr 28 2020 7:50 utc | 68
@61 Arch: "This document discusses the legal rationale for the US withdrawal from tje JCPOA in detail"

Arch, the crux of that CRS legal paper boils down to this:
.."under current domestic law, the President may possess authority to terminate U.S. participation in the JCPOA and to re-impose U.S. sanctions on Iran, either through executive order or by declining to renew statutory waivers"..

All the other fluff in that paper is inconsequential compared to this question posed by that quote: can the US claim to be half-pregnant?

I suspect not.

Note that at the time the CRS paper was written (May 2018) it did have a valid point i.e. while Trump *had* refused to re-certify Iranian compliance, he had *not* reimposed US sanctions on Iran, and so the CRS paper could credibly argue that Trump wasn't pregnant, he just talking dirty to the Congress.

But that was then, and this is now, and - as b points out - Executive Order 13846 is the smoking gun because in it Trump is OFFICIALLY stating that he has decided to " cease the participation of the United States in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action ".

That EO is clearly the killing blow to Pompeo's nonsense, and even the CRS legal paper you linked to would agree.

Zeug , Apr 28 2020 12:29 utc | 74
As I see it, the historical problem with European fascism has been that when push comes to shove the knife comes out and its either give in to enforced collaboration or take a stabbing, it's your choice. Even if that means helping murder millions of your neighbours or being murdered. As Celan said "Der Tod ist ein Meister aus Deutschland."

The US has been enforcing a morally sanitised Disney Adult version of this old world order since at least the 2003 Supreme Crime of Aggression against Iraq. Sooner or later as this global pandemic, political, and financial crisis unfolds, the US leaders will be forced to choose whether or not the UN is a viable vehicle through which to continue the elite lunatic project for planetary full spectrum dominance of 21st C financial and military affairs.

So I reckon the Pentagon at some point either gets to finally execute the long awaited 'Operation Conquer Persia' or the politicians and their chickenhawk ideologues will back off again and continue the death by a thousand cuts of the last 40 years. I'd probably bet the latter but that's the trouble with genuine psychopaths, push comes to shove they will go for it if they think they'll get away with it.

This last 2 decades has been like watching a reality TV series about a fat drunken psychopath with a bloody knife going around and stabbing people at a party, but now the psycho is starting to stagger and everyone in the house is watchful trying to keep their distance. House rules are that anyone starts an actual fight to the death with the psycho then everyone dies!

I more or less trust that if we ever get there, a multipolar world order won't collapse into outright fascism but we're closer to collapse every year, especially from this year on, and most especially in the Persian Gulf.

jared , Apr 28 2020 12:44 utc | 75
In current US political system, it is not necessary to propose a valid claim, or proposal or argument - they intend to act from a position of authority. They know where you live.

[Apr 24, 2020] There is no serious question that the some aspects of neofascism initially tend to help a government to operate more efficiently for the same reasons army operates efficiently in battle conditions, but with time the corruption of the fascist elite takes those gains back

Is not "make America great again" a re-birth slogan ?
Apr 24, 2020 | www.unz.com

Been_there_done_that , says: Show Comment April 23, 2020 at 9:59 am GMT

" What better way to achieve that than to blame it all on China? "

The premise of fingering China arises from the fact that this is primarily about China [duh]:

• The initial rapid viral spread occurred in the Chinese city of Wuhan;
• A Wuhan bio-lab had the expertise to engineer such enhanced viruses;
• Authorities allowed viral carriers to fly to other regions of the world.

To then spin a conspicuously strained counter-narrative that denies these three key facts and instead tacitly or directly blames the United States as the primary culprit for the current world viral pandemic is clear evidence of a Chinese sponsored redirection campaign; or else voluntary promoters of such propaganda efforts are surely dedicated fascists.

Since the term " fascist " is nowadays often used as a rather nebulous term of slander, I want to emphasize that I am using it correctly here, and not maliciously, because it is consistent with key attributes of the original Fascism in Italy, under Mussolini, as well as somewhat later and concurrently in Germany, under Hitler, so I will provide my definition of the term below.

On the basis of these characteristics, I maintain that the world's two most fascist countries (both the government and a prevailing attitude of its people) are both Israel and China. Therefore, people who glorify these countries and eagerly support their actions, as is evident on this site, should at least be honest and understand that they are essentially fascists in this regard. My use of the term here is thus merely a straightforward political appellation.

Five Key Characteristic Elements of and Criteria for State Fascism

• Hyper-Nationalism, State Worship, Dynastic and Cultural Glory
• Cult of Militaristic Strength and Desired Territorial Conquests
• Historically Rooted in Basic Socialist Principles and Revolution
• Strongly Authoritarian Behavioral Control of the Entire Population
• Pursuit of Corporatist Economics with State Guidance of Business

If challenged, I would be happy to provide specific examples. There may be a few countries that fulfill only some of these five attributes or that follow all or most of them to a weaker extent (Turkey, Russia, Iran, Ukraine), but Israel and China clearly reflect all these five characteristics most strongly.

So readers should consider whether their strong support of Israel or China (or both) is something they can feel proud of or not. There is no serious question that the aforementioned aspects tend to make a government operate more efficiently, if allowed to remain unchallenged, which may be the primary goal.

ThreeCranes , says: Show Comment April 23, 2020 at 1:32 pm GMT
@Been_there_done_that Another characteristic of fascism is "rebirth". The appeal of fascism to the mass of discontent people is in pointing out that the prevailing bourgeois society/economy is the source of the nation's weakness and corruption.

Fascists use the 5 traits you outlined to redirect people's anger and frustration into hope and belief in their promise to act as midwives in the birth of a new nation/civilization that embodies the people's true and essential character. The Phoenix rising out of the flames is a fitting symbol of their party. This promise of rebirth has a deep appeal to the human psyche, one that goes back to our earliest agricultural roots. It is Archetypal.

Been_there_done_that , says: Show Comment April 23, 2020 at 2:31 pm GMT
@ThreeCranes

Another characteristic of fascism is "rebirth".

Yes, that is especially important during the consolidation phase, upon having come to power, but this characteristic is not unique to fascism.

This promise of rebirth has a deep appeal to the human psyche

It is an important aspect in various religions too; afterlife, reincarnation, confession, new year

[Apr 17, 2020] Google Subpoenaed For Hillary Clinton Emails Believed To Contain Backup To Records Scrubbed With "Bleachbit"

Apr 17, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

librul , Apr 16 2020 4:44 utc | 107

Some happy news for a change...

Google Subpoenaed For Hillary Clinton Emails Believed To Contain Backup To Records Scrubbed With "Bleachbit"

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/google-subpoenaed-hillary-clinton-emails-believed-contain-backup-records-scrubbed

[Apr 11, 2020] History repeats

Apr 11, 2020 | off-guardian.org

John Flanagan ,

I am probably a case in point for this article. When Trump was elected, I got a "sharing my grief" letter from Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR). This was my response to his letter, posted November 18, 2016:
Thank you, Sen. Merkley, for the reassurance and encouragement.

Although I voted a straight Democratic ticket, I had no enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton.

I was angry that the Democratic Party has allowed itself to fall into the neo-con, neo-liberal, globalist approach/understanding of our most important issues and gave up the nationalism and populism that was so important to the Progressive movement. This morphing of the Party is something I've watched with considerable dismay for many years. The powers and influences that have taken over the Party are bringing it to ruin, and are ultimately responsible for this mind-boggling defeat.

We are all going to have to pay a lot more attention to politics in the coming years. We no longer have the luxury of tending to our own families and affairs, trusting that our government is in good hands, led by people who will do the right thing and not let anything catastrophic happen. I did not have such confidence in Hillary Clinton, by the way. From the outset I was in favor of a Biden/Warren ticket, and hoped that Elizabeth would be our first female President, not Hillary. But then, I grew up in Oklahoma, and believe she's a progressive, Oklahoma populist down deep.

The news coverage of the election by NPR was abysmal, in my view. This defeat was not a revolt of the "losers," of the declining White middle class males, and the rise of misogyny, racism and isolationism. (Those words were not used, of course, but that understanding appeared to me to be embedded in the analysis.)

Isn't it possible that liberal, progressive, educated Americans might be unhappy with the way American power, prestige, money and "soft" power has been squandered, and towards what ends? Do you think educated

Americans are in favor of paring down the Constitution, beginning with the First and Second Amendments? Do you believe that ordinary American citizens are to be feared, are the enemy? Do you think they are all on board with spending trillions of dollars on Middle East wars, creating destabilized states and the refugee crisis, and letting our own infrastructure deteriorate and

Social Security go bankrupt? Will the SS funds borrowed to fund these and other wars, and to balance budgets, ever be repaid? Do you think Americans are so dumbed down and cynical that they would look to the Clintons as "wholesome" examples of what is best in America and for uncorrupted leadership? Do you think no one either heard or remembered "We came, we saw, he died! Ha, ha, ha"? Or have not heard Hillary's intent to establish a no-fly zone in Syria, knowing full well that such an action could lead to war with Russia? Do you think educated Americans really bought the "killing of Osama bin Laden" theater? Did you? I admit that the tired "Osama" specter had to be laid to rest, but why not do it in an upright and out front manner? Why all the deceit? It is this kind of deeply embedded dishonesty and resulting corruption of justice, integrity and open political process that has brought the Democratic Party into disrepute. Do you think people remain ignorant of the Clinton Foundation's pay-for-play method of enriching themselves, or that the Foundation transferred $1.8 billion to Doha? Where did all that loot come from? We are not talking here of Bill Gates, or the CEO of Google. Where did the money come from?

I do not put you in the same camp. My first encounter with you was when you gave the keynote speech at the first graduating class of the MET in Tigard. You have never tainted yourself with lies and falseness. Maybe it is easier to retain your integrity being from Oregon, since I have the same high regard for Rep. Earl Blumenauer and Peter DeFazio. You are the exemplars of liberal, progressive values and grassroots democracy, not Hillary Clinton.

As much as I have grown to dislike Hillary Clinton, listening to her concession speech, I had a sense of tragedy. She seems such an intelligent, lovely woman.

It could and probably should have ended differently. Was it ambition that destroyed her, or hubris and lack of humility? What happened to her respect for the intelligence and basic decency of the American people? Where has simple honesty gone?

She appears to me to have taken the "left-hand path," and perhaps it is better that she be personally ruined than allowed to take the country to ruin along with her, since that path always ends in ruin.

I hope for the best. We will, I trust, survive a Donald Trump administration. There will be damage, of course. Trump has to repay supporters who put their own political careers at risk to back him. This is frightening all by itself–imagine a Sarah Palin in charge of the Department of Energy! I fear the dismantling of all the federal regulatory agencies that five generations of Americans have worked so hard to put in place–one of the great achievements of the Progressive movement. Imagine BPA sold off to the highest bidder, or our public lands bartered off to pay for the ruinous wars we have been visiting on the Middle East!

By writing you in this frank way, I do not mean to be disrespectful. As I said, I hold you, Rep. Blumenauer and Rep. DeFazio in high regard, and believe Oregon has the best congressional delegation in the nation, bar none. More tThan ever, we all depend upon you to be honest, vigilant and courageous, and prevent the worst possible outcomes from this disaster from being realized.

Best of luck!

Sincerely,

John D. Flanagan

[Apr 07, 2020] Three big claims of 'Russian disinformation' and 'Russian trolls/bots' on social media.

Apr 07, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

John A , April 7, 2020 at 04:09

Over the last week, there have, to my knowledge, been three big claims of 'Russian disinformation' and 'Russian trolls/bots' on social media.
1. Last week, Russian equipment and support sent to Italy to help fight Covid-19. Nato stenographers claim and spread the disinformation that '80% of the equipment was useless', citing one anonymous source. Total lies.

2. Swedish minister claims social media campaign against a 5G network in Sweden is run by russian trolls. Turns out it is a 64 year old grandmother living in Stockholm who is behind the campaign.

3. Yesterday afternoon, russia media report, according to a National Health Service source, Boris Johnson is on a ventilator in hospital. Utter nonsense say MSM, Russian disinformation. Overnight headlines in British media – Boris in intensive care.

The western media are so totally venally corrupt in serving the 1% yet get found out in their lies time after time and yet carry on. I try to read as many different media as possible, but have no doubt, which are more credible, and it aint NATO stenographers

AnneR , April 7, 2020 at 14:33

Yes, John A. Truly there is something warped about the western ruling elites' mindset. But I guess they have to have a bugaboo and Russia (then China, sometimes Iran and others) is the primary, western created, go-to one. Even among those who did not grow up, or were only young, during the cold war.

I am only thankful that, despite my father's Tory politics (all but regarding the land, which he believed should be nationalized and 50 acres given to every male [well, he was sexist]; an curious, decidedly not Tory viewpoint) the USSR as was then never was on either his or my mother's agenda. Indeed, we used to watch with much pleasure the Red Army choir, once we got a television (not till 1958, when I was 10), which toured the UK, I *think*

No ducking under school desks. Nor any other weird thing

[Apr 04, 2020] This Anti-Semitic newspaper should be banned.

Apr 04, 2020 | www.unz.com

Hippopotamusdrome , says: Show Comment April 3, 2020 at 7:18 am GMT

"Israel's ultra-Orthodox endanger the public" was the headline of yesterday's Jerusalem Post opinion piece. The article points to the ultra orthodox community as a menace both to the general society and itself.

This Anti-Semitic newspaper should be banned. When are the ADL and Antifa going to get on this?

[Apr 04, 2020] There are over one hundred Hassid groups, some of which started recently in America

Apr 04, 2020 | www.unz.com

ploni almoni , says: Show Comment April 3, 2020 at 3:20 pm GMT

@Wizard of Oz There are over one hundred Hassid groups, some of which started recently in America. Hassidism is one of the direct results of the Shabbatai Zvi movement. Shabbatai Zevi was a Satanic Messiah born in 1626 died 1676. He was a Spanish Jew born in Izmir Turkey, and out of him came the Donmeh who ran the Turkish government in the 20th century. Why Satanic? He said that what was prescribed by law is is now prohibited by him and what is forbidden is made permissible by him. Mainly this means orgies, and "a doing a-what comes naturally." Shabbatianism and Hassidism are based on Kabbalah, materialist antinomial Satanism. The Hassid Rebbi is considered, for all practical intents and purposes to be God Himself. This is understood only by the elect. For the Lubavitchers this was diluted down -- for the fringe -- to the idea that Schneersohn is Moshiach, and of course half the Lubavitchers are not sure. The founding Rebbi results in a dynasty of his descendants or the group is taken over by a successor in a power struggle. Only the Rumanian-Hungarian Satmar group claims to be anti-Zionist on paper, because of a pet idea of Teitelbaum's. The Satmar march "in protest" against the Salute to Israel day Parade under special protection of the New York Police. But their opposition to Israel is only on paper and they go to Israel like everyone else. They also show solidarity to the Iranians and show up in Teheran as guests of the government.

Another development out of Shabbatai Zevi are the Frankists. Jacob Frank said, besides orgies and promiscuity, it is perfectly safe to convert: Lightning will not strike you. These Frankists include Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin (*his grandfather and great grandfather), Benjamin Disraeli, Heinrich Heine, and thousands, thousands, perhaps millions more. As Shabbatai Zevi said the forbidden is permitted, Jacob Frank applied this in particular to conversion to the religion of convenience as the path to success. Frank converted in 1759 with the Polish King as his godfather. 26,000 Polish and Ukrainian Jews followed and received Polish nobility, and money. The process is still going on. And this must be why Poland and Ukraine are so screwed up. Frank died calling himself the "Baron of Offenbach."

Frankists who did not convert include Sigmund Freud who started his own religion, and Louis Brandeis who had a trinity of Zvi, Frank, and Frank's daughter Eva. I think it is correct to say that Hollywood, where Jews married Shiksas and had Christmas trees, was a Frankist development. (Irving Berlin and Samuel Goldwyn come to mind. Remember the MGM lion of Judah lying on a torah?) Frankism Lite is the Reform Judaism of Temple Emmanuel and the Society for Ethical Culture. Read. There is a lot to learn about the world around you.

[Apr 04, 2020] Flavours of Orthodox Judaism

Apr 04, 2020 | www.unz.com

Fran Taubman , says: Show Comment April 3, 2020 at 3:02 pm GMT

@Gilad Atzmon Gilad I am shocked you can not give a better answer then this.

Judaism from the time of the Temple destruction through out Medieval Europe, and the ME was Orthodox Judaism and Hassidic dynasties (each having their own customs.) The same for Mizrahi, Separdic and Ashkenazim Jews.

It's center was the Vilna Goan in Lithuania, not sure about the ME. Jews wore fringes, had beards and women covered their heads (shaytl, tichal). It was not called Orthodox since those customs and rules were universal. You were either a practicing Jew or not. The basic rules were as follows:

Orthodox Judaism:
-Keeping the sabbath
-Keeping Kosher
-Family ritual purity
-Women covering their heads.
-Men covering their heads.

After the enlightenment other sub divisions occurred.

-Reform Judaism
-Conservative Judasim
Modern Orthodox Judaism.

Modern Orthodox Judaism (I was raised), included keeping the sabbath, keeping kosher, family purity was optional. Women do not cover their heads and men usually do not cover their heads outside of the Synagogue or at home. The main difference between Orthodox and Conservative is in the Synagogue. In Orthodox Synagogue men sit separately from women divided by a high barrier.

Today those differences are defined by Orthodox (modern) , and Ultra Orthodox (traditional from the middle ages) ,

Then you have the various Hassidic sects which are family dynasties, the most prominent being the Lubavitcher Hassids which run the Chabad movement and all the Kabbalah centers.

[Apr 04, 2020] A theory of natural selection in action

Apr 04, 2020 | www.unz.com

AnonFromTN , says: Show Comment April 3, 2020 at 3:19 pm GMT

The orthodox community's complete dismissal of modern medical advice and its negligence in social distancing and modern hygiene are a health catastrophe in the making.

Well, there is a theory of natural selection, which Orthodox Jews reject. Yet it is natural selection that is likely to cull those unfit to live in human society.

[Apr 03, 2020] Orthodox Judaism as supremacist ideology

Apr 03, 2020 | www.unz.com

NPleeze , says: Show Comment April 3, 2020 at 6:13 am GMT

@Fran Taubman

The religious community is luminous in its spirituality, and you feel it when you are there.

Orthodox Judaism is bar none the most filthy, evil, disgusting supremacist hate ideology the world has ever known – nothing whatsoever about it is "spiritual". All you have to do is read the deplorable Torah and especially the satanic beast this community "worships".

You are obviously also a worshiper of this dark "prince", the Synagogue of Satan (*as Jesus aptly described it). That makes you a Jew supremacist, and not just in a symbolic way, but by dint of real action: it is the duty of Jews, in the Torah (and of course also the Talmud), to conquer the planet and enslave humanity, except in Greater Israel, where all non-Jews are to be slaughtered.

It's all stated, most succinctly, in 20 Deut. 10-18. And again in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which is just a repeat of 20 Deut. 10-18.

As Karl Marx said, the only way for Jews to escape their satanic life is to assimilate, i.e., reject Jewish supremacism. Of course someone like you is incapable of that. To you, the most wretched evil is "spiritual".

ExRabbi , says: Show Comment April 3, 2020 at 9:32 am GMT
@Fran Taubman Dear Fellow Jewish people,

I will be blunt. I think it's definitely time for us Jews to recognize our sacred religion for what it really is – a supermacist cult and to denounce it. The Mosaic Covenant must be broken. The oh-so awaited promised Moschiah hasn't come for thousands of years and we have only up until the year 6000 for him to show up and to elevate us as the ultimate leaders of the World. Fortunately or not, this is not going to happen. All our efforts to prove otherwise will only reveal the fallacious and highly irrational essence of Judaism to the critical thinker, a cult that emerged from Ancient Canaanite worship. I am aware that blind and irrational belief in our traditional religion is what is required from us, but inquiring one's deepest and most sacred beliefs is what makes one human and not a robot.

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: Show Comment April 3, 2020 at 10:53 am GMT
@ExRabbi " the fallacious and highly irrational essence of Judaism".

Thanks, ExRabbi. Well put. And it has terrible side-effects. Because it's fallacious and highly irrational, Jews in denial of that must resort to lying and deception, so lying and deception become the mark of the Jew. Simply abandon all Jewish ritual and be proud that, having abandoned it, you are not a Jew.

geokat62 , says: Show Comment April 3, 2020 at 11:11 am GMT

Every perplexing narrative about Jewish history (including the birth of Zionism and the initial rejection of Diaspora/Religious identity) is resolved by this 6 second clip https://t.co/WvmGrZduji

-- Gilad Atzmon (@GiladAtzmon) April 3, 2020

[Mar 21, 2020] Why Is CrowdStrike Confused On 11 Key Details About The DNC 'Hack'

Mar 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Why Is CrowdStrike Confused On 11 Key Details About The DNC 'Hack'? by Tyler Durden Sat, 03/21/2020 - 21:20 Authored by Larry Johnson via Sic Semper Tyrannis blog,

Here is the bottom-line - despite being hired in late April (or early May) of 2016 to stop an unauthorized intrusion into the DNC, CrowdStrike, the cyber firm hired by the DNC's law firm to solve the problem, failed abysmally. More than 30,000 emails were taken from the DNC server between 22 and 25 May 2016 and given to Wikileaks. Crowdstrike blamed Russia for the intrusion but claimed that only two files were taken. A nd CrowdStrike inexplicably waited until 10 June 2016 to reboot the DNC network.

CrowdStrike, a cyber-security company hired by a Perkins Coie lawyer retained by the DNC, provided the narrative to the American public of the alledged hack of the DNC, But the Crowdstrike explanation is inconsistent, contradictory and implausible. Despite glaring oddities in the CrowdStrike account of that event, CrowdStrike subsequently traded on its fame in the investigation of the so-called Russian hack of the DNC and became a publicly traded company. Was CrowdStrike's fame for "discovering" the alleged Russian hack of the DNC a critical factor in its subsequent launch as a publicly traded company?

The Crowdstrike account of the hack is very flawed. There are 11 contradictions, inconsistencies or oddities in the public narrative about CrowdStrike's role in uncovering and allegedly mitigating a Russian intrusion (note--the underlying facts for these conclusions are found in Ellen Nakashima's Washington Post story , Vicki Ward's Esquire story , the Mueller Report and the blog of Crowdstrike founder Dmitri Alperovitch):

  1. Two different dates -- 30 April or 6 May -- are reported by Nakashima and Ward respectively as the date CrowdStrike was hired to investigate an intrusion into the DNC computer network.
  2. There are on the record contradictions about who hired Crowdstrike. Nakashima reports that the DNC called Michael Sussman of the law firm, Perkins Coie, who in turn contacted Crowdtrike's CEO Shawn Henry. Crowdstrike founder Dmitri Alperovitch tells Nakashima a different story, stating our "Incident Response group, was called by the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
  3. CrowdStrike claims it discovered within 24 hours the "Russians" were responsible for the "intrusion" into the DNC network.
  4. CrowdStrike's installation of Falcon (its proprietary software to stop breaches) on the DNC on the 1st of May or the 6th of May would have alerted to intruders that they had been detected.
  5. CrowdStrike officials told the Washington Post's Ellen Nakashima that they were, "not sure how the hackers got in" and didn't "have hard evidence."
  6. In a blog posting by CrowdStrike's founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, on the same day that Nakashima's article was published in the Washington Post, wrote that the intrusion into the DNC was done by two separate Russian intelligence organizations using malware identified as Fancy Bear (APT28) and Cozy Bear (APT29).
  7. But, Alperovitch admits his team found no evidence the two Russian organizations were coordinating their "attack" or even knew of each other's presence on the DNC network.
  8. There is great confusion over what the "hackers" obtained. DNC sources claim the hackers gained access to the entire database of opposition research on GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump. DNC sources and CrowdStrike claimed the intruders, "read all email and chat traffic." Yet, DNC officials insisted, "that no financial, donor or personal information appears to have been accessed or taken." However, CrowdStrike states, "The hackers stole two files."
  9. Crowdstrike's Alperovitch, in his blog posting, does not specify whether it was Cozy Bear or Fancy Bear that took the files.
  10. Wikileaks published DNC emails in July 2016 that show the last message taken from the DNC was dated 25 May 2016. This was much more than "two files."
  11. CrowdStrike, in complete disregard to basic security practice when confronted with an intrusion, waited five weeks to disconnect the DNC computers from the network and sanitize them.

Let us start with the very contradictory public accounts attributed to Crowdstrke's founder, Dmitri Alperovitch. The 14 June 2016 story by Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post and the October 2016 piece by Vicki Ward in Esquire magazine offer two different dates for the start of the investigation:

When did the DNC learn of the "intrusion"?

Ellen Nakashima claims it was the end of April:

"DNC leaders were tipped to the hack in late April . Chief executive Amy Dacey got a call from her operations chief saying that their information technology team had noticed some unusual network activity... That evening, she spoke with Michael Sussmann, a DNC lawyer who is a partner with Perkins Coie in Washington. Soon after, Sussmann, a former federal prosecutor who handled computer crime cases, called Henry, whom he has known for many years. Within 24 hours, CrowdStrike had installed software on the DNC's computers so that it could analyze data that could indicate who had gained access, when and how.

Ward's timeline, citing Alperovitch, reports the alert came later, on 6 May 2016:

At six o'clock on the morning of May 6, Dmitri Alperovitch woke up in a Los Angeles hotel to an alarming email. . . . late the previous night, his company had been asked by the Democratic National Committee to investigate a possible breach of its network. A CrowdStrike security expert had sent the DNC a proprietary software package, called Falcon, that monitors the networks of its clients in real time. Falcon "lit up," the email said, within ten seconds of being installed at the DNC: Russia was in the network.

This is a significant and troubling discrepancy because it marks the point in time when CrowdStrike installed its Falcon software on the DNC server. It is one thing to confuse the 30th of April with the 1st of May. But Alperovitch gave two different reporters two different dates.

What did the "hackers" take from the DNC?

Ellen Nakashima's reporting is contradictory and wrong. Initially, she is told that the hackers got access to the entire Donald Trump database and that all emails and chats could be read. But then she is assured that only two files were taken. This was based on Crowdstrike's CEO's assurance, which was proven subsequently to be spectacularly wrong when Wikileaks published 35,813 DNC emails. How did Crowdstrike miss that critical detail? Here is Nakashima's reporting:

Russian government hackers penetrated the computer network of the Democratic National Committee and gained access to the entire database of opposition research on GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump, according to committee officials and security experts who responded to the breach.

The intruders so thoroughly compromised the DNC's system that they also were able to read all email and chat traffic, said DNC officials and the security experts. . . .

The DNC said that no financial, donor or personal information appears to have been accessed or taken, suggesting that the breach was traditional espionage, not the work of criminal hackers.

One group, which CrowdStrike had dubbed Cozy Bear, had gained access last summer (2015) and was monitoring the DNC's email and chat communications, Alperovitch said.

The other, which the firm had named Fancy Bear, broke into the network in late April and targeted the opposition research files. It was this breach that set off the alarm. The hackers stole two files, Henry said. And they had access to the computers of the entire research staff -- an average of about several dozen on any given day. . . .

CrowdStrike is continuing the forensic investigation, said Sussmann, the DNC lawyer. "But at this time, it appears that no financial information or sensitive employee, donor or voter information was accessed by the Russian attackers," he said.

The DNC emails that are posted on the Wikileaks website and the metadata shows that these emails were removed from the DNC server starting the late on the 22nd of May and continuing thru the 23rd of May. The last tranche occurred late in the morning (Washington, DC time) of the 25th of May 2016. Crowdstrike's CEO, Shawn Henry, insisted on the 14th of June 2016 that "ONLY TWO FILES" had been taken. This is demonstrably not true. Besides the failure of Crowdstrike to detect the removal of more than 35,000 emails, there is another important and unanswered question -- why did Crowdstrike wait until the 10th of June 2016 to start disconnecting the DNC server when they allegedly knew on the 6th of May that the Russians had entered the DNC network?

Crowdstrike accused Russia of the DNC breach but lacked concrete proof.

Ellen Nakashima's report reveals that Crowdstrike relied exclusively on circumstantial evidence for its claim that the Russian Government hacked the DNC server. According to Nakashima:

CrowdStrike is not sure how the hackers got in. The firm suspects they may have targeted DNC employees with "spearphishing" emails. These are communications that appear legitimate -- often made to look like they came from a colleague or someone trusted -- but that contain links or attachments that when clicked on deploy malicious software that enables a hacker to gain access to a computer. " But we don't have hard evidence, " Alperovitch said.

There is a word in English for the phrases, "Not sure" and "No hard evidence"--that word is, "assumption." Assuming that the Russians did it is not the same as proving, based on evidence, that the Russians were culpable. But that is exactly what CrowdStrike did.

The so-called "proof" of the Russian intrusions is the presence of Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear?

At first glance, Dmitri Alperovitch's blog postin g describing the Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear "intrusions" appears quite substantive. But cyber security professionals quickly identified a variety of shortcomings with the Alperovitch account. For example, this malware is not unique nor proprietary to Russia. Other countries and hackers have access to APT28 and have used it.

Skip Folden offers one of the best comprehensive analyses of the problems with the Alperovitch explanation :

No basis whatsoever :

APT28, aka Fancy Bear, Sofacy, Strontium, Pawn Storm, Sednit, etc., and APT29, aka Cozy Bear, Cozy Duke, Monkeys, CozyCar,The Dukes, etc., are used as 'proof' of Russia 'hacking' by Russian Intelligence agencies GRU and FSB respectively.

There is no basis whatsoever to attribute the use of known intrusion elements to Russia, not even if they were once reverse routed to Russia, which claim has never been made by NSA or any other of our IC.

On June 15, 2016 Dmitri Alperovitch himself, in an Atlantic Council article, gave only "medium-level of confidence that Fancy Bear is GRU" and "low-level of confidence that Cozy Bear is FSB." These assessments, from the main source himself, that either APT is Russian intelligence, averages 37%-38% [(50 + 25) / 2].

Exclusivity :

None of the technical indicators, e.g., intrusion tools (such as X-Agent, X-Tunnel), facilities, tactics, techniques, or procedures, etc., of the 28 and 29 APTs can be uniquely attributed to Russia, even if one or more had ever been trace routed to Russia. Once an element of a set of intrusion tools is used in the public domain it can be reverse-engineered and used by other groups which precludes the assumption of exclusivity in future use. The proof that any of these tools have never been reverse engineered and used by others is left to the student - or prosecutor.

Using targets :

Also, targets have been used as basis for attributing intrusions to Russia, and that is pure nonsense. Both many state and non-state players have deep interests in the same targets and have the technical expertise to launch intrusions. In Grizzly Steppe, page 2, second paragraph, beginning with, "Both groups have historically targeted ...," is there anything in that paragraph which can be claimed as unique to Russia or which excludes all other major state players in the world or any of the non-state organizations? No.

Key-Logger Consideration :

On the subject of naming specific GRU officers initiating specific actions on GRU Russian facilities on certain dates / times, other than via implanted ID chips under the finger tips of these named GRU officers, the logical assumption would be by installed key logger capabilities, physical or malware, on one or more GRU Russian computers.

The GRU is a highly advanced Russian intelligence unit. It would be very surprising were the GRU open to any method used to install key logger capabilities. It would be even more surprising, if not beyond comprehension that the GRU did not scan all systems upon start-up and in real time, including key logger protection and anomalies of performance degradation and data transmissions.

Foreign intelligence source :

Other option would be via a foreign intelligence unit source with local GRU access. Any such would be quite anti-Russian and be another nail in the coffin of any chain of evidence / custody validity at Russian site.

Stated simply, Dmitri Alperovitch's conclusion that "the Russians did it" are not supported by the forensic evidence. Instead, he relies on the assumption that the presence of APT28 and APT29 prove Moscow's covert hand. What is even more striking is that the FBI accepted this explanation without demanding forensic evidence.

Former FBI Director James Comey and former NSA Director Mike Rogers testified under oath before Congress that neither agency ever received access to the DNC server. All information the FBI used in its investigation was supplied by CrowdStrike. The Hill reported :

The FBI requested direct access to the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) hacked computer servers but was denied, Director James Comey told lawmakers on Tuesday.

The bureau made "multiple requests at different levels," according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a "highly respected private company" would get access and share what it found with investigators.

The foregoing facts raise major questions about the validity of the Crowdstrike methodology and conclusions with respect to what happened on the DNC network. This is not a conspiracy theory. It is a set of facts that, as of today, have no satisfactory explanation. The American public deserve answers.

[Mar 12, 2020] The Democratic Party Surrenders to Nostalgia by Bill Blum

Highly recommended!
Trump does not have a party with the program that at least pretends to pursue "socialism for a given ethnic group". He is more far right nationalist then national socialist. But to the extent neoliberalism can be viewed as neofascism Trump is neo-fascist, he definitly can be called a "national neoliberal."
Notable quotes:
"... I am nothing if not a realist. The idea that Sanders might have become the Democratic candidate was always a fantasy, not unlike my youthful dreams of one day becoming an NFL quarterback. Even after Sanders' triumph in the Nevada caucuses, I never thought the party establishment would ever allow a socialist -- even a mild social democratic one, such as Sanders -- to head its ticket. ..."
"... Of the two campaigns, Trump's will be decidedly more toxic. The "Make America Great Again" slogan that propelled Trump to victory in 2016 and the "Keep America Great" slogan he will try to sell this time around are neo-fascist in nature, designed to invoke an imaginary and false state of mythical past national glory ..."
"... The fascist designation is not a label I apply to Trump cavalierly. I use it, as I have before in this column , because Trump meets many of the standard and widely respected definitions of the term. ..."
"... Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion. ..."
"... An appeal to a frustrated middle class that is suffering from an economic crisis of humiliation and fear of the pressure exerted by lower social groups. ..."
"... Joe Biden is not a fascist. He is, instead, a standard-bearer of neoliberalism. As with fascism, there are different definitions of neoliberalism, prompting some exceptionally smug mainstream commentators like New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait to claim that the concept is little more than a left-wing insult. In truth, however, the concept describes an all-too-real set of governing principles. ..."
"... Neoliberalism , by contrast, deemphasizes federal economic intervention in favor of initiatives calling for deregulation, corporate tax cuts, private-public partnerships, and international trade agreements that augment the free flow of capital while undermining the power and influence of trade unions. ..."
"... Until the arrival of Trump and his brand of neo-fascism, both major parties since Reagan had embraced this ideology. And while neoliberals remain more benign on issues of race and gender than Trump and Trumpism ever will be, neoliberalism offers little to challenge hierarchies based on social class. Indeed, income inequality accelerated during the Obama years and today rivals that of the Gilded Age . ..."
Mar 11, 2020 | www.truthdig.com
Now that the Michigan Democratic primary is over and Joe Biden has been declared the winner , it's time to read the handwriting on the political wall: Biden will be the Democratic nominee for president, and Bernie Sanders will be the runner-up once again come the party's convention in July. Sanders might influence the party's platform, but platforms are never binding for the nominee. Sanders has lost, and so have his many progressive supporters, myself included.

I am nothing if not a realist. The idea that Sanders might have become the Democratic candidate was always a fantasy, not unlike my youthful dreams of one day becoming an NFL quarterback. Even after Sanders' triumph in the Nevada caucuses, I never thought the party establishment would ever allow a socialist -- even a mild social democratic one, such as Sanders -- to head its ticket.

Funded by wealthy donors, run by Beltway insiders and aided and abetted by a corporate media dedicated to promoting the notion that Sanders was " unelectable ," the Democratic Party never welcomed Sanders as a legitimate contender. Not in 2016 and not in 2020. In several instances, it even resorted to some good old-fashioned red-baiting to frighten voters; the party is, after all, a capitalist institution. Working and middle-class families support the Democrats largely because they have no other place to go on Election Day besides the completely corrupt and craven GOP.

Now we are left with Donald Trump and Biden to duke it out in the fall. Yes, it has come to that.

In terms of campaign rhetoric and party policies, the general election campaign will be a battle for America's past far more than it will be a contest for its future. The battle will be fueled on both sides by narratives and visions that are illusory, regressive and, in important respects, downright dangerous.

Of the two campaigns, Trump's will be decidedly more toxic. The "Make America Great Again" slogan that propelled Trump to victory in 2016 and the "Keep America Great" slogan he will try to sell this time around are neo-fascist in nature, designed to invoke an imaginary and false state of mythical past national glory that ignores our deeply entrenched history of patriarchal white supremacy and brutal class domination.

The fascist designation is not a label I apply to Trump cavalierly. I use it, as I have before in this column , because Trump meets many of the standard and widely respected definitions of the term.

As the celebrated Marxist playwright Bertolt Brecht wrote in 1935 , fascism "is a historic phase of capitalism the nakedest, most shameless, most oppressive and most treacherous form of capitalism." Trumpism, along with its international analogs in Brazil, India and Western Europe, neatly accords with Brecht's theory.

Trumpism similarly meets the definition of fascism offered by Robert Paxton in his classic 2004 study, " The Anatomy of Fascism ":

Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.

Trump and Trumpism similarly embody the 14 common factors of fascism identified by the great writer Umberto Eco in his 1995 essay, Ur Fascism :

Joe Biden is not a fascist. He is, instead, a standard-bearer of neoliberalism. As with fascism, there are different definitions of neoliberalism, prompting some exceptionally smug mainstream commentators like New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait to claim that the concept is little more than a left-wing insult. In truth, however, the concept describes an all-too-real set of governing principles.

To grasp what neoliberalism means, it's necessary to understand that it does not refer to a revival of the liberalism of the New Deal and New Society programs of the 1930s and 1960s. That brand of liberalism advocated the active intervention of the federal government in the economy to mitigate the harshest effects of private enterprise through such programs as Social Security, the National Labor Relations Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, Medicare, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That brand of liberalism imposed high taxes on the wealthy and significantly mitigated income inequality in America.

Neoliberalism , by contrast, deemphasizes federal economic intervention in favor of initiatives calling for deregulation, corporate tax cuts, private-public partnerships, and international trade agreements that augment the free flow of capital while undermining the power and influence of trade unions.

Until the arrival of Trump and his brand of neo-fascism, both major parties since Reagan had embraced this ideology. And while neoliberals remain more benign on issues of race and gender than Trump and Trumpism ever will be, neoliberalism offers little to challenge hierarchies based on social class. Indeed, income inequality accelerated during the Obama years and today rivals that of the Gilded Age .

As transformational a politician as Barack Obama was in terms of race, he too pursued a predominantly neoliberal agenda. The Affordable Care Act, Obama's singular domestic legislative achievement, is a perfect example of neoliberal private-public collaboration that left intact a health industry dominated by for-profit drug manufacturers and rapacious insurance companies, rather than setting the stage for Medicare for All, as championed by Sanders.

Biden never tires of reminding any audience willing to put up with his gaffes, verbal ticks and miscues that he served as Obama's vice president. Those ties are likely to remain the centerpiece of his campaign, as he promises a return to the civility of the Obama era and a restoration of America's standing in the world.

History, however, only moves forward. As charming and comforting as Biden's imagery of the past may be, it is, like Trump's darker outlook, a mirage. If Trump has taught us anything worthwhile, it is that the past cannot be replicated, no matter how much we might wish otherwise.

[Mar 12, 2020] The Democratic Party Surrenders to Nostalgia by Bill Blum

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion. ..."
Mar 12, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

Mar 11, 2020

Now that the Michigan Democratic primary is over and Joe Biden has been declared the winner , it's time to read the handwriting on the political wall: Biden will be the Democratic nominee for president, and Bernie Sanders will be the runner-up once again come the party's convention in July. Sanders might influence the party's platform, but platforms are never binding for the nominee. Sanders has lost, and so have his many progressive supporters, myself included.

I am nothing if not a realist. The idea that Sanders might have become the Democratic candidate was always a fantasy, not unlike my youthful dreams of one day becoming an NFL quarterback. Even after Sanders' triumph in the Nevada caucuses, I never thought the party establishment would ever allow a socialist -- even a mild social democratic one, such as Sanders -- to head its ticket.

Funded by wealthy donors, run by Beltway insiders and aided and abetted by a corporate media dedicated to promoting the notion that Sanders was " unelectable ," the Democratic Party never welcomed Sanders as a legitimate contender. Not in 2016 and not in 2020. In several instances, it even resorted to some good old-fashioned red-baiting to frighten voters; the party is, after all, a capitalist institution. Working and middle-class families support the Democrats largely because they have no other place to go on Election Day besides the completely corrupt and craven GOP.

Now we are left with Donald Trump and Biden to duke it out in the fall. Yes, it has come to that.

In terms of campaign rhetoric and party policies, the general election campaign will be a battle for America's past far more than it will be a contest for its future. The battle will be fueled on both sides by narratives and visions that are illusory, regressive and, in important respects, downright dangerous.

Of the two campaigns, Trump's will be decidedly more toxic. The "Make America Great Again" slogan that propelled Trump to victory in 2016 and the "Keep America Great" slogan he will try to sell this time around are neo-fascist in nature, designed to invoke an imaginary and false state of mythical past national glory that ignores our deeply entrenched history of patriarchal white supremacy and brutal class domination.

The fascist designation is not a label I apply to Trump cavalierly. I use it, as I have before in this column , because Trump meets many of the standard and widely respected definitions of the term.

As the celebrated Marxist playwright Bertolt Brecht wrote in 1935 , fascism "is a historic phase of capitalism the nakedest, most shameless, most oppressive and most treacherous form of capitalism." Trumpism, along with its international analogs in Brazil, India and Western Europe, neatly accords with Brecht's theory.

Trumpism similarly meets the definition of fascism offered by Robert Paxton in his classic 2004 study, " The Anatomy of Fascism ":

Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.

Trump and Trumpism similarly embody the 14 common factors of fascism identified by the great writer Umberto Eco in his 1995 essay, Ur Fascism :

Joe Biden is not a fascist. He is, instead, a standard-bearer of neoliberalism. As with fascism, there are different definitions of neoliberalism, prompting some exceptionally smug mainstream commentators like New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait to claim that the concept is little more than a left-wing insult. In truth, however, the concept describes an all-too-real set of governing principles.

To grasp what neoliberalism means, it's necessary to understand that it does not refer to a revival of the liberalism of the New Deal and New Society programs of the 1930s and 1960s. That brand of liberalism advocated the active intervention of the federal government in the economy to mitigate the harshest effects of private enterprise through such programs as Social Security, the National Labor Relations Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, Medicare, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That brand of liberalism imposed high taxes on the wealthy and significantly mitigated income inequality in America.

Neoliberalism , by contrast, deemphasizes federal economic intervention in favor of initiatives calling for deregulation, corporate tax cuts, private-public partnerships, and international trade agreements that augment the free flow of capital while undermining the power and influence of trade unions.

Until the arrival of Trump and his brand of neo-fascism, both major parties since Reagan had embraced this ideology. And while neoliberals remain more benign on issues of race and gender than Trump and Trumpism ever will be, neoliberalism offers little to challenge hierarchies based on social class. Indeed, income inequality accelerated during the Obama years and today rivals that of the Gilded Age .

As transformational a politician as Barack Obama was in terms of race, he too pursued a predominantly neoliberal agenda. The Affordable Care Act, Obama's singular domestic legislative achievement, is a perfect example of neoliberal private-public collaboration that left intact a health industry dominated by for-profit drug manufacturers and rapacious insurance companies, rather than setting the stage for Medicare for All, as championed by Sanders.

Biden never tires of reminding any audience willing to put up with his gaffes, verbal ticks and miscues that he served as Obama's vice president. Those ties are likely to remain the centerpiece of his campaign, as he promises a return to the civility of the Obama era and a restoration of America's standing in the world.

History, however, only moves forward. As charming and comforting as Biden's imagery of the past may be, it is, like Trump's darker outlook, a mirage. If Trump has taught us anything worthwhile, it is that the past cannot be replicated, no matter how much we might wish otherwise.

[Mar 03, 2020] Hillary Clinton regarding the primaries: "Let's follow the rules"

Mar 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

librul , Mar 3 2020 15:06 utc | 2

Quote of the Day
or
Quote of the Millennia?

Hillary Clinton regarding the primaries:

"Let's follow the rules"

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485646-hillary-clinton-responds-to-sanders-on-delegates-lets-follow-the-rules


Trailer Trash , Mar 3 2020 15:49 utc | 6

Is there any other nation state that has 50 separate official elections, mostly run and paid for by the public, just so a private club masquerading as a political party can select its leader? To the rest of the world, this must look completely insane, but few people anywhere even seem to notice how ridiculous it all looks.
Nathan Mulcahy , Mar 3 2020 22:54 utc | 62
Stop calling it USA. It is USO (United States of Oligarchs).

[Jan 22, 2020] Who is a real "Russian asset" is an on-trivial question ;-)

Jan 22, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

pparalegal , 1 hour ago link

Stay out of Arkansas.

Best President Ever , 2 hours ago link

Nobody likes Hillary even liberals like myself won't vote for her and that is why Trump won. She is the Russian asset.

RG_Canuck , 1 hour ago link

Please don't insult the Russians like that.

[Jan 18, 2020] Putin plants to prohibit dual citizens to serve in government

Highly recommended!
Jan 18, 2020 | www.unz.com

Peripatetic Commenter , says: Show Comment January 17, 2020 at 9:43 pm GMT

I don't think it will be long before we see Congress in the US calling for invasion of Russia on the grounds of a lack of diversity, lack of respect for LGBTP and so forth.

[Jan 17, 2020] I knew that if you kept it up, Putler would get around to targeting you.

Jan 17, 2020 | www.unz.com

iffen , says: January 15, 2020 at 5:55 pm GMT

Ban PMs, Ministers, governors, some mayors and judges, from having second citizenships of foreign residencies; moreover, Presidential candidates should have been resident in Russia for 25 years (previously 10 years) and never had a foreign citizenship.

I knew that if you kept it up, Putler would get around to targeting you.

[Jan 08, 2020] Three major Trump accomplishments

Jan 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Bubbles , Jan 8 2020 16:29 utc | 103

arby @90

Trump has accomplished 3 things in 3 years.

1. Being Santa Claus to Netanyahu, the far right and the very rich (Generous donors)
2. Doing the impossible, making Hillary look like the better of 2 terrible choices
3. Proving 42% of the American public aren't too swift.


[Jan 06, 2020] Who is in the pockets of Israel First nationalists?

Jan 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

Just passing through , says: Show Comment January 5, 2020 at 9:38 pm GMT

@gotmituns I think we all know the Orange One who is in the pockets of Jews and Israel First nationalists* will not actually pull out troops. I have also heard someone on this comments board says the agreement between the US and Iraq stipulates that the US has 1 year to withdraw if requested to do so by Iraq, so he will no doubt cite that reason for staying there as long as possible – which leaves ample time for more Jewish tricks and swindles à la USS Liberty or Lavon Affair.

The real question is whether or not his room-temperature IQ support base will pick up on the fact that their man in the White House is only increasing troop presence despite being told to piss off by the Iraqis, thus laying waste to the myth that Iraqis are begging the US to stay there. Will this be the broken promise that will finally deprogram the hordes of MAGAtards and awaken them from their slumber?

* – https://lobelog.com/trump-has-a-259-million-reason-to-bomb-iran/

[Jan 03, 2020] Is not it strange that Wikipeaida founder was former pornography seller and Bellingcat founder -- a female underwear salesman

Jan 03, 2020 | www.unz.com

Brabantian says: Show Comment

January 2, 2020 at 6:56 am GMT 200 Words Intelligence agencies recruit pornographers to lead their disinformation operations, apparently because porn purveyors are so lacking in ethics they will tell public lies about anything

The alleged 'founder' of Wikipedia is the arch-Zionist Jimmy 'Jimbo' Wales, who attends intimate birthday parties of Presidents of Israel

Wales was 'selected' for this role after being in the pornography-selling business

[Oct 19, 2019] Russian agents under every bed

Highly recommended!
Oct 19, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

S , Oct 19 2019 15:33 utc | 24

Okay, let's recap:

1) Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset (Clinton).
2) Jill Stein is a Russian asset (Clinton).
3) Donald Trump has been a Russian asset since 1987 ( Intelligencer ).
4) Rand Paul is "working for Vladimir Putin" ( McCain , Greg Olear ).
5) Bernie Sanders is "just a tool" to the Russians ( The Washington Post ).

I'm sure Bernie will turn from "just a tool" into "an asset" in no time if his poll numbers become too high. After all, nobody forgot his fraternizing with the enemy in a sauna in USSR !

[Sep 06, 2019] The only conceivable answer is that The New York Times is somehow complicit in these monstrous crimes

Sep 06, 2019 | www.unz.com

David Erickson , says: September 5, 2019 at 6:17 pm GMT

"The only conceivable answer is that The New York Times is somehow complicit in these monstrous crimes." – Bingo!
Robjil , says: September 5, 2019 at 6:23 pm GMT
...Soma the drug of the Brave New World gives one pleasure. Aldous Huxley died the same day as JFK, and CS Lewis....

Here are some quotes from Aldous Huxley...

http://www.globalistagenda.org/download/HuxleyTranscript.txt

In our time, we are endlessly brainwashed to love all the things that we can buy. Meanwhile, people are being bombed, terrorized, sanctioned, etc. across the world ... We can't complain since we got lots of toys to play with.

And here I think one has an enormous area in which the ultimate revolution could function very well indeed, an area in which a great deal of control could be used by not through terror, but by making life seem much more enjoyable than it normally does. Enjoyable to the point, where as I said before, Human beings come to love a state of things by which any reasonable and decent human standard they ought not to love and this I think is perfectly possible.

"Happiness" with our toys is being used to keep us quiet.

"The dictatorships of tomorrow will deprive men of their freedom, but will give them in exchange a happiness none the less real, as a subjective experience, for being chemically induced. The pursuit of happiness is one of the traditional rights of man; unfortunately, the achievement of happiness may turn out to be incompatible with another of man's rights -- namely, liberty."

...press has complete control to filter everything to look rosey for them, demonize any dissidents, and the masses fall for it. Why? They do not allow any counter arguments...

A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude.

...bread and circus propaganda. They want to keep that way. Any one who dissents is a "hater".

What I may call the messages of Brave New World, but it is possible to make people contented with their servitude. I think this can be done. I think it has been done in the past. I think it could be done even more effectively now because you can provide them with bread and circuses and you can provide them with endless amounts of distractions and propaganda.

...Pleasure trick keeps one from looking at what our rulers are doing.

As political and economic freedom diminishes, sexual freedom tends correspondingly to increase. And the dictator will do well to encourage that freedom it will help to reconcile his subjects to the servitude which is their fate.

...using their MSM to make massive herds of humans all over the earth to love their servitude to Zion uber alles.

The question of the next generation will not be one of how to liberate the masses, but rather, how to make them love their servitude

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/848465-the-lord-s-prayer-is-less-than-fifty-words-long-and

...rulers are using temptation to the max to rule us now.

"The Lord's Prayer is less than fifty words long, and six of those words are devoted to asking God not to lead us into temptation."

[Sep 01, 2019] The Dangerous Stalinism of the "Woke" Hard-Left by Alan M. Dershowitz

Notable quotes:
"... For Stalinist and "wokers," there is no uncertainty or fallibility. If they believe someone is guilty, he must be. Why do we need a cumbersome process for determining guilt? The identities of the accuser and accused are enough. Privileged white men are guilty perpetrators. Intersectional minorities are innocent victims. Who needs to know more? Any process, regardless of its fairness, favors the privileged over the unprivileged. ..."
"... We must always remember that it is not only the road to hell that is paved with good intentions. It is also the road to tyranny. ..."
Aug 31, 2019 | www.gatestoneinstitute.org

[Aug 25, 2019] Back then Allyssa Milano and others were telling us that we must believe all women (so now guilty until proven innocent), but those same women have been completely silent when one of Epstein's accusers said she was forced to have sex with Bill Richardson (D) and George Mitchell (D), both of whom denied the allegations.

Notable quotes:
"... I've always wondered if the whole MeToo movement was orchestrated by a hidden hand ..."
"... It seemed like the MeToo was weaponized ..."
"... Back then Allyssa Milano and others were telling us that we must believe all women (so now guilty until proven innocent), but those same women have been completely silent when one of Epstein's accusers said she was forced to have sex with Bill Richardson (D) and George Mitchell (D), both of whom denied the allegation ..."
Aug 25, 2019 | www.unz.com

Amanda , says: August 24, 2019 at 10:47 pm GMT

@Paul Tarsus Good question. Others have asked the same thing:

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/08/22/the-missing-howls-of-denunciation-over-major-sex-trafficking/

I've always wondered if the whole MeToo movement was orchestrated by a hidden hand – same for those horrible pussy hats they came out with after Trump was elected.

It seemed like the MeToo was weaponized and ready to go when Kavanaugh was nominated (and I'm not a fan–he's connected to Bush and the Patriot Act). They brought out Dr. Chrissy Fraud and Julie Swetnick (who seemed quite mentally unstable with her accusations that Kavanaugh was connected to gang rape parties).

Back then Allyssa Milano and others were telling us that we must believe all women (so now guilty until proven innocent), but those same women have been completely silent when one of Epstein's accusers said she was forced to have sex with Bill Richardson (D) and George Mitchell (D), both of whom denied the allegations.

And, of course, such accusations were barely mentioned in the MSM.

[Aug 20, 2019] BREAKING BOMBSHELL NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails Money Laundering, Sex Crimes with Children, Child Exploitation

There were no prosecution in three years since publication of this article
Notable quotes:
"... New York Police Department detectives and prosecutors working an alleged underage sexting case against former Congressman Anthony Weiner have turned over a newly-found laptop he shared with wife Huma Abedin to the FBI with enough evidence "to put Hillary (Clinton) and her crew away for life," NYPD sources told True Pundit. ..."
"... NYPD detectives and a NYPD Chief, the department's highest rank under Commissioner, said openly that if the FBI and Justice Department fail to garner timely indictments against Clinton and co- conspirators, NYPD will go public with the damaging emails now in the hands of FBI Director James Comey and many FBI field offices. ..."
"... Meanwhile, FBI sources said Abedin and Weiner were cooperating with federal agents, who have taken over the non-sexting portions the case from NYPD. The husband-and-wife Clinton insiders are both shopping for separate immunity deals, sources said. ..."
"... Prosecutors in the office of US Attorney Preet Bharara have issued a subpoena for Weiner's cell phones and travel records, law enforcement sources confirmed. NYPD said it planned to order the same phone and travel records on Clinton and Abedin, however, the FBI said it was in the process of requesting the identical records. Law enforcement sources are particularly interested in cell phone activity and travel to the Bahamas, U.S. Virgin Islands and other locations that sources would not divulge. ..."
"... Both NYPD and FBI sources confirm based on the new emails they now believe Hillary Clinton traveled as Epstein's guest on at least six occasions, probably more when all the evidence is combed, sources said. Bill Clinton, it has been confirmed in media reports spanning recent years, that he too traveled with Epstein over 20 times to the island. ..."
"... Because Weiner's campaign website is managed by the third-party consultant and political email guru, FBI agents are burdened with the task of trying to decipher just how many people had access to Weiner's server and emails and who were these people. Or if the server was ever compromised by hackers, or other actors. ..."
"... Abedin told FBI agents in an April interview that she didn't know how to consistently print documents or emails from her secure Dept. of State system. Instead, she would forward the sensitive emails to her yahoo, Clintonemail.com and her email linked to Weiner. ..."
"... Abedin said, according to FBI documents, she would then access those email accounts via webmail from an unclassified computer system at the State Dept. and print the documents, many of which were classified and top secret, from the largely unprotected webmail portals. ..."
Nov 02, 2016 | truepundit.com

New York Police Department detectives and prosecutors working an alleged underage sexting case against former Congressman Anthony Weiner have turned over a newly-found laptop he shared with wife Huma Abedin to the FBI with enough evidence "to put Hillary (Clinton) and her crew away for life," NYPD sources told True Pundit.

NYPD sources said Clinton's "crew" also included several unnamed yet implicated members of Congress in addition to her aides and insiders.

The NYPD seized the computer from Weiner during a search warrant and detectives discovered a trove of over 500,000 emails to and from Hillary Clinton, Abedin and other insiders during her tenure as secretary of state. The content of those emails sparked the FBI to reopen its defunct email investigation into Clinton on Friday.

But new revelations on the contents of that laptop, according to law enforcement sources, implicate the Democratic presidential candidate, her subordinates, and even select elected officials in far more alleged serious crimes than mishandling classified and top secret emails, sources said. NYPD sources said these new emails include evidence linking Clinton herself and associates to:

NYPD detectives and a NYPD Chief, the department's highest rank under Commissioner, said openly that if the FBI and Justice Department fail to garner timely indictments against Clinton and co- conspirators, NYPD will go public with the damaging emails now in the hands of FBI Director James Comey and many FBI field offices.

"What's in the emails is staggering and as a father, it turned my stomach," the NYPD Chief said. "There is not going to be any Houdini-like escape from what we found. We have copies of everything. We will ship them to Wikileaks or I will personally hold my own press conference if it comes to that."

The NYPD Chief said once Comey saw the alarming contents of the emails he was forced to reopen a criminal probe against Clinton.

"People are going to prison," he said.

Meanwhile, FBI sources said Abedin and Weiner were cooperating with federal agents, who have taken over the non-sexting portions the case from NYPD. The husband-and-wife Clinton insiders are both shopping for separate immunity deals, sources said.

"If they don't cooperate they are going to see long sentences," a federal law enforcement source said.

NYPD sources said Weiner or Abedin stored all the emails in a massive Microsoft Outlook program on the laptop. The emails implicate other current and former members of Congress and one high-ranking Democratic Senator as having possibly engaged in criminal activity too, sources said.

Prosecutors in the office of US Attorney Preet Bharara have issued a subpoena for Weiner's cell phones and travel records, law enforcement sources confirmed. NYPD said it planned to order the same phone and travel records on Clinton and Abedin, however, the FBI said it was in the process of requesting the identical records. Law enforcement sources are particularly interested in cell phone activity and travel to the Bahamas, U.S. Virgin Islands and other locations that sources would not divulge.

The new emails contain travel documents and itineraries indicating Hillary Clinton, President Bill Clinton, Weiner and multiple members of Congress and other government officials accompanied convicted pedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein on his Boeing 727 on multiple occasions to his private island in the US Virgin Islands, sources said. Epstein's island has also been dubbed Orgy Island or Sex Slave Island where Epstein allegedly pimps out underage girls and boys to international dignitaries.

Both NYPD and FBI sources confirm based on the new emails they now believe Hillary Clinton traveled as Epstein's guest on at least six occasions, probably more when all the evidence is combed, sources said. Bill Clinton, it has been confirmed in media reports spanning recent years, that he too traveled with Epstein over 20 times to the island.


Laptop Also Unveiled More Classified, Top Secret Breaches

According to other uncovered emails, Abedin and Clinton both sent and received thousands of classified and top secret documents to personal email accounts including Weiner's unsecured campaign web site which is managed by Democratic political consultants in Washington D.C.

Weiner maintained little known email accounts that the couple shared on the website anthonyweiner.com. Weiner, a former seven-term Democratic Congressman from New York, primarily used that domain to campaign for Congress and for his failed mayoral bid of New York City.

At one point, FBI sources said, Abedin and Clinton's classified and top secret State Department documents and emails were stored in Weiner's email on a server shared with a dog grooming service and a western Canadian bicycle shop.

However, Weiner and Abedin, who is Hillary Clinton's closest personal aide, weren't the only people with access to the Weiner's email account. Potentially dozens of unknown individuals had access to Abedin's sensitive State Department emails that were stored in Weiner's email account, FBI sources confirmed.

FEC records show Weiner paid more than $92,000 of congressional campaign funds to Anne Lewis Strategies LLC to manage his email and web site. According to FBI sources, the D.C.-based political consulting firm has served as the official administrator of the anthonyweiner.com domain since 2010, the same time Abedin was working at the State Department. This means technically Weiner and Abedin's emails, including top secret State Department emails, could have been accessed, printed, discussed, leaked, or distributed by untold numbers of personnel at the Anne Lewis consulting firm because they can control where the website and it emails are pointed, FBI sources said.

According to FBI sources, the bureau's newly-minted probe into Clinton's use and handling of emails while she served as secretary of state, has also been broadened to include investigating new email-related revelations, including:

Because Weiner's campaign website is managed by the third-party consultant and political email guru, FBI agents are burdened with the task of trying to decipher just how many people had access to Weiner's server and emails and who were these people. Or if the server was ever compromised by hackers, or other actors.

Abedin told FBI agents in an April interview that she didn't know how to consistently print documents or emails from her secure Dept. of State system. Instead, she would forward the sensitive emails to her yahoo, Clintonemail.com and her email linked to Weiner.

Abedin said, according to FBI documents, she would then access those email accounts via webmail from an unclassified computer system at the State Dept. and print the documents, many of which were classified and top secret, from the largely unprotected webmail portals.

Clinton did not have a computer in her office on Mahogany Row at the State Dept. so she was not able to read timely intelligence unless it was printed out for her, Abedin said. Abedin also said Clinton could not operate the secure State Dept. fax machine installed in her Chappaqua, NY home without assistance.

Perhaps more alarming, according to the FBI's 302 Report detailing its interview with Abedin, none of the multiple FBI agents and Justice Department officials who conducted the interview pressed Abedin to further detail the email address linked to Weiner. There was never a follow up, according to the 302 report.

But now, all that has changed, with the FBI's decision to reopen the Clinton email investigation and the husband and wife seeking immunity deals to testify against Clinton and other associates about the contents of the laptop's emails.

[May 12, 2019] Is rabid warmonger, neocon chickenhawk Bolton a swinger? That is a mental picture that s deeply disturbing yet funny at the same time

Highly recommended!
In this case he looks like Bill Clinton impersonalization ;-) That's probably how Adelson controls Bolton ;-)
Notable quotes:
"... Larry Flint had offered a Million dollars to anyone who had proof of republican sexual exploits. He was quickly fingered by someone who attended those clubs. He was forced to accept a temporary position and quietly resigned after a few months so as to avoid facing questions. ..."
May 12, 2019 | www.unz.com

FB , says: Website May 11, 2019 at 4:46 pm GMT

@J. Gutierrez Thanks for putting together this commentary J

Bolton a swinger ? LOL that's a mental picture that's deeply disturbing yet funny at the same time

J. Gutierrez , says: May 11, 2019 at 10:42 pm GMT

@FB Yeah brother, that POS was called out during his confirmation hearings during baby Bush's presidency. Larry Flint had offered a Million dollars to anyone who had proof of republican sexual exploits. He was quickly fingered by someone who attended those clubs. He was forced to accept a temporary position and quietly resigned after a few months so as to avoid facing questions.

Someone said they saw him proposition a teenage girl outside one of the swinger clubs he frequented.

Glad you enjoyed the piece take care brother.

[Nov 23, 2018] Sitting on corruption hill

Highly recommended!
Mueller is in the cave just below the Clinton foundation" sign. Entrance is behind the bag with the dollars ;-)
Nov 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

[Oct 24, 2017] Neo-Jacobins Demand Zero Tolerance, Or Else by Zachary Yost

Notable quotes:
"... The best label for these students is "Jacobin," even if it's unlikely many of them would refer to themselves that way. Historically, the Jacobins were a faction in the French Revolution that carried out the Reign of Terror and orchestrated the genocidal suppression of the reactionary Catholic and Monarchist counter-revolutionaries. While the original Jacobins are long gone, the spirit of their revolutionary ideology lingers, seeking nothing less than to end evil itself by sweeping away the status quo and replacing it with a new and just order. ..."
"... The Jacobins would rather embrace revolutionary violence and tear society apart than tolerate injustices and oppression temporarily while changes are made. In the end that leaves everyone, including the oppressed, worse off. ..."
"... Reflections on the Revolution in France ..."
"... why do the pampered Hollywood elite go out and march against Trump? It is surely not because he threatens their way of life or freedom to hit the casting couch ..."
"... The reality is that our country has become so divorced from anything real and meaningful in the lives of most people, particularly sheltered coastal elites and snowflake students, that they are desperately looking for something to gives their lives meaning. It just so happens that the imminent Nazi takeover of the local independent coffee house gives them the lightning rod they need. ..."
"... Are they dangerous? Sure. Are they potentially going to be a long term problem? Maybe, especially if America begins to split apart at the seams. They're not much different from ISIS, outside of a lack of religion. ..."
Oct 24, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com

They prefer fists and fires over words, but to what end?

Recently, the University of California at Berkeley paid approximately $600,000 for security so their chapter of Young Americans for Freedom could host conservative pundit Ben Shapiro without riots breaking out. Similarly, Reed College was forced to cancel the first meeting of its core "Introduction to Humanities: Ancient Greece and the Mediterranean" class -- which has been mandatory for freshman since 1943 -- after students objected that the course was Eurocentric and racist, and disrupted its classes. These protests are increasingly common on college campuses. They're almost always carried out in the name of denying alleged oppressors a platform to spew "hateful" rhetoric.

But it's a recent incident at the College of William and Mary that provides the best window into the disruptors' way of thinking. A speech by a representative of the ACLU was interrupted by protesters who objected to the group's defense of First Amendment rights for everyone -- including white supremacists -- and demanded zero tolerance for views they deem unacceptable. If one sorts through their various chants and screams, it becomes readily apparent why they reject free speech: they view it as an inherently conservative institution that stands in the way of "progress."

The best label for these students is "Jacobin," even if it's unlikely many of them would refer to themselves that way. Historically, the Jacobins were a faction in the French Revolution that carried out the Reign of Terror and orchestrated the genocidal suppression of the reactionary Catholic and Monarchist counter-revolutionaries. While the original Jacobins are long gone, the spirit of their revolutionary ideology lingers, seeking nothing less than to end evil itself by sweeping away the status quo and replacing it with a new and just order.

Campus Jacobins, like many of their fellow students, see ills like racism, sexism, and bigotry, and desire to end them. However, to the Jacobin mind, anything short of immediate and radical reform is tantamount to colluding with evil. With that in mind, it becomes clear why these students are opposed to free speech and open inquiry: trying to fix things by working out differences through words is a very slow process that allows injustices to continue existing in the short term. In the words of one student, trying to right wrongs through debate merely " tricks you into thinking social problems can be resolved if only people tolerate their oppression just a LITTLE while longer ."

The Jacobins would rather embrace revolutionary violence and tear society apart than tolerate injustices and oppression temporarily while changes are made. In the end that leaves everyone, including the oppressed, worse off. Slow positive change is much preferable to rapid and revolutionary upheaval. As Edmund Burke, the 18th-century political theorist and staunch opponent of the French Revolution, said in his Reflections on the Revolution in France , "mind must conspire with mind. Time is required to produce that union of minds which alone can produce all the good we aim at. Our patience will achieve more than our force."

Burke argues for caution, reflection, and restraint when seeking to make necessary changes, rather than revolutions that lead to more problems that before. This requires humility and the acknowledgement that one might not possess the ultimate answer to a problem. The open and free exchange of ideas is the best way of accomplishing such a task because it allows the aggregation of knowledge and perspectives to arrive together at a general conclusion, rather than violently enforcing one conclusion on everyone. Campus Jacobins have no patience for that; despite their youth and inexperience, they've concluded that they already possess all the information they need, and therefore there is no need for discussion, only compliance with their demands.

Unfortunately, the oft unsaid -- and perhaps unrealized -- implication of the rejection of free expression is that force and violence are the only alternatives to bring about change. If one is so supremely self-assured in one's conclusions that one sees those who hold differing views not as acting in good faith but rather perpetrating evil, then it follows that dissent should not be reasoned or compromised with but rather eradicated. When everyone does not carry out their demands merely because they demand them, the morally absolute are left only with upheaval.

Hopefully, the majority of college students see the destructive path that the campus Jacobins are heading down and choose to defend free speech and open inquiry, which has provided the basis for so much social harmony, despite our differences. If not, the future of civil coexistence looks bleak.

Zachary Yost is a Young Voices Advocate who lives and works in the Pittsburgh area. Hide 20 comments 20 Responses to Neo-Jacobins Demand Zero Tolerance, Or Else

John , says: October 23, 2017 at 10:12 pm

I have a relative who marches with these clowns, or at least is a fellow traveler. He lamented a few years ago that there was no great protest movement like the sixties to take part in, so he became a campus agitator himself.

Likewise, why do the pampered Hollywood elite go out and march against Trump? It is surely not because he threatens their way of life or freedom to hit the casting couch.

The reality is that our country has become so divorced from anything real and meaningful in the lives of most people, particularly sheltered coastal elites and snowflake students, that they are desperately looking for something to gives their lives meaning. It just so happens that the imminent Nazi takeover of the local independent coffee house gives them the lightning rod they need.

Are they dangerous? Sure. Are they potentially going to be a long term problem? Maybe, especially if America begins to split apart at the seams. They're not much different from ISIS, outside of a lack of religion. I don't think they are going to effect the widespread social change they want, other than hastening the collapse of the higher ed bubble as parents begin to hesitate sending their kids to these schools.

Harold Helbock , says: October 23, 2017 at 10:23 pm
The German National Socialists were just like the Jacobins. They had different ideas about what they wanted but their methods were identical. We need to be much less "understanding" of the current crop of fascists.
Siarlys Jenkins , says: October 23, 2017 at 11:03 pm
A modest contribution from a Burkean Bolshevik:

The Jacobins would rather embrace revolutionary violence and tear society apart than tolerate injustices and oppression temporarily while changes are made.

Unlike the original Jacobins, who were a product rather than the progenitors of a revolution that followed nobody's plan or principles, these "infantile disorders" as Lenin would have called them are puffed up fish in a very small pond. They have no mass base to support any kind of upsurge, peaceful or violent, and they wouldn't last long outside their campus cocoons. They wouldn't last long there if, e.g., Reed College would simply expel any student who disrupted a scheduled class. Think John Reed would have a problem with that? Joseph Stalin wouldn't.

Bill Johnson , says: October 23, 2017 at 11:07 pm
Classic moron conservatism. Left's war on "bigotry" and "hate" is legit, just needs to be slowed down a little
EliteCommInc. , says: October 23, 2017 at 11:27 pm
I take it then that you reject the violence of the founder's revolution.

Which i why i take the poition that the founders were not conservatives or conservatives who temporarily threw off reason . . . a temporary losing of their rational selves.

s you say according to Edmund Burke,

" . . . mind meets mind . . ."

Fran Macadam , says: October 23, 2017 at 11:50 pm
We'll find out if it has to play out unto Thermidor.
cka2nd , says: October 24, 2017 at 2:45 am
I've dealt with a lot of progressives and radicals over the years who dismissed the need for long-term thinking and planning and demanded immediate action and immediate responses from those in power, and I've often been critical of such thinking and of activism that seemed to be more about you making yourself feel useful than about really changing things. I can't say I've been right every time, but overall, I'm comfortable with that perspective.

However, Mr. Yost, you make some very broad generalizations when you say that "revolutionary violence In the end leaves everyone, including the oppressed, worse off." Revolutionary violence contributed to the raising up of the French peasantry that left it, as a class, far better off than it was under the Old Regime. The French Revolution was also defended by mobilized masses who defeated virtually every army that the European monarchies threw at them, and inspired the eventual replacement of monarchy by republican forms of governance, which begs the question whether many Frenchmen thought that revolutionary violence had been, on balance, worse for everyone.

I could make similar arguments about the American, Russian and Chinese revolutions – as horrible as the Great Chinese Famine of 1959-61 was, Maoist China still increased lifespans and improved overall quality of life more than India did in the same period – but let's move on to your argument that "Slow positive change is much preferable to rapid and revolutionary upheaval."

Generally speaking, I would agree with you, but if the change is snail-paced or virtually non-existent, and if the powers that be have proved resistant to Edmund Burke's "union of minds," then patience is just a fool's game. I've had friends argue that chattel slavery would have died out within two or three generations of the American Civil War, so the enormous waste of the war was unjustifiable. Yet the slaveowners were working actively against that fate, expanding the practice to Texas and looking to extend it further west and south, including into a conquered Mexico. Nor were they afraid of violating free speech rights or bending the Constitution and laws of the Republic to their benefit.

I, too, appreciate caution, reflection, restraint and humility, and the open and free exchange of ideas, but I also recognize that consensus does not always happen, no matter the quality of the debate and the mutual regard of the debaters. Most orthodox Trotskyists I know do not support shouting down or "no platforming" political opponents, even ones we may consider racist, homophobic or just bat-sh*t crazy (Ann Coulter, come on down!). But right-wingers with a history or current practice of violence are another story, which is why you'll see Trotskyists and other Marxists organizing for a MASS response when the Klan or the neo-Nazis are in town, ready and willing to help the masses drive them from the streets.

My problem with so many young "social justice warriors" today, and their mentors, is that they refuse to make the necessary distinctions between the ACLU – which has defended us, too, you know! – Ann Coulter and the KKK. You need to deepen your ability to make distinctions, too, I think.

By the way, the article on Reed College was very interesting and actually somewhat heartening. Thank you for the link.

cka2nd , says: October 24, 2017 at 3:29 am
By the way, I read your Op-Ed piece at the Washington Examiner about unions. Sigh.

Using seniority as the basis for awarding shifts or making seniority-based pay increases is not the perfect system, but it is the least imperfect one (that's usually an argument that appeals to conservatives, by the way). Along with across-the-board and cost-of-living wage increases, seniority pay can stabilize a workforce, reducing wasteful turnover and staff churning, and leave a better trained and more competent and knowledgeable staff in place. In an ideal world, merit pay would actually reward merit, but in the real world, it usually rewards friends and sycophants. And while any union shop steward can tell you tales of employees they wish they didn't have to defend and who should lose their jobs, due process means that the bosses have rules to follow when they want to fire anyone, including the excellent employee who somehow got under someone's bonnet.

You might also want to brush up on your understanding of "basic economics" as many studies have called into doubt the idea that increased minimum wages decrease job creation, even in those municipalities competing directly with lower minimum wage neighbors. And at some point, yielding to captial's demand for ever lower wages becomes a zero sum game and demands restrictions on capital's power, not on labor's price.

Moving on, if you think workers in highly skilled jobs or unions do not have to fear technological unemployment, I suggest you read about the automation of brokerage jobs on Wall Street and Amazon's on-going effort to automate human responses to language, grammar and thought.

Back to your appeal to "basic economics" – a favorite trope of libertarians, by the way, as if there are not different schools of economic thought, including within capitalist economic theory – if productivity and not unions were responsible for increased wages, why have wages fallen or remained stagnant for the last nearly 40 years even though productivity has gone through the roof while unions have been busted and capital deregulated?

The naivete of you arguing that "learning more skills and gaining workplace experience" is the best way to secure one's future might be charming in a post-Great Recession "gig" economy if you weren't also so insulting as to say that supporting unions means that you "are comfortable with stasis, enjoy having underachieving colleagues, and are largely lacking in ambition." My ambition is for workers, in general, to have a weekend, an annual vacation, paid sick time and personal time off, paid parental leave and wages enough to afford a home, car (and private school if I so choose), which would be a radical break from the employment trends of the last 40 years (so no stasis there).

And if all that and due process rights and solidarity come at the cost of living with the occasional underachieving colleague, so be it. It's not as if the ranks of management aren't filled with incompetents, or that being non-union ensures that all of one's colleagues will know what the hell they are doing. But I'll take the trade-offs that come with unions, thank you, and so would most American workers if they didn't face constant anti-union harassment or the threat of closing down the workplace and losing their jobs if they vote to unionize.

cka2nd , says: October 24, 2017 at 3:30 am
Welcome to TAC, Mr. Yost!
Thaomas , says: October 24, 2017 at 9:04 am
Colleges just need to stand firm, hire the extra security if necessary and prosecute those who disrupt if they break the law.
KD , says: October 24, 2017 at 9:24 am
Unfortunately, as Taleb Nassim has pointed out, in a democracy, the most intolerant groups always win in the end:

https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

Thinking that we are okay because there is a more tolerant majority is not true. The only way that there will be a balance is if members of the Right exert equal or greater intolerance than the Left.

The irony of the American politics is that the Right is always caricatured as "intolerant" and "bigots" when in fact they are clearly more tolerant and less bigoted than the Left, hence the increasing Leftward turn towards pervasive political correctness.

Further, these folks aren't Jacobins, they are revolutionary throat-slitting Communists in the image of Stalin and Lenin. If they win, there will be mass executions, gulags, and unimaginable state repression.

Stephen , says: October 24, 2017 at 10:16 am
Reading about our privileged "radicals," I'm reminded of Morgan Earp's remark in Tombstone: "They're bugs, Wyatt. There's no live-and-let-live with bugs." It's sad that college administrators are so spineless.
Valley Virginian , says: October 24, 2017 at 10:38 am
I take it then that you reject the violence of the founder's revolution.
EliteCommInc:
"Which i why i take the poition that the founders were not conservatives or conservatives who temporarily threw off reason . . . a temporary losing of their rational selves.

s you say according to Edmund Burke,

" . . . mind meets mind . . .""

They actually were conservatives/traditionalists. If you know history from the beginning of English settlement in America until and through the War for Independence, it is clear that they are. By the time of the Revolution, there were different American ways. Also, the Revolution was sparked by a Constitutional crisis (one of the British constitution). Parliament and King were subverting the British constitution, and interfering in the American ways that had developed since 1607. As M.E. Bradford said, it was a revolution prevented, not made. Essentially, it was a "revolution" to preserve the existing social and political ways of the different colonies.

Colonel Bogey , says: October 24, 2017 at 11:18 am
"They wouldn't last long if . . . Reed College would simply expel any student who disrupted a scheduled class. Think John Reed would have a problem with that? Joseph Stalin wouldn't."

I had to check to see whether Reed College could actually have been named for John Reed, but it wasn't, and I don't think Mr Jenkins was implying that it was. But that would have been wonderful irony along the lines of chickens coming home to roost. Now, William and Mary, on the other hand. . . . Name a college after illegitimate usurpers, and see what eventually happens!

Siarlys Jenkins , says: October 24, 2017 at 11:48 am
What cka2nd said.

Darn, Colonel Bogey, we've agree twice this month, and now you go trashing the Glorious Revolution. Very much in character though.

I believe that John Reed was related to the family that gave Reed College its name, but no, he wasn't a founder nor was it named after him.

Further, these folks aren't Jacobins, they are revolutionary throat-slitting Communists in the image of Stalin and Lenin.

Most of them are anarchists, and not particularly ideological anarchists at that. They have some commonality with the Red Guards in China -- which the communist party eventually had to forcibly dislodge from their roost on the campuseses, but they lack the administrative ability to maintain a Guglag. And they also lack a mass base.

(Captcha is going crazy again. Rein it in.)

Colm J , says: October 24, 2017 at 12:26 pm
This piece gives Antifa way too much credit for sincerity. Antifa never attack the rallies of Neocon politicians, or those of Democrat liberal interventionists – even though these folks' wars kill more non-whites in a day than the the various Klan groups managed in 150 years. And they never attack the meetings of the Israel first politicians in both parties – even though Israel is an open and
unabashed ethnostate.

It's quite clear therefore that Antifa are not an anti-racist group, but rather the street enforcers of the global super-capitalist class – whatever their ludicrous jargon ridden manifestoes may claim to the contrary

MM , says: October 24, 2017 at 1:33 pm
Some more recent developments:

09/29/17: Berkeley Antifa stalks Republican students at dinner
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=9873

09/27/17: Antifa Leader to White Ally: "If You're White, You're Inherently Racist It's In Your DNA"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/09/27/antifa_youre_white_youre_inherently_racist_its_in_your_dna.html# !

09/14/17: Criminal Justice Professor Justifies Antifa Violence And Jokes About Dead Cops
http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/14/criminal-justice-professor-justifies-antifa-violence-and-jokes-about-dead-cops/

08/28/17: Dartmouth professor calls Antifa violence "vital" form of "collective self defense"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/aug/28/mark-bray-dartmouth-professor-calls-vital-antifa-v/

08/25/17: Black Trump Supporter Sucker Punched By Antifa: If Situation Were Reversed, "I Would Be In The Spotlight On CNN"
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/08/25/black_trump_supporter_sucker-punched_by_antifa_if_situation_were_reversed_i_would_be_in_the_spotlight_in_cnn.html

08/17/17: Antifa Injures Reporter, Blames Him: "You Do Not Have the Right to Treat Us This Way"
http://freebeacon.com/politics/antifa-injures-reporter-blames-him/

Leaving aside the delicious irony that a self-described anti-authoritarian and anti-racist movement is itself explicitly authoritarian and racist, I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that Professor Robert Reich, formerly of the Clinton Administration and strong supporter of Bernie Sanders, considers this whole pheonomenon, all of it, to be nothing more than a right-wing false flag operation:

https://hotair.com/archives/2017/02/03/robert-reich-rumors-that-berkeley-riots-were-a-right-wing-false-flag-or-something/

Absolutely gorgeous

oath keeper , says: October 24, 2017 at 2:14 pm
"The reality is that our country has become so divorced from anything real and meaningful in the lives of most people, particularly sheltered coastal elites and snowflake students, that they are desperately looking for something to gives their lives meaning."

True enough. Sadly, there's a conservative version of this which is just as sick, un-American, and divorced from reality. And you can find it in certain places in the "heartland". For example, this law in Texas that you can't get hurricane relief unless you sign a document swearing not to (wait for it) boycott Israel . Whoever thought that one up ought to be deported to Tel Aviv and have their US citizenship revoked.

PR Doucette , says: October 24, 2017 at 2:23 pm
We all need to stop and take a breath and remember back to when we were in school. As a member of the so-called Boomer generation I can well recall the protests over everything from civil rights, the war in Vietnam, and whether somebody with socialist/communist sympathies should be allowed to speak on campus and how parents, the press and politicians of that time were sure that all these protests a sure sign that America was going to hell in a hand basket. Well guess what? The vast majority of those young Boomers who directly or indirectly supported all those protests have become the biggest defenders of the status quo and now bemoan that their children or grand children are protesting against the status quo.

Instead of bemoaning that some of the protesters consider a course on democracy to be euro-centric as a sign of the decay of youth perhaps the better response would be to admit that yes the course is euro-centric but ask for examples of any other culture that has made any significant contribution to our understanding of what democracy means today. Just as the concept of the zero in math was developed by Arab mathematicians, many cultures have made contributions to society but in the case of democracy, for better or worse it was European thinkers who developed the concept of democracy.

Instead of worrying what the demands of today's protesters mean for the future we would be wise to remember that in youth all issues have hard edges and that just like we Boomers today's protesters will become the next generation to face the protests of their children and they will be just a perplexed by some of their protests.

TheIdiot , says: October 24, 2017 at 3:21 pm
cda2nd, you speak well for the left. As a Burkean conservative, I'm glad to hear your voice. While we likely disagree on solutions, we likely agree on the problems.

The real reason for all this craziness is our federal reserve. It has allowed this rampant crony capitalism that keeps the government from reining in monopolies. It allows governments and corporations to live beyond their means while holding the average Joe down. Not having real money has kept wages stagnant while financial assets and political contributions have continued to rise. It is the Feds fault. They have insulated us from a realistic risk-reward environment.

In order to make the world safer, first you need to make it more dangerous.

We try to keep everyone safe by eliminating the consequences of unsafe behavior. Better for there to be consequences for acting unsafely. In Pittsburgh for instance, Mr Yost will recognize, people don't text and drive. It's too dangerous; they might die.

[Dec 31, 2016] What Happened to Obamas Passion

This was written in 2011 but it summarizes Obama presidency pretty nicely, even today. Betrayer in chief, the master of bait and switch. That is the essence of Obama legacy. On "Great Democratic betrayal"... Obama always was a closet neoliberal and neocon. A stooge of neoliberal financial oligarchy, a puppet, if you want politically incorrect term. He just masked it well during hist first election campaigning as a progressive democrat... And he faced Romney in his second campaign, who was even worse, so after betraying American people once, he was reelected and did it twice. Much like Bush II. He like another former cocaine addict -- George W Bush has never any intention of helping American people, only oligarchy.
Notable quotes:
"... IN contrast, when faced with the greatest economic crisis, the greatest levels of economic inequality, and the greatest levels of corporate influence on politics since the Depression, Barack Obama stared into the eyes of history and chose to avert his gaze. ..."
"... We (yes, we) recognise that capitalism is the most efficient way to maximise overall prosperity and quality of life. But we also recognise that unfettered, it will ravage the environment, abuse labor, and expand income disparity until violence or tragedy (or both) ensues. ..."
"... These are the lessons we've learned since the industrial revolution, and they're the ones that we should be drawing from the past decade. We recognise that we need a strong federal government to check these tendencies, and to strike a stable, sustainable balance between prosperity, community, opportunity, wealth, justice, freedom. We need a voice to fill the moral vacuum that has allowed the Koch/Tea/Fox Party to emerge and grab power. ..."
"... Americans know this---including, of course, President Obama (see his April 13 speech at GW University). But as this article by Dr. Westen so effectively shows, Obama is incompetent to lead us back ..."
"... he is not competent to lead us back to a state of American morality, where government is the protector of those who work hard, and the provider of opportunity to all Americans. ..."
"... I've heard him called a mediator, a conciliator, a compromiser, etc. Those terms indicate someone who is bringing divergent views together and moving us along. That's part of what a leader does, though not all. Yet I don't think he's even lived up to his reputation as a mediator. ..."
"... Almost three years after I voted for Obama, I still don't know what he's doing other than trying to help the financial industry: the wealthy who benefit most from it and the technocrats who run it for them. But average working people, people like myself and my daughter and my grandson, have not been helped. We are worse off than before. And millions of unemployed and underemployed are even worse off than my family is. ..."
"... So whatever else he is (and that still remains a mystery to me), President Obama is not the leader I thought I was voting for. ..."
"... I knew that Obama was a charade early on when giving a speech about the banking failures to the nation, instead of giving the narrative Mr. Westen accurately recommended on the origins of the orgy of greed that just crippled our economy and caused suffering for millions of Americans ..."
"... He should have been condemning the craven, wanton, greed of nihilistic financial gangsters who hijacked our economy. Instead he seemed to be calling for all Americans not to hate rich people. That was not the point. Americans don't hate rich people, but they should hate rich people who acquire their wealth at the expense of the well being of an entire nation through irresponsible, avaricious, and in some instances illegal practices, and legally bribe politicians to enact laws which allow them to run amok over our economy without supervision or regulation. ..."
"... I knew then that Obama was either a political lemon, in over his head, an extremely conflict averse neurotic individual with a compulsive need for some delusional ideal of neutrality in political and social relations, or a political phony beholden to the same forces that almost destroyed the country as Republicans are. ..."
Aug 06, 2011 | nytimes.com

When Barack Obama rose to the lectern on Inauguration Day, the nation was in tatters. Americans were scared and angry. The economy was spinning in reverse. Three-quarters of a million people lost their jobs that month. Many had lost their homes, and with them the only nest eggs they had. Even the usually impervious upper middle class had seen a decade of stagnant or declining investment, with the stock market dropping in value with no end in sight. Hope was as scarce as credit.

In that context, Americans needed their president to tell them a story that made sense of what they had just been through, what caused it, and how it was going to end. They needed to hear that he understood what they were feeling, that he would track down those responsible for their pain and suffering, and that he would restore order and safety. What they were waiting for, in broad strokes, was a story something like this:

"I know you're scared and angry. Many of you have lost your jobs, your homes, your hope. This was a disaster, but it was not a natural disaster. It was made by Wall Street gamblers who speculated with your lives and futures. It was made by conservative extremists who told us that if we just eliminated regulations and rewarded greed and recklessness, it would all work out. But it didn't work out. And it didn't work out 80 years ago, when the same people sold our grandparents the same bill of goods, with the same results. But we learned something from our grandparents about how to fix it, and we will draw on their wisdom. We will restore business confidence the old-fashioned way: by putting money back in the pockets of working Americans by putting them back to work, and by restoring integrity to our financial markets and demanding it of those who want to run them. I can't promise that we won't make mistakes along the way. But I can promise you that they will be honest mistakes, and that your government has your back again." A story isn't a policy. But that simple narrative - and the policies that would naturally have flowed from it - would have inoculated against much of what was to come in the intervening two and a half years of failed government, idled factories and idled hands. That story would have made clear that the president understood that the American people had given Democrats the presidency and majorities in both houses of Congress to fix the mess the Republicans and Wall Street had made of the country, and that this would not be a power-sharing arrangement. It would have made clear that the problem wasn't tax-and-spend liberalism or the deficit - a deficit that didn't exist until George W. Bush gave nearly $2 trillion in tax breaks largely to the wealthiest Americans and squandered $1 trillion in two wars.

And perhaps most important, it would have offered a clear, compelling alternative to the dominant narrative of the right, that our problem is not due to spending on things like the pensions of firefighters, but to the fact that those who can afford to buy influence are rewriting the rules so they can cut themselves progressively larger slices of the American pie while paying less of their fair share for it.

But there was no story - and there has been none since.

In similar circumstances, Franklin D. Roosevelt offered Americans a promise to use the power of his office to make their lives better and to keep trying until he got it right. Beginning in his first inaugural address, and in the fireside chats that followed, he explained how the crash had happened, and he minced no words about those who had caused it. He promised to do something no president had done before: to use the resources of the United States to put Americans directly to work, building the infrastructure we still rely on today. He swore to keep the people who had caused the crisis out of the halls of power, and he made good on that promise. In a 1936 speech at Madison Square Garden, he thundered, "Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me - and I welcome their hatred."

When Barack Obama stepped into the Oval Office, he stepped into a cycle of American history, best exemplified by F.D.R. and his distant cousin, Teddy. After a great technological revolution or a major economic transition, as when America changed from a nation of farmers to an urban industrial one, there is often a period of great concentration of wealth, and with it, a concentration of power in the wealthy. That's what we saw in 1928, and that's what we see today. At some point that power is exercised so injudiciously, and the lives of so many become so unbearable, that a period of reform ensues - and a charismatic reformer emerges to lead that renewal. In that sense, Teddy Roosevelt started the cycle of reform his cousin picked up 30 years later, as he began efforts to bust the trusts and regulate the railroads, exercise federal power over the banks and the nation's food supply, and protect America's land and wildlife, creating the modern environmental movement.

Those were the shoes - that was the historic role - that Americans elected Barack Obama to fill. The president is fond of referring to "the arc of history," paraphrasing the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s famous statement that "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." But with his deep-seated aversion to conflict and his profound failure to understand bully dynamics - in which conciliation is always the wrong course of action, because bullies perceive it as weakness and just punch harder the next time - he has broken that arc and has likely bent it backward for at least a generation.

When Dr. King spoke of the great arc bending toward justice, he did not mean that we should wait for it to bend. He exhorted others to put their full weight behind it, and he gave his life speaking with a voice that cut through the blistering force of water cannons and the gnashing teeth of police dogs. He preached the gospel of nonviolence, but he knew that whether a bully hid behind a club or a poll tax, the only effective response was to face the bully down, and to make the bully show his true and repugnant face in public.

IN contrast, when faced with the greatest economic crisis, the greatest levels of economic inequality, and the greatest levels of corporate influence on politics since the Depression, Barack Obama stared into the eyes of history and chose to avert his gaze. Instead of indicting the people whose recklessness wrecked the economy, he put them in charge of it. He never explained that decision to the public - a failure in storytelling as extraordinary as the failure in judgment behind it. Had the president chosen to bend the arc of history, he would have told the public the story of the destruction wrought by the dismantling of the New Deal regulations that had protected them for more than half a century. He would have offered them a counternarrative of how to fix the problem other than the politics of appeasement, one that emphasized creating economic demand and consumer confidence by putting consumers back to work. He would have had to stare down those who had wrecked the economy, and he would have had to tolerate their hatred if not welcome it. But the arc of his temperament just didn't bend that far.

Michael August 7, 2011

Eloquently expressed and horrifically accurate, this excellent analysis articulates the frustration that so many of us have felt watching Mr...

Bill Levine August 7, 2011

Very well put. I know that I have been going through Kübler-Ross's stages of grief ever since the foxes (a.k.a. Geithner and Summers) were...

AnAverageAmerican August 7, 2011

"In that context, Americans needed their president to tell them a story that made sense of what they had just been through, what caused it,...

cdearman Santa Fe, NM August 7, 2011

Unfortunately, the Democratic Congress of 2008-2010, did not have the will to make the economic and social program decisions that would have improved the economic situation for the middle-class; and it is becoming more obvious that President Obama does not have the temperament to publicly push for programs and policies that he wants the congress to enact.
The American people have a problem: we reelect Obama and hope for the best; or we elect a Republican and expect the worst. There is no question that the Health Care law that was just passed would be reversed; Medicare and Medicare would be gutted; and who knows what would happen to Social Security. You can be sure, though, that business taxes and regulation reforms would not be in the cards and those regulations that have been enacted would be reversed. We have traveled this road before and we should be wise enough not to travel it again!

SP California August 7, 2011

Brilliant analysis - and I suspect that a very large number of those who voted for President Obama will recognize in this the thoughts that they have been trying to ignore, or have been trying not to say out loud. Later historians can complete this analysis and attempt to explain exactly why Mr. Obama has turned out the way he has - but right now, it may be time to ask a more relevant and urgent question.

If it is not too late, will a challenger emerge in time before the 2012 elections, or will we be doomed to hold our noses and endure another four years of this?

farospace san francisco August 7, 2011

Very eloquent and exactly to the point. Like many others, I was enthralled by the rhetoric of his story, making the leap of faith (or hope) that because he could tell his story so well, he could tell, as you put it, "the story the American people were waiting to hear."

Disappointment has darkened into disillusion, disillusion into a species of despair. Will I vote for Barack Obama again? What are the options?

Richard Katz American in Oxford, UK August 7, 2011

This is the most brilliant and tragic story I have read in a long time---in fact, precisely since I read when Ill Fares the Land by Tony Judt. When will a leader emerge with a true moral vision for the federal government and for our country? Someone who sees government as a balance to capitalism, and a means to achieve the social and economic justice that we (yes, we) believe in? Will that leadership arrive before parts of America come to look like the dystopia of Johannesburg?

We (yes, we) recognise that capitalism is the most efficient way to maximise overall prosperity and quality of life. But we also recognise that unfettered, it will ravage the environment, abuse labor, and expand income disparity until violence or tragedy (or both) ensues.

These are the lessons we've learned since the industrial revolution, and they're the ones that we should be drawing from the past decade. We recognise that we need a strong federal government to check these tendencies, and to strike a stable, sustainable balance between prosperity, community, opportunity, wealth, justice, freedom. We need a voice to fill the moral vacuum that has allowed the Koch/Tea/Fox Party to emerge and grab power.

Americans know this---including, of course, President Obama (see his April 13 speech at GW University). But as this article by Dr. Westen so effectively shows, Obama is incompetent to lead us back to America's traditional position on the global economic/political spectrum. He's brilliant and eloquent. He's achieved personal success that is inspirational. He's done some good things as president. But he is not competent to lead us back to a state of American morality, where government is the protector of those who work hard, and the provider of opportunity to all Americans.

Taxes, subsidies, entitlements, laws... these are the tools we have available to achieve our national moral vision. But the vision has been muddled (hijacked?) and that is our biggest problem. -->

An Ordinary American Prague August 7, 2011

I voted for Obama. I thought then, and still think, he's a decent person, a smart person, a person who wants to do the best he can for others. When I voted for him, I was thinking he's a centrist who will find a way to unite our increasingly polarized and ugly politics in the USA. Or if not unite us, at least forge a way to get some important things done despite the ugly polarization.

And I must confess, I have been disappointed. Deeply so. He has not united us. He has not forged a way to accomplish what needs to be done. He has not been a leader.

I've heard him called a mediator, a conciliator, a compromiser, etc. Those terms indicate someone who is bringing divergent views together and moving us along. That's part of what a leader does, though not all. Yet I don't think he's even lived up to his reputation as a mediator.

Almost three years after I voted for Obama, I still don't know what he's doing other than trying to help the financial industry: the wealthy who benefit most from it and the technocrats who run it for them. But average working people, people like myself and my daughter and my grandson, have not been helped. We are worse off than before. And millions of unemployed and underemployed are even worse off than my family is.

So whatever else he is (and that still remains a mystery to me), President Obama is not the leader I thought I was voting for. Which leaves me feeling confused and close to apathetic about what to do as a voter in 2012. More of the same isn't worth voting for. Yet I don't see anyone out there who offers the possibility of doing better.

martin Portland, Oregon August 7, 2011

This was an extraordinarily well written, eloquent and comprehensive indictment of the failure of the Obama presidency.

If a credible primary challenger to Obama ever could arise, the positions and analysis in this column would be all he or she would need to justify the Democratic party's need to seek new leadership.

I knew that Obama was a charade early on when giving a speech about the banking failures to the nation, instead of giving the narrative Mr. Westen accurately recommended on the origins of the orgy of greed that just crippled our economy and caused suffering for millions of Americans, he said "we don't disparage wealth in America." I was dumbfounded.

He should have been condemning the craven, wanton, greed of nihilistic financial gangsters who hijacked our economy. Instead he seemed to be calling for all Americans not to hate rich people. That was not the point. Americans don't hate rich people, but they should hate rich people who acquire their wealth at the expense of the well being of an entire nation through irresponsible, avaricious, and in some instances illegal practices, and legally bribe politicians to enact laws which allow them to run amok over our economy without supervision or regulation.

I knew then that Obama was either a political lemon, in over his head, an extremely conflict averse neurotic individual with a compulsive need for some delusional ideal of neutrality in political and social relations, or a political phony beholden to the same forces that almost destroyed the country as Republicans are.

Perhaps all of these are true.

[Dec 31, 2016] Like Iraq WMD Fiasco, Russia Story Does Not Add Up

If such attempts were really registered, the question is were those attempts to hack US sites from Russian IP space a false flag operation, probably with participation of Ukrainian secret services? '
As one commenter noted: "The Ukrainian government have been trying to drive a wedge between the West and Russia for years for their own political advantage."
If so what is the agenda outside obvious attempt to poison Us-Russian relations just before Trump assumes presidency. Neocon in Washington are really afraid losing this plush positions. And there is the whole colony of such "national security professionals" in Washington DC. For example Robert Kagan can't do anything useful outside his favorite Russophobic agenda and would be an unemployed along with his wife, who brought us Ukrainian disaster.
Notable quotes:
"... President Obama issued a terse statement seeming to blame Russia for the hack of the Democratic National Committee emails. "These data theft and disclosure activities could only have been directed by the highest levels of the Russian government," he wrote. ..."
"... The problem with this story is that, like the Iraq-WMD mess, it takes place in the middle of a highly politicized environment during which the motives of all the relevant actors are suspect. Nothing quite adds up. ..."
"... Now we have this sanctions story, which presents a new conundrum. It appears that a large segment of the press is biting hard on the core allegations of electoral interference emanating from the Obama administration. ..."
"... Did the Russians do it? Very possibly, in which case it should be reported to the max. But the press right now is flying blind. ..."
"... Maybe the Russians did hack the DNC, but the WikiLeaks material actually came from someone else? There is even a published report to that effect, with a former British ambassador as a source, not that it's any more believable than anything else here. ..."
"... We ought to have learned from the Judith Miller episode. Not only do governments lie, they won't hesitate to burn news agencies. In a desperate moment, they'll use any sucker they can find to get a point across. ..."
"... The Joint Analysis Report from the FBI contains an appendix that lists hundreds of IP addresses that were supposedly "used by Russian civilian and military intelligence services." While some of those IP addresses are from Russia, the majority are from all over the world, which means that the hackers constantly faked their location. ..."
"... "If I was the Chinese and I wanted to make it look like the Russians did it, I would use Russian language within the code, I would use Russian techniques of breaking into the organization," McAfee said, adding that, in the end, "there simply is no way to assign a source for any attack." ..."
"... I have a problem understanding why the powers that be can't understand the widening gap between their on podium statements and the average persons view. Are they hoping to brainwash, or really believe it, or just leaving a video record for posterity that might sway historical interpretation of the current time? ..."
"... A little OT, but how many people realize that Israel (less than half the population of the former Palestine) has taken complete control of ALL water and has decreed that 3% of that water may be directed to the Palestinians! ..."
"... It's been said that on average Americans are like mushrooms – "Keep 'em in the dark and feed 'em shit!" ..."
"... And THAT, from what I've read in OPEN literature (obviously) about what is known by our cyber threat intel community, read on tech sites, and seen on the outstanding documentary program CyberWar about the Eastern European hacking community, is a OUTRIGHT BLATANT LIE. ..."
"... NOTE that he may actually believe that because that is what he may have been TOLD, just as Bush was told there were WMDs in Iraq, but as I've pointed out, the clumsy errors allowing the malware to be so very EASILY traced back to "supposedly" Russia are beyond belief for any state-sponsored outfit, especially a Russian effort. ..."
"... Note that the user info for TWO BILLION Yahoo email accounts was stolen and they left no traces which then led the FBI to conclude that it must have been "state sponsored." ..."
"... We are left with two basic options. Either they are simply stupid or their is a larger agenda at hand. I don't believe they are stupid. They have been setting fires all around this election for months, none of them effective by themselves, but ALL reinforcing the general notion that Trump is unfit and illegitimate. ..."
"... I do not believe this is just random panic and hyperbole. They are "building" something. ..."
"... This is what is must have been like being a Soviet Citizen in 1989 or so. The official media was openly laughed at because its lies were so preposterous. ..."
"... Sadly, the JAR, as the Joint Analysis Report is called, does little to end the debate. Instead of providing smoking guns that the Russian government was behind specific hacks, it largely restates previous private-sector claims without providing any support for their validity. Even worse, it provides an effective bait and switch by promising newly declassified intelligence into Russian hackers' "tradecraft and techniques" and instead delivering generic methods carried out by just about all state-sponsored hacking groups." ..."
"... WORSE than "delivering generic methods carried out by just about all state-sponsored hacking groups." It should have said "by just about anyone using 'in the wild' malware tools." ..."
"... The Russians probably have a lot of information about USG employees, contractors, etc, via hacking, recording, etc than Wikileaks. But, as a general rule, intelligence agencies do not dump it into the public domain because you don't want a potential adversary know what you know about him lest he investigate and close off the means of obtaining that information. The leaks came from elsewhere. ..."
"... Smells like a "false flag" operation, like the USA/NATO Operation Gladio in Europe. ..."
"... McCain and the War Hawks have had it out for Russia for a long time, and the Neo-cons have been closing in on the borders of Russia for some time. What will be interesting is when Trump meets with the CIA/NSA et al. for intel briefings on the alleged hacking. Hopefully, Trump will bring along VP Pence, Mad Dog and the other Marine generals (appointees) for advice. I suspect that the "false flag" nature of the hacking excuse will be evident and revealed as the pretext for the Neo-con anti-Russia agenda moving forward. ..."
"... McCain is the real thug, and an interferer in foreign elections (Kiev) and seems to have no real scruples. ..."
"... After Victoria Nuland brags about the USA spending $5 billion to overthrow the elected Ukraine government, how these Russia-phobes have any credibility is beyond me. Just shows that the consolidation of the media into a few main propaganda outlets under Bill Clinton (who also brought the Neo-cons into foreign policy dominance) has reached its logical apex. The Swamp is indeed a stinking, Corrupt miasma. ..."
"... Russia a country of 170 million surrounded by NATO military bases and 800 million people in the EU and USA is the threat? The US alone spends 12 times as much on its military annually than Russia. It's not Russia invading and overthrowing secular governments in the Muslim world. ..."
"... If I remember correctly the CIA claimed their intelligence sources came from unspecified 'allies'. It seems rather crucial to establish who these allies actually are. If it were Germany that would be one thing, however it is more than likely to be the Ukraine. ..."
"... So if Obama had actually produced evidence that the Russians had hacked Hilary's illegal, unprotected email setup in her Chapaqua basement/closet how would that change the ***content*** of the emails? It wouldn't. ..."
"... Obama is failing to convince the world that Russia is a bunch of whistle blowers on his corrupt regime. All of the emails detailing corruption and fraud are true (unchallenged), however Obama wants to suggest they were obtained illegally from an illegal email server? That is Obama's bullshit defense for the corrupt behavior? ..."
Dec 30, 2016 | mishtalk.com

Yesterday, President Obama expelled 35 Russian "Operatives" from the Russian Embassy .

Is there any evidence those expelled are "intelligence operatives"? Any hard evidence Russia was behind the Hillary hacks? Any credible evidence that Putin himself is to blame?

The answers are No, No, and No. Yet, once again the American press is again asked to co-sign a dubious intelligence assessment.

... ... ....

Something Stinks

The Rolling Stone comments Something About This Russia Story Stinks

In an extraordinary development Thursday, the Obama administration announced a series of sanctions against Russia. Thirty-five Russian nationals will be expelled from the country. President Obama issued a terse statement seeming to blame Russia for the hack of the Democratic National Committee emails. "These data theft and disclosure activities could only have been directed by the highest levels of the Russian government," he wrote.

The problem with this story is that, like the Iraq-WMD mess, it takes place in the middle of a highly politicized environment during which the motives of all the relevant actors are suspect. Nothing quite adds up.

If the American security agencies had smoking-gun evidence that the Russians had an organized campaign to derail the U.S. presidential election and deliver the White House to Trump, then expelling a few dozen diplomats after the election seems like an oddly weak and ill-timed response. Voices in both parties are saying this now.

Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham noted the "small price" Russia paid for its "brazen attack." The Democratic National Committee, meanwhile, said Thursday that taken alone, the Obama response is " insufficient " as a response to "attacks on the United States by a foreign power."

The "small price" is an eyebrow-raiser.

Adding to the problem is that in the last months of the campaign, and also in the time since the election, we've seen an epidemic of factually loose, clearly politically motivated reporting about Russia. Democrat-leaning pundits have been unnervingly quick to use phrases like "Russia hacked the election."

This has led to widespread confusion among news audiences over whether the Russians hacked the DNC emails (a story that has at least been backed by some evidence, even if it hasn't always been great evidence ), or whether Russians hacked vote tallies in critical states (a far more outlandish tale backed by no credible evidence ).

As noted in The Intercept and other outlets, an Economist/YouGov poll conducted this month shows that 50 percent of all Clinton voters believe the Russians hacked vote tallies.

And reports by some Democrat-friendly reporters – like Kurt Eichenwald, who has birthed some real head-scratchers this year, including what he admitted was a baseless claim that Trump spent time in an institution in 1990 – have attempted to argue that Trump surrogates may have been liaising with the Russians because they either visited Russia or appeared on the RT network. Similar reporting about Russian scheming has been based entirely on unnamed security sources.

Now we have this sanctions story, which presents a new conundrum. It appears that a large segment of the press is biting hard on the core allegations of electoral interference emanating from the Obama administration.

Did the Russians do it? Very possibly, in which case it should be reported to the max. But the press right now is flying blind.

Maybe the Russians did hack the DNC, but the WikiLeaks material actually came from someone else? There is even a published report to that effect, with a former British ambassador as a source, not that it's any more believable than anything else here.

We just don't know, which is the problem.

We ought to have learned from the Judith Miller episode. Not only do governments lie, they won't hesitate to burn news agencies. In a desperate moment, they'll use any sucker they can find to get a point across.

Where the Hell is the Evidence?

'I Can Guarantee You, It Was Not the Russians'

John McAfee, founder of the security firm McAfee Associates, says 'I Can Guarantee You, It Was Not the Russians' .

The Joint Analysis Report from the FBI contains an appendix that lists hundreds of IP addresses that were supposedly "used by Russian civilian and military intelligence services." While some of those IP addresses are from Russia, the majority are from all over the world, which means that the hackers constantly faked their location.

McAfee argues that the report is a "fallacy," explaining that hackers can fake their location, their language, and any markers that could lead back to them. Any hacker who had the skills to hack into the DNC would also be able to hide their tracks, he said

"If I was the Chinese and I wanted to make it look like the Russians did it, I would use Russian language within the code, I would use Russian techniques of breaking into the organization," McAfee said, adding that, in the end, "there simply is no way to assign a source for any attack."

Question of Patriotism

It's not patriotic to accept accusations as facts, given US history of lies, deceit, meddling, and wars.

Related

keepitsimple , December 30, 2016 1:41:03 at 1:41 PM
The gullibility and ignorance of the typical media lapdog is appalling, and whores like McCain and Graham will use them shamelessly to promote their twisted, warmongering agenda. The same old story, over and over again.
Bobdough , December 30, 2016 10:51:52 at 10:51 PM
Not gullibilty, but complicity
The_Fish , December 30, 2016 2:07:19 at 2:07 PM
I have a problem understanding why the powers that be can't understand the widening gap between their on podium statements and the average persons view. Are they hoping to brainwash, or really believe it, or just leaving a video record for posterity that might sway historical interpretation of the current time?

No problem if they deliver proof.

James Greenberg , December 30, 2016 6:30:47 at 6:30 PM
Read 1984. It will explain EVERYTHING.
The_Fish , December 30, 2016 7:05:07 at 7:05 PM
Net control very likely in Europe soon with public administration of the web/content. Might at least help reduce the unemployment rate. Looked over the 2016 Bilderberg attendees too. MSM attendees interesting vs political bias they exhibit.

Whoever thinks there aren't people behind the scenes with a plan is naive and woe betide anyone upsetting that plan.

Crysangle , December 30, 2016 8:56:05 at 8:56 PM
Unemployment rate read last refuge from the official economy. Not the alt. web that takes away motivation, it is a pressure valve for people who find the official direction nothing short of insulting. The majority of social media users won't be distracted.

Noticed zh on Italy for you if you had not picked it up

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-30/italy-urges-europe-begin-censoring-free-speech-internet

Michael G , December 31, 2016 9:53:11 at 9:53 AM
A little OT, but how many people realize that Israel (less than half the population of the former Palestine) has taken complete control of ALL water and has decreed that 3% of that water may be directed to the Palestinians!

Over ten million get running water for 12 hrs a week, while in Israel (borders move every day as the world says nothing) there are no water restrictions zero! So, while Palestinians struggle to live in hot barren desert conditions (food and medicine is also denied children die of treatable cancer often as medication is blocked), a 5 min drive away millions of gallons are used to create a green, lush paradise for the Jewish Masters!

Did you know US laws were changed in 1968 to allow "Dual Citizens" to be elected and appointed to government positions and today many of the top posts are citizens of Israel and America WTF?

Trump needs to make a daily dose of Red Pills the law

Michael G , December 31, 2016 9:58:31 at 9:58 AM
Oops the 10M fig is a bit high but it's at least double the Jewish population, yet they get 97% this is slow moving genocide yet it's never even acknowledged
Greg , December 30, 2016 2:07:48 at 2:07 PM
Syria is about gas pipelines. Corporations want to profit from the gas pipeline through the region and wr the people are supposed to send our children to war over it and pay taxes tpbsupport the effort. Rissia wants pipelines from their country under the Black sea and Irans pipelines to the north. The US is supporting Qatar pipeline and LNG from our own shores to the EU.
The_Fish , December 30, 2016 2:09:55 at 2:09 PM
Some rumours Obama to be considered for UN role and Cameron NATO.
Germ , December 30, 2016 2:13:34 at 2:13 PM
It's been said that on average Americans are like mushrooms – "Keep 'em in the dark and feed 'em shit!"
Winston , December 30, 2016 3:43:28 at 3:43 PM
"These data theft and disclosure activities could only have been directed by the highest levels of the Russian government," (Obama) wrote.

And THAT, from what I've read in OPEN literature (obviously) about what is known by our cyber threat intel community, read on tech sites, and seen on the outstanding documentary program CyberWar about the Eastern European hacking community, is a OUTRIGHT BLATANT LIE.

Note he avoided the phrase, "slam dunk"

Winston , December 30, 2016 3:52:29 at 3:52 PM
NOTE that he may actually believe that because that is what he may have been TOLD, just as Bush was told there were WMDs in Iraq, but as I've pointed out, the clumsy errors allowing the malware to be so very EASILY traced back to "supposedly" Russia are beyond belief for any state-sponsored outfit, especially a Russian effort.

Note that the user info for TWO BILLION Yahoo email accounts was stolen and they left no traces which then led the FBI to conclude that it must have been "state sponsored."

fingerhole , December 30, 2016 5:24:36 at 5:24 PM
Any government that claims a right to secrecy over its affairs is going to use lying as a policy.
Steven milgrom , December 30, 2016 4:17:51 at 4:17 PM
Snowden says that it is auite easy to trace the source of the hackers.
madashellowell , December 30, 2016 4:21:48 at 4:21 PM
We are left with two basic options. Either they are simply stupid or their is a larger agenda at hand. I don't believe they are stupid. They have been setting fires all around this election for months, none of them effective by themselves, but ALL reinforcing the general notion that Trump is unfit and illegitimate.

I do not believe this is just random panic and hyperbole. They are "building" something.

Fred Rogers , December 31, 2016 1:25:43 at 1:25 PM
Well, it is an established and accepted fact that Richard Nixon was a very intelligent guy. None of Nixon's detractors ever claimed he was stupid, and Nixon won reelection easily.

Tricky Dick was just a tad "honesty challenged", and so is Obama. They were/are both neo-keynesians, both took their sweet time ending stupid wars started by their predecessors even after it was clear the wars were pointless.

Then again, I doubt Obozo is as smart as Nixon. Soros is clearly the puppeteer controlling what Obama does. Soros is now freaking out that his fascist agenda has been exposed.

vooch , December 30, 2016 5:18:15 at 5:18 PM
This is what is must have been like being a Soviet Citizen in 1989 or so. The official media was openly laughed at because its lies were so preposterous.
Winston , December 30, 2016 5:24:35 at 5:24 PM
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/12/did-russia-tamper-with-the-2016-election-bitter-debate-likely-to-rage-on/

Excerpt:

"While security companies in the private sector have said for months the hacking campaign was the work of people working for the Russian government, anonymous people tied to the leaks have claimed they are lone wolves. Many independent security experts said there was little way to know the true origins of the attacks.

Sadly, the JAR, as the Joint Analysis Report is called, does little to end the debate. Instead of providing smoking guns that the Russian government was behind specific hacks, it largely restates previous private-sector claims without providing any support for their validity. Even worse, it provides an effective bait and switch by promising newly declassified intelligence into Russian hackers' "tradecraft and techniques" and instead delivering generic methods carried out by just about all state-sponsored hacking groups."

WORSE than "delivering generic methods carried out by just about all state-sponsored hacking groups." It should have said "by just about anyone using 'in the wild' malware tools."

The_Fish , December 30, 2016 5:54:31 at 5:54 PM
2015 Bilderberg. Looking down the attendees and subjects covered. Interesting some of the main anti-Brexit groups had representatives there, suggests HC picked for 2016 US election, Cyber-security and etc. Look at the key topics. How they all helped define 2016. So many current intertwined themes.

Little people upset the apple-cart? http://www.globalresearch.ca/bilderberg-chooses-hillary-clinton-for-2016/5454829

wootendw , December 30, 2016 6:01:33 at 6:01 PM
"We just don't know "

The Russians probably have a lot of information about USG employees, contractors, etc, via hacking, recording, etc than Wikileaks. But, as a general rule, intelligence agencies do not dump it into the public domain because you don't want a potential adversary know what you know about him lest he investigate and close off the means of obtaining that information. The leaks came from elsewhere.

greg , December 30, 2016 9:09:50 at 9:09 PM
One of the leakers is dead, we know that.
joelg5 , December 30, 2016 6:35:45 at 6:35 PM
Smells like a "false flag" operation, like the USA/NATO Operation Gladio in Europe.

McCain and the War Hawks have had it out for Russia for a long time, and the Neo-cons have been closing in on the borders of Russia for some time. What will be interesting is when Trump meets with the CIA/NSA et al. for intel briefings on the alleged hacking. Hopefully, Trump will bring along VP Pence, Mad Dog and the other Marine generals (appointees) for advice. I suspect that the "false flag" nature of the hacking excuse will be evident and revealed as the pretext for the Neo-con anti-Russia agenda moving forward.

The CIA it is now widely believed was part of the Deep State behind the JFK assassination when JFK took an independent view, so Trump will need the USA Marines on his side. McCain is the real thug, and an interferer in foreign elections (Kiev) and seems to have no real scruples.

After Victoria Nuland brags about the USA spending $5 billion to overthrow the elected Ukraine government, how these Russia-phobes have any credibility is beyond me. Just shows that the consolidation of the media into a few main propaganda outlets under Bill Clinton (who also brought the Neo-cons into foreign policy dominance) has reached its logical apex. The Swamp is indeed a stinking, Corrupt miasma.

Perhaps the Clinton Foundation and nascent Obama foundation feel it in their financial interests to nurture the misma.

Cha-ching, cha-ching. Money to be made in demonizing Russia.

Ron J , December 31, 2016 12:32:19 at 12:32 PM
"The CIA it is now widely believed was part of the Deep State behind the JFK assassination when JFK took an independent view "

All the circumstantial evidence pointed to Oswald. No one has ever proven otherwise, in over 50 years.

After 50 years of being propagandized by conspiracy book writers, it isn't surprising that anything is widely believed at this point. The former curator of the 6th Floor Museum, Gary Mack, believed there was a conspiracy, but over time came to realize that it was Oswald, alone.

CJ , December 30, 2016 8:15:54 at 8:15 PM
When liberal Rolling Stone questions the Obama/DNC propaganda, you know for certain that they have lost even their base supporters (the ones that can still think). The BS has just gotten too stupid.
Truth seeker , December 30, 2016 9:32:32 at 9:32 PM
Why is the WSJ strongly supporting Obama here but also saying he waited way to long to make this move? I don't always agree with them nor do I with you.

Ok I haven't read the comments but would only say that when Vladimir Putin the once leader of the KGB becomes a preacher and starts criticizing the West for abandoning its Christian roots, it's moral dignity, that for me doesn't just stink, it raises red flags all over the place. I think Trump and some of the rest of u r being set up here-like lambs to the slaughter. Mish your naïveté here surprises me!

Bobdough , December 30, 2016 11:00:12 at 11:00 PM
The Russians are coming!

Russia a country of 170 million surrounded by NATO military bases and 800 million people in the EU and USA is the threat? The US alone spends 12 times as much on its military annually than Russia. It's not Russia invading and overthrowing secular governments in the Muslim world.

greg , December 30, 2016 9:52:15 at 9:52 PM
Germany takes back its gold from US. Finally, after the Fed Res refused an audit request. http://www.pravdareport.com/business/finance/27-12-2016/136521-gold-0/
Simon Hodges , December 31, 2016 7:57:09 at 7:57 AM
If I remember correctly the CIA claimed their intelligence sources came from unspecified 'allies'. It seems rather crucial to establish who these allies actually are. If it were Germany that would be one thing, however it is more than likely to be the Ukraine.

The Ukranian government have been trying to drive a wedge between the West and Russia for years for their own political advantage. If I was Trump then when I took office I would want an extremely thorough investigation into the activities of the CIA by a third reliable party.

Seenitallbefore , December 31, 2016 9:48:10 at 9:48 AM
Don't be stupid. The Russians did it. CNN reported it, so it must be true.
Winston , December 31, 2016 10:22:42 at 10:22 AM
Supporting -EXACTLY- the points I've previously made here: Russian Hackers Said To "Penetrate US Electricity Grid" Using Outdated Ukrainian Malware

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-31/russian-hackers-said-penetrate-us-electricity-grid-using-outdated-ukrainian-malware

Excerpt: But was it really Russian meddling? After all, how does one prove not only intent but source in a world of cyberespionage, where planting false flag clues and other Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) meant to frame a specific entity, is as important as the actual hack.

Robert M. Lee, CEO and founder of cybersecurity company Dragos, which specializes in threats facing critical infrastructure, also noted that the IOCs included "commodity malware," or hacking tools that are widely available for purchase.

He said:

1. No they did not penetrate the grid.
2. The IOCs contained *commodity malware* – can't attribute based off that alone.

Fred Rogers , December 31, 2016 1:09:53 at 1:09 PM
So if Obama had actually produced evidence that the Russians had hacked Hilary's illegal, unprotected email setup in her Chapaqua basement/closet how would that change the ***content*** of the emails? It wouldn't.

Obama is failing to convince the world that Russia is a bunch of whistle blowers on his corrupt regime. All of the emails detailing corruption and fraud are true (unchallenged), however Obama wants to suggest they were obtained illegally from an illegal email server? That is Obama's bullshit defense for the corrupt behavior?

And as "proportional retaliation" for this Russian whistle blowing, Obozo is evicting 35 entertainment staff from the Russian embassy summer camp?

I doubt Hollywood or San Francisco has the integrity to admit they backed the wrong loser when they supported Obozo but they should think about their own credibility after January 20th. Anyone who is still backing Obozo is just too stupid to tie their own shoes much less vote

[Dec 31, 2016] The last hissy fit of neocon Obama is probably connected with the loss of Alepo and being sidelined in Syria

Notable quotes:
"... White House/StateDep press release on sanctions is ORWELLIAN: corruption within the DNC/Clinton's manager Podesta undermines the democracy, not its exposure as claimed (let alone the fact that there is still no evidence that the Russian government has anything to do with the hacks). ..."
"... The press release also talks about how the security of the USA and its interests were compromised, so Obama in effects says that national security interest of the country is to have corrupt political system, which is insane. ..."
"... You may be sure that the Americans will commit all the stupidities they can think of, plus some that are beyond imagination." ~Charles de Gaulle. ..."
"... United States are not united I guess. Guess, that Merkel is the next on the list... ..."
"... Obama will be making to many paid speeches to be doing anything of the sort. And frankly I suspect he be silent, because Trump is soon going to know where all the bodies were buried under Obama, just like Obama knows where all the bodies are buried from the Bush area. ..."
Dec 31, 2016 | www.theguardian.com

On Friday, the Kremlin responded to the moves, including the expulsion of 35 suspected intelligence operatives and the closing of two Russian facilities in the US, with a shrug. Putin, it seems, is willing simply to wait until Trump moves into the Oval Office. Trump's tweet suggested he is too.

But such provocative words could not distract the media and public from another domestic concern for Trump – the growing perception that his predecessor has acted to his disadvantage .

"The sanctions were clearly an attempt by the Obama administration to throw a wrench into – or [to] box in – the next administration's relationship with Russia," said Boris Zilberman, a Russia expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

"Putin, in part, saw through that and sidestepped it by playing good cop to [Russian foreign minister Sergey] Lavrov and the [state] Duma, who were calling for a reciprocal response."


vgnych 8h ago

All Obama does with his clumsy movements is just attempting to blame Russians for Democrat's loss of elections. Also he is obscuring peaceful power transition while at it.

All what Trump needs to do is to just call the looser a loser a move on.

Max South , 30 Dec 2016 18:56
White House/StateDep press release on sanctions is ORWELLIAN: corruption within the DNC/Clinton's manager Podesta undermines the democracy, not its exposure as claimed (let alone the fact that there is still no evidence that the Russian government has anything to do with the hacks).

The press release also talks about how the security of the USA and its interests were compromised, so Obama in effects says that national security interest of the country is to have corrupt political system, which is insane.

This argumentation means that even if Russian government has done the hacking, it was a good deed, there is nothing to sanction Russia for even in such case.

MacCosham -> Max South , 30 Dec 2016 19:38
There were no hacks, the DNC emails were leaked by disgruntled insiders. As brilliantly said by the heroic former diplomat Craig Murray. Reply
CDNBobOrr , 30 Dec 2016 18:58
'Fraid both Putin and Trump are a lot smarter than Barry. Putin's move in not retaliating and inviting US kids to the Kremlin New Year party was an astute judo throw. And Barry is sitting on his backside wondering how it happened. Reply
antobojar , 30 Dec 2016 19:00
.. Probably Obama's "exceptionalism" made him so clumsy on international affairs stage..

.. just recently.. snubbed by Fidel.. he refused to meet him..
.. humiliated by Raul Castro, he declined to hug president of USA..
.. Duterte described.. hmm.. his provenance..
.. Bibi told him off in most vulgar way.. several times..
.. and now this..
..pathetic..

P.S.
You may be sure that the Americans will commit all the stupidities they can think of, plus some that are beyond imagination." ~Charles de Gaulle.

chiefwiley -> Tribal War , 30 Dec 2016 21:49
Obama knew about Russian involvement in July. Look it up. He ignored it because it was seen as having no effect, and they didn't want the appearance of the government favoring Hillary, because they thought she was in line for a landslide victory.

After the election, "RUSSIA" has become a fund raising buzz word for Democrats.

Phrygian , 30 Dec 2016 19:02
Talk about sore loser. Obama's actions are disgraceful. The sooner he leaves office the better. Reply Share
AveAtqueCave -> Phrygian , 30 Dec 2016 19:17
The election should have taught our "betters" that people do think for themselves, albeit occasionally.

I've been frustrated enough with Obama since he pardoned Bush and Cheney... now he wants to sacrifice whatever shreds of reputation the Democratic party has... to be a white knight for miserable candidate, warmonger, and incompetent Hillary Clinton.

He figured the republicans would love him when he took Bush et al. off the hook and (clumsily) implemented Romney's health plan. They didn't.

Now he thinks leftists will love him because he's going "all in" on Hillary didn't lose this all on her own. They won't.

The guy doesn't have a fraction of the insight he credits himself with.

blocksburg -> Phrygian , 30 Dec 2016 19:18
Indeed, may even be seen as treasonous behaviour Reply
Munchausen007 , 30 Dec 2016 19:06
Simple solution, publish the commenter geolocation and ban proxy, clean the comment section from putinbots. Putin like ASBO's must stop to do more harm against democracy. Reply Share
Down2dirt -> Munchausen007 , 30 Dec 2016 19:17
What a foolish comment. Reply Share
Ilurktostudyyouall -> Munchausen007 , 30 Dec 2016 19:39
And what happens when you begin to realise many are not putinbots? Reply Share
Not4TheFaintOfHeart -> Ilurktostudyyouall , 30 Dec 2016 19:58
I'm sure they'll find some excuse to get around that...
'It's elephants all the way down', don't forget Reply
ukc ltd , 30 Dec 2016 19:07
Sanctions = token gestures that will soon fade into the distance. Much like you know who.

Obama is salty because of Kilary getting whupped and Putin out-playing him in Syria.

Never thought I would see the day when I sided with Trump over Obama. Interesting times. Reply

foolisholdman -> ukc ltd , 30 Dec 2016 20:01
Yes, the so-called liberals are losing all over. They blame everyone but themselves. The problem is that they have been found out. They were not real liberals at all. They had little bits of liberal policies like "Gay rights" and "bathrooms for Transgenders" and, of course, "Anti-Anti-Semitism Laws" and a few other bits and pieces with which they constructed a sort of camoflage coat, but the core of their policies was Corpratism. Prize exhibits: Tony Blair and Barak Obama.

The extreme Left and extreme Right ("Populists") are benefiting by being able to say what they mean, loud and apparently clear. People are not, on the whole, politically sophisticated but they do realise that they have been lied to for a very long time and they are fed up. That is why "Populists are making such a showing in the polls. People don't believe in the centre's "Liberalism" any more.

Terry Phillips , 30 Dec 2016 19:19
You just know these people, like Johnny boy, who are pointing fingers at Russia are doing so based upon long laid plans to bind up Trump from building a healthy relationship with Russia which would put an end to terrorism and likely all of these petty little wars that are tearing the world to pieces. These people want war because division keeps them in power and war makes them lots of money. I hope that Trump and Putin can work together and build a trust and foundation as allies in that together we can stamp out terrorism and stabilize the worlds conflicts. Everything these people do in the next 20 days has a single agenda and that is to cause instability and roadblocks for Trump and his team. Hope is just around the corner people so let's help usher it in.
86753oh9 , 30 Dec 2016 19:24
First... let's see some actual evidence/proof. Oh, that's right, none has been offered up.
Second... everyone is upset that the DNC turd was exposed, but no one upset about the existence of the turd. ?

Obama acting like a petulant child that has to leave the game and go home now, so he's kicking the game board and forcing everyone else to clean up his mess. Irresponsible.

TheWindsOfFreedom -> 86753oh9 , 30 Dec 2016 19:33
Hundred times repeated lie will become the truth... that's the US officials policy for decades now. In 8 years, they did nothing, so they are trying to do "something" in the last minute. For someone, who's using his own brain is all of this just laughable.

United States are not united I guess. Guess, that Merkel is the next on the list...

Fulhamred , 30 Dec 2016 19:26
Hopefully now this will enable senate and congress republicans to prevent these crazy ideas of russian appeasement take hold and prusue a hardline against Russia, Hamas, Iran and Cuba.
Down2dirt -> Fulhamred , 30 Dec 2016 19:31
They'll probably do that. Business as usual. To pursue a hard line against Isis enablers like Saudi and Qatar, now that would be a surprise. Reply Share
Individualist -> Down2dirt , 30 Dec 2016 19:35
Actually the biggest ISIS enabler was Cheney.
Down2dirt -> Individualist , 30 Dec 2016 19:42
Well you're probably right about that.
rocjoc43rd -> Individualist , 30 Dec 2016 19:45
Obama will be making to many paid speeches to be doing anything of the sort. And frankly I suspect he be silent, because Trump is soon going to know where all the bodies were buried under Obama, just like Obama knows where all the bodies are buried from the Bush area.

You are a wishful thinker, if you think Obama is going anything after he leaves office.

cosmith , 30 Dec 2016 19:27
So the person awarded a Nobel Peace Prize uses his last weeks in office to sour relations between the only 2 superpowers on Earth for - what ?

American party politics /
Spite ?
Ideological hatred ?

For those of you who are too young to remember, look up "Cold War" and look for references
to Hawks and Doves.

Who are the Hawks now - and who are the Doves ?

The Left/Liberal paradigm is so drastically in need of updating that it is becoming downright dangerous.

Hell hath on fury like a self defined "liberal" scorned.

Banker1 -> Individualist , 30 Dec 2016 19:48
The foreign power did the American people a favor when it exposed the corruption within the Democratic Party; something the establishment media was apparently unable or unwilling to do. Rather than sanctioning Putin, Americans should be thanking him!
Haigin88 , 30 Dec 2016 19:30
R.E.M.: 'Exhuming McCarthy'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMedTmZKo38 Reply Share
gottliebvera , 30 Dec 2016 19:34
I think Obama is behaving in a most petulant and non-presidential manner. Lack of decorum as parting shot. Good going. Reply Share
UnitedundertheSun -> Jonathan Stromberg , 30 Dec 2016 23:10
Attack Russia with a wet lettuce? Oh the pain! And gives Putin the high moral ground. Brilliant politics from Obama.

All to hamfistedly conceal what a rotten dysfunctional political organisation he heads.

Obama plays snakes and ladders while Putin is playing chess.

chelsea55 , 30 Dec 2016 19:35
Seems a no brainer, reverse Obama's ridiculous posturing gesture. As if the US doesn't have a long track record of interfering in the affairs of other countries.
chelsea55 -> LithophaneFurcifera , 30 Dec 2016 21:57
Personally I think the US should do as it wishes but it's extremely hypocritical to act shocked when the same meddling is returned by others. Obama is acting foolishly as if the final weeks of his presidency have any genuine traction on future events.

[Dec 30, 2016] The Coup against Trump and His Military

Firstly, this coup is not against a standing President, but targets an elected president set to take office on January 20, 2017. Secondly, the attempted coup has polarized leading sectors of the political and economic elite. It even exposes a seamy rivalry within the intelligence-security apparatus, with the political appointees heading the CIA involved in the coup and the FBI supporting the incoming President Trump and the constitutional process. Thirdly, the evolving coup is a sequential process, which will build momentum and then escalate very rapidly.
Notable quotes:
"... In the past few years Latin America has experienced several examples of the seizure of Presidential power by unconstitutional means, which may help illustrate some of the current moves underway in Washington. These are especially interesting since the Obama Administration served as the 'midwife' for these 'regime changes'. ..."
"... Firstly, this coup is not against a standing President, but targets an elected president set to take office on January 20, 2017. Secondly, the attempted coup has polarized leading sectors of the political and economic elite. It even exposes a seamy rivalry within the intelligence-security apparatus, with the political appointees heading the CIA involved in the coup and the FBI supporting the incoming President Trump and the constitutional process. Thirdly, the evolving coup is a sequential process, which will build momentum and then escalate very rapidly. ..."
"... In the wake of her resounding defeat, Candidate Stein usurped authority from the national Green Party and rapidly raked in $8 million dollars in donations from Democratic Party operatives and George Soros-linked NGO's (many times the amount raised during her Presidential campaign). This dodgy money financed her demand for ballot recounts in selective states in order to challenge Trump's victory. The recounts failed to change the outcome, but it was a 'first shot across the bow', to stop Trump. It became a propaganda focus for the neo-conservative mass media to mobilize several tho