April 18, 2017

Violent Left and Deep State now indistinguishable

There's a lot to unpack from the Battle of Berkeley over the weekend, where an army of Trump supporters took over downtown libtard central against a gang of Antifa ("anti-fascist"). See here for a first-hand account and observations of how both sides behaved.

Now that Antifa has actually had to fight a real battle, rather than showing up unchallenged, we can start to fill in a lot of the gaps about who they are and what they're about. An earlier post drew attention to the fact that they are not fighting against the other side's "speech" but against their right to free "assembly". They want to prevent the other side from congregating, getting pumped up as a group, and potentially acting as a collective force toward their goals. Keeping them from congregating amounts to isolating and atomizing them, preventing them from doing much toward their goals.

* * *

After seeing how Antifa interacts with a real crowd on the other side, we see even more about what their role is -- a police force. They're not just any old group that wants to occupy a territory against some rival group, like fans of one sports team taking over a certain bar and not welcoming fans of rival teams. They want to keep a space clear of the other side in the same way that the police want to keep the streets free from criminals, and they are willing to use force in order to make that happen.

They don't merely shove the other side out of the space, they surround downed opponents and beat them down. They use weapons that are only for cruelty, humiliation, and torture, like the glass bottles and brass-knuckled gloves wielded by that dreadlocked bitch who got mowed down by a Trump supporter. And of course the ubiquitous pepper spray that the actual police use, only here to inflict pain rather than to simply disperse a crowd. They are not trying to "win" against another team, but to punish those who they see as the lowest of criminals.

It is not just random terrorizing like you see from gangs who randomly target victims just so everybody in the neighborhood understands who's boss. Antifa directs their violence only against those who they charge and convict of certain crimes, and their violence is a kind of norm enforcement.

At first glance, you might say it's a kind of vigilante justice, coming from private citizens rather than any branch of the government. And yet there is nothing organic about their banding together, in the way that concerned citizens do when there's a crime spree under way in their neighborhood. The members of Antifa do not live next to each other or have other organic social bonds, at least across the whole group that shows up.

Instead, it is more like a deputized posse that is recruited and organized by the state. Anybody who wants to enforce certain norms against certain people, show up to the sheriff's office and we'll deputize you to use force against the bad guys. Indeed, the actual Berkeley police were nowhere to be seen, proving that they had temporarily transferred their authority to the thugs of Antifa. It would look too bad for the official police if they were raining down blows on Trump supporters, so let's just give a little wink at Antifa and let them do the violent policing against political enemies of the Establishment.

And we'll look the other way if you guys want to punish the criminals before they've even committed an illegal act -- there may not be a law against supporting Trump or putting American over global interests, but it is still a violation of our norms, and that is no less of a crime against our norms just because there's no government law against it. Merely showing up on the pro-Trump side is proof of committing this crime of allegiance to the wrong group (America vs. the world), so no further bad acts need to be committed for you guys to punish them violently.

* * *

It is inaccurate to use the phrase "thought crime" since they don't care what you believe or think or say, which are individual activities that can be done in isolation and generally don't threaten change to how the world works. They're primarily against you belonging to a certain group and acting collectively to advance its interests, whether voting for Trump or showing up for one of his rallies. This is more of a social crime -- a crime of allegiance to the wrong group. Specifically, the bad guys are to be punished for disloyalty or treason against the globalist side.

Notice that the Violent Left is no longer raging against the Right -- it's anybody who wants American interests to come before those of foreign interests. That includes just about everybody in the middle, moderate, or Independent range of the spectrum. And in fact, the Trump army began by laying waste to the Right during the GOP primaries. Antifa is not fighting against the theocratic and Puritanical crusaders who followed Ted Cruz. And they are not fighting against people who are harassing abortion clinics, burning books or other media that corrupt the youth, or other stereotypical right-wing extremism.

In fact, if that kind of right-wing behavior got out of hand, the Trump army would turn out to dampen it down or put it out. These are the people who got sick of the GOP when it went too far in the right-wing direction during the '80s and '90s, and backed Ross Perot or grudgingly Bill Clinton. Compared to a typical group of conservatives or Right-wingers, the Trump brawlers are more likely to have tattoos, have permissive views toward pornography, and rarely or never attend church, all of which place them lower on being driven by concerns about purity, sanctity, and taboo.

So it makes more sense to call them Normalizers, who intervene en masse when the pendulum swings too far in either direction. It happens to be swinging too far to the left now, so they come off as right-wingers. But circa 1990, it was swinging too far to the right (Tipper Gore and the PMRC), and they came off more as left-wingers.

This also explains their fumbling for descriptions: in such a polarized climate as ours, anyone less puritanical than the Mormons is a permissive libertarian to be kicked out of the Right, and anyone less multicultural than La Raza is a bigoted conservative to be kicked out of the Left.

* * *

Portraying a group like Antifa as a deputized posse of the state could be more literal than figurative. The Deep State has always infiltrated and co-opted groups that began as anti-Establishment, to turn them around and serve the shadow government's own ends. This is even more likely for very old groups like Antifa and the KKK where the operatives have had plenty of time to do their work, as opposed to fresh new organic movements like the Bernie or the Trump movements.

Threats to the Establishment could come from the Left or the Right, requiring a two-pronged approach. In each prong, the idea is to inflame the emotions of extremists and turn them against the mainstream majority to punish them for questioning the Establishment. On the Right, people's emotions are inflamed more by apocalyptic religion (the Judaizer cults that flock to Ted Cruz), while on the Left their emotions are inflamed by apocalyptic violence (the guerrilla wannabes who join Antifa). Both of these emotionally volatile groups can then be turned against normal Americans to keep them demoralized, apathetic, and bowing out of the political arena.

The two-pronged strategy of the Deep State -- instigate Antifa thugs on the Left and inflame the Mormons on the Right -- came out into the open when CIA operative Evan McMullin tweeted the following about the Alt-Right:



He had already publicly tried to derail the Trump movement by duping the Mormons in Utah, where all of his energy and funding was focused. After stoking the emotions of the crazy Right, he tries to stoke the emotions of the crazy Left, complete with an emoji reminding them to "punch a Nazi".

The McMuffin campaign was an abject failure by every measure, and the rout of Antifa by the Trump army in Berkeley only confirms how disastrously the Deep State strategy is breaking down. Normal Americans have had enough with the abuse from the moralistic Right and the moralistic Left threatening them with ostracism, damnation, and beatdowns just for wanting a normal American society and not some theocratic or communistic dystopia.

The only open question is how desperately Deep State tries to salvage their campaign. They may be stretched too thin from their push to embroil America in a series of pointless wars abroad, and not have enough capital to mobilize the cults of the Left and Right against Americans back home. Or they may decide to give up on adding more nations to its sphere of influence abroad, in order to double down on punishments for Americans who betray the globalist government by pushing for America-first policies. Only time will tell.

36 comments:

  1. Too far to the right? What have you been smoking, the left has enjoyed uninterrupted dominance for decades. Every "conservative" of any note has obediently done the left's bidding on every issue that matters (immigration, cultural degradation, white humiliation, etc.) without exception. Foreign policy and minor economic disagreements are meaningless next to the successful erasure of America as a nation. Removing a handful of illegals doesn't even put a dent in the 65 million people brought in to eradicate every trace of the America that was.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Only a moron will describe the Reagan/Bush years as the society swinging too far to the Left.

    Economically, the beginning of stock market worship, yuppies, off-shoring, and monopolization.

    Politically, covert wars around the world, brought to the light of day with Iran-Contra.

    Socially and culturally, the Religious Right's moral panics about pop song lyrics, T&A in teen movies, heavy metal, video game violence, and horror movies corrupting the youth -- at the least causing an epidemic of teenage pregnancy, and at worst sending them into the arms of Satanic cults that practiced human sacrifice.

    If you're old enough to be named Steven, you should remember all of that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, those issues are meaningless trivia compared to actual important shit wherein the "right" did the left's bidding without question. All that moral panic made no difference whatsoever in actual laws or behavior, simply being used as a way for lefties to show off how superior they were because look at the stupid right-wingers. Tell me which of those things were banned and their practicioners thrown out of respectable society or arrested. Say one bad thing about googles and you will never get a decent job again.

      Delete
  3. A.B. Prosper4/18/17, 5:05 PM

    McMullin's behavior is understandable even without him being a CIA agent

    Mormons in general are "Judeo Christian" and see themselves as "Gods replacement Jews" this on top of their outright errant theology leaves them out in the cold with mainstream (Conservative Catholic ,Evangelical and a few other denominations) Christians who regard them as heretics or sometimes Satanists.

    LDS are genuinely nice people whose women are in my experience pretty top notch and they have a lot going for them

    That being a somewhat Conservative culture and good fertility , mostly though this seems to be going down and of course recruitment

    All efforts aside they are outnumbered 12-1 or more in the US by people or more by people who consider them a problem

    Thus the LDS shacked up with the Deep State and make up lots of spooks, operative and secret services types and have for decades. They are generally pretty reliable in the same manner say Sikhs are in India but that isn't always a good thing for the greater culture

    Thus seeing the .Alt Right which is composed of a lot of people who don't much like them or their boss and who will put them far out of power they are likable to react badly

    Frankly when it all goes to hell, the battle between the growing "Christian" movement and the Judeo_Christians" will end up much like all internecine religious disputes do, ugly.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mormons also began as an anti-government or anti-Establishment group that included an "oath of vengeance" in their initiation ritual ("endowment ceremony"):

    "You and each of you do covenant and promise that you will pray and never cease to pray to Almighty God to avenge the blood of the prophets upon this nation, and that you will teach the same to your children and to your children's children unto the third and fourth generation."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_vengeance

    They weren't angry only at the particular individuals who killed their prophets -- the entire "nation" was their target.

    BTW, their prophets were killed for practicing and promoting polygamy. Also why they were denied entry into the Union for so long.

    Like Antifa, the Mormons began as a bitterly anti-government cult that ended up co-opted by the shadow government (mostly CIA and NSA).

    ReplyDelete
  5. "those issues are meaningless trivia compared to actual important shit wherein the "right" did the left's bidding without question"

    Reagan/Bush were mere Leftists because they didn't make it OK to shout "nigger" in public. LOL. You're retarded.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Obviously Steve is referring to the fact that porn was never outlawed, violent video games were never banned, fornicators were never shamed. The sexual revolution continued unabated regardless the rhetoric coming from the Religious Right.

    But the right joined the left in allowing the dispossession of the white majority. So we never got real right-wing rule.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So did Trump force Jason Chaffetz out?

    ReplyDelete
  8. "the fact that porn was never outlawed, violent video games were never banned, fornicators were never shamed"

    No, he's complaining that you can't discuss certain taboo topics now, eg race, or criticize other races.

    During the Reagan/Bush years, discussion and heavy criticism about porn, crime, etc., was mainstream. Even on college campuses -- "the God squad". That is most definitely shaming.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Reagan/Bush were mere Leftists because they didn't make it OK to shout "nigger" in public. LOL. You're retarded."

    You are wrong, and, as usual, you are an obnoxious ass in the process. Steve is right.

    Take any social stance, from any decade before the 1950s, and compare it to any social stance, and compare it to any decade after the 1950s. Western culture has clearly been more Left, and more permissive, and more progressive, in almost every way, since about 1960. That is what Steve was referring to: clear Left dominance of the prevailing culture for 70 years.

    Compare typical movies from the Reagan era to typical movies from the 1920's, 1930's, 1940's and 1950's. The culture was clearly more Left wing, even in the Reagan era.

    There are little glimmers of exception: comic books were violent back in the bad old days before they were regulated in the 1950's, perhaps the 1920's had a permissive streak to them. But they are really minor in comparison to the overall trend of popular culture.

    Its really not a difficult concept to see; it is apparent to anyone with eyes. You know those pictures on the internet showing the University in Afghanistan in the 1970's (with women in western garb), compared to the same University today (with women in burkas)?

    The exact opposite is clearly and obviously the case in the West, with the faultline being about 1965. Obviously not to the same degree (women of the west didn't wear burkas, though nuns practically did).

    But...but.. Reagan sent the army into Nicaragua... he sputtered. The US military has been all over the world for a century. Reagan didn't invent it, and its existence isn't evidence of Right wing domination.

    Ignoring what's in front of your eyes just because you didn't like Reagan is just about what an intolerant autist would do, isn't it?

    anon

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hallmarks of the left-wing revolution during Reagan/Bush, compared to FDR/Eisenhower:

    - God squads on college campuses, televangelists, mass conversion into the Mormon church (~1960-1990)

    - Moral panics about every aspect of popular culture

    - Deregulation mania, unopposed mergers & acquisitions, stock market worship, off-shoring, downsizing, de-industrialization, union busting

    - War on drugs, skyrocketing incarceration rates, return of death penalty, pop culture suffused with vigilante fantasies

    You're micro-obsessing over desegregation, affirmative action, and promiscuity among young people, to the exclusion of everything else that people pay attention to when they're evaluating if the zeitgeist is swinging in toward the Left or the Right.

    You do not share the mindset of mainstream Americans, and cannot empathize with it either. If *you* felt like the '80s was swinging toward the Left, then the average American must have too.

    Obviously they did not -- they felt it was swinging too far to the Right, and that's why they voted for Perot (neutral) or Clinton (moderate/liberal) over Bush (conservative) during the 1990s.

    Your beef is with the mainstream American perception -- you're accusing them of subjectively viewing things as moving Right when objectively they were moving Left. Take it up with them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. No more of this retarded "Reagan was an esoteric Leftist plant" discussion.

    The topic of the post is that Antifa serves as an unofficial police force for the Establishment. It's not two opposing sides with a third referee (Antifa vs. Trump army, with police as referee). Rather, there's only one side of supporters, the Trump army, with authority to punish them being shared between an alliance of "police + Antifa".

    That's interesting and thought-provoking -- not "Reagan was ACKSHUALLY a Leftist".

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have a question for you, but first I'll say thanks (thanks) for another great post. I found your description of antifa's role to be really just spot on and clarifying in a way I've not seen put yet, or put so simply, but effectively. My question is, have you ever read anything by Kerry Bolton?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ag, you say "now". When do think this began?
    Ike was warning about the Military Industrial Complex before the 60s and the Leftist takeover, so perhaps then? Shortly after? Long after? Recently?

    ReplyDelete
  14. This is a recent development, where Antifa & Co. are literally attacking the anti-Establishment crowd (Trump army).

    Back in the late '60s and early '70s, Antifa & Co. were part of the anti-Establishment crowd (New Left), and the infiltration by Deep State was meant to subvert this anti-Establishment movement from within.

    I don't think it's only due to the Trump phenomenon, though. At least by the early 2010s, the New Left had abandoned anti-imperialism and were rooting for the American empire-orchestrated jihadists revolting against Assad, who they vilified as just another Stalinist kind of ruler who had betrayed true socialism, etc.

    Still today, most Leftists (I mean Leftists, not just liberals) are rooting for the toppling of Assad and the rise of the American-backed jihadists, er, I mean the indigenous rebels. The Left is officially promoting the Deep State imperial agenda abroad.

    That's a whole 'nother post, though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bernie Sanders.

      Related to this post, the howls that continue against Trump by the globalists and Deep State...I wonder if the Democrats will have an easier time turning toward populism than Republicans given that Republicans have already broken that ground. That's bringing up too big an issue that goes well beyond Deep State, though.
      But the Dems are trying, and it's so painful that I wonder if they won't lose heart first and go for peace and a few short-term victories. I just don't see any Trumps in their ranks who will do anything on the level of crucifying GWB at a Republican debate.

      Delete
  15. 1. The antifa is very similar to what the KKK were. They use non-legal violence to enforce the actual will of the establishment. Since the antifags hide their identity, the establishment is given deniability. The can say "we deplore these action, but..."
    Of course the major different is that the KKK were the establishment, or at least parts of it, so were acting in their own interest and in fact goin along was probably a way for young guys to get ahead in business, the law, etc. The antifa are total dupes and losers, are not beneficiaries of their own actions, and individually can be discarded at any time.

    2. The biggest difference between the antifa and the right wingers is: self respect. The pro-trump guys seem to be pretty happy with 'me'. The average antifa filled with self-loathing. If you are involved in degrading or shameful sexual behavior and have a black shirt you may have what it takes to be antifa. Being contemptible, they are filled with contempt even for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The KKK of the 20s era were LARPers: lowcountry Southerners trying to be uber masculine like their fellow rightists, but much cooler Appalachians, but with an autistic twist. Like the Nazis....
      So, you totally have a point.

      Delete
  16. I wonder what Ag thinks of Steve's thesis that the powerful and respectable left have had enough of these "embarrassing" twerps... I think he's correct. Trump has proven he's not Hitler and passions have cooled.
    The USA closed borders, tightened immigration 100 years ago amid many populist measures...and then a little while later *fought* the Nazis. How the f!#: these measures became associated with evil Nazis is anyone's guess.

    ReplyDelete
  17. How are Antifa embarrassing to the Left? They're violently policing and punishing the political enemies of the Establishment, like the powerful / respectable Left wishes they could do if they could get away with it.

    They feel sorry for Trump supporters getting ganged up on for about five seconds, and even then only if they're witnessing it directly, like the MSNBC reporters who covered the San Jose riot against Trump rally attendees.

    But after five seconds, cognitive dissonance kicks in, and they're not about to believe that they themselves are on the wrong side of history, or of the law. So while it's kinda sad, it's nothing really illegal, and ultimately neutral or a plus in terms of the greater long-term good.

    We will not change their minds by appealing to their morality, because they are morally empty. They want us erased and our memory stigmatized.

    We will only change their behavior by raising the social costs to them for turning a blind eye toward a shadow police force punishing citizens for belonging to an anti-Establishment group (Trump army).

    Once the words and pictures get around, normal American bystanders will start saying "Antifa R the real fascists," and when we manage to stain their image as being "on the wrong side of history," they are finished. We will not have converted them to our side, but sidelined them and shut them up in the larger war for the hearts and minds of the Silent Majority.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now I feel like Tevya in Fiddler on the Roof: I see your point, too! You know, I've been wondering if we being so loud and vocal and putting these images out there were having an effect, but because I was so intimately involved in doing just that, as a lot of us here were, I wondered if that wasn't just shoulder patting. But, I can't deny what you said makes perfect sense, and at the same time, there does seem to be a turning against these people by their fellow travelers...

      All I can say is, keep it up. James O'Keefe explored violence against innocent everyday Trump supporters, then dropped the ball. Many guys on our side tend to do this for reasons I don't understand. But we're winning now and cannot drop this...

      Delete
  18. Social costs... I've noticed this exact turning when it comes to RUSSIA! Some journalists really thought there was something to it, but now, with so much dedicated effort by lib populists, pepe twitter, and so many sleuths, few people anymore want to be seen as believing in it. We've finally reached the point where it is declasse. And we're starting to get there with anti-Trump supporter violence.
    Children have been attacked. Women and elderly. It is so, so, so important that these be catalogued, the stuff that happened before the election when we were all so innocent. As I said at Steve's, I had done just that on Twitter, but was forced off. I'll work on it, again, but had trouble getting people to understand its importance before; it was incredibly frustrating. Just recently, Cernovich wrote about violence against women, but could only name like one two. And he didn't mention the children. Now, things are very different when it comes to outing these pieces of garbage when they assault Trump dudes. An entire movement is geared toward these tasks now.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It's a start...

    This boy was 14-years-old. His father, Craig, brought him to the San Jose rally to show him what democracy looks like. On the way there, the boy asked if he could get a Trump shirt and his dad said, "yes". The father engaged with some protestors per videos before the rally and everything was civil; the boy just watched. Afterward, when they left, father and son were separated by a mob. The kid was punched twice with ferocious force in the back of the head. As he fled to keep from being beaten, the mob chased after him some of whom yelled, "Kill him!" He ran and tried to climb aboard a firetruck that drove by, but they didn't stop. The kid ultimately was tackled by the cousin of the man who punched him twice in the back of the head, Somali Muslims. Members of their families as well as friends congratulated them on beating this child.
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/san-jose-firefighters-refused-help-teen-trump-supporter-fleeing-terror-mob/

    ReplyDelete
  20. Can't wait for the France analysis, Ag!

    My short and sweet thoughts...

    How quickly and efficiently countries shake off the parasites seems to have a lot to do with post-WWII confidence.
    The big winners were Russia, US, and UK. Months ago, I proffered that US and UK were nearly identical in their political timetable, but the UK seemed ever so slightly ahead; Brexit won more handily than Trump did.

    By contrast, Russia is *years* ahead of all of us. There may be other reasons involved with why besides confidence: homogeneous Slavic population, surviving Communism and the American vultures who went immediately after, etc. I don't know. But being the first, they get all the arrows.

    I expect Germany to be dead last in making the turn.

    I worry that the character of many continental Europeans is so "Farmer" that they will not simply be able to kick out the parasites, but that they'll simmer, simmer, simmer until they explode with mass killings and revolution. Le Pen is a nice lady who would go the far tamer "Pastoralist" route, like Putin did, but these people really seem to think she's Hitler. I used to think this was hyperbole, and maybe it is, but I'm not so sure anymore.
    Anyway, I'm not hopeful the losers of WWII will go the tamer route and will instead explode a decade or so down the road.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The main hurdle for Le Pen is their electoral process where there's a free-for-all primary and then a general two weeks later. It doesn't allow any time for the two leading candidates to consolidate the voters from the lesser candidates on either side.

    In some cases, it may not matter, and the lesser Left voters will mindlessly go with the greater Left, and ditto on the Right.

    But when you have these re-alignment candidates like Trump and Le Pen, it takes awhile to corral, convince, and cajole the lesser Right voters into the great big Right coalition.

    It was clear by March that Trump would win the primaries, and de facto by May, and official in July. And yet still look at how many wimp Republicans either stayed home, voted Johnson, or even worse defected to Clinton.

    There is zero chance that in just two short weeks, Le Pen's group will be able to pull together enough of the Fillon voters (mostly old cucks living in comfortable retirement), or enough of the anti-Establishment Melenchon voters, to beat the assembled forces of cuckdom.

    That's exactly what happened last time.

    If their process allowed for a longer time between primaries and general to build coalitions, I would have faith in Le Pen pulling off a narrow victory, like Trump or Brexit.

    But the way the process is, there's no chance for major re-alignments, and the status quo just goes on and on.

    France needs another one of its periodic Revolutions to change the way they elect presidents.

    ReplyDelete
  22. If we had had a free-for-all primary, the four top candidates would have been Trump (Le Pen), Clinton (Macron), Sanders (Melenchon), and Bush (Fillon), in that order.

    Imagine the primary ended after March. Two weeks later, would the Bush voters be more inclined to go with Trump or Clinton? Meanwhile most of the Sanders supporters would join Clinton too, and she'd be a shoe-in.

    I'm really glad for our American system, where we don't have to go through violent revolutions to get a re-alignment -- scathing primaries is as bad as it gets, unlike in Europe.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Also notice what a killer it is to be anti-Establishment but also pro-immigration. Melenchon came in 3rd, despite being close to Le Pen on the other main issues (EU, trade / globalization, government spending). And Bernie would've come in 3rd after Trump and Clinton, for the same reason.

    The anti-Establishment Left either accepts nationalism, or it goes extinct. The Establishment does not need to accept anything to continue existing -- just through inertia, they will, even if they wind up losing.

    But the anti-Establishment Left has no built-in base or inertia or funding or media. They either hold their nose on nationalism, and ride the Trump bandwagon as coalition partners, albeit not cheerleaders -- or they're done.

    After 4 and then 8 years of Trump, nationalism especially regarding immigration will be fait accompli, and they may feel less motivation to try keeping up their pro-immigration anti-Establishment platform.

    But in the meantime, when closed borders and deportations are not yet all said and done, they will probably wimp out and try to carve out a "third way".

    However, after 8 years, if they accept nationalist immigration is already done, and run a Bernie-type candidate who will not open the borders, that would kill any cuckservative that the GOP thinks about running after Trump's two terms. Probably including Pence, if he's still VP for the second term.

    Still, that's assuming such a nationalist could squeak through the Dem primaries -- and that looks very doubtful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They were just tested...and failed. They stood up to, and then quickly backed down from, the striver upper-middle class women on abortion. See Tom Perez today. They *know* now this is hurting them and still they got cold feet, tucked tail, and backed down. P!#:÷whipped?

      There's a lot of parallels between that and globalism in a way I hadn't appreciated until these past few weeks: loved and held dear by wealthier strivers to the dismay of everyone else. Good proxy issue for gauging the Democratic party vis a vis populism.

      Yes, Marine can't win and that's unfortunate if you hope for a soft landing.
      I had thought Trump/US would succeeded best in transitioning, but given how much trouble he's having, I now wonder if it was naive to doubt Putin/Russia of course would be the most successful. Knocking off a few sociopathic plutocrats who savaged Russia plus a tighter press? Beats revolution, overreaction, and paranoia.

      Everyone says Germany's process is the worst. I'm not up on the electoral processees of Europe, but assumed they reflected the priorities and defeatism of post-War Europe, and, ergo, continental Europe would be the least responsive to nationalism.

      Delete
  24. I can't believe this is happening, but oh my God, this is happening: we're taking a second look at Joseph Stalin.

    No brakes on the Trump Train.

    You're aware of Stumps series and footsies some have played with Stalin. Now in this thread, there's debate about whether Stalin was really responsible for the Holodomor among other things:
    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/france-elections-2017-first/#comments

    I totally understand and get it. Personally, give me the butt kicking, but non-mass murdering Cossacks. But, again, I get what's going on.
    Still, Joseph Stalin!! (Screaming in pillow)

    ReplyDelete
  25. one of the more revealing things is the media (see: cnn) framing the race between macron and le pen now as being between a "centrist" and a "populist." implying that the two things are somehow opposite, mutually exclusive...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really don't know anything about this woman, only she seems nice, kind of staid, close to the gays...
      For all I know, she could be the next coming of Hitler, but all I have to go on is that the same people who've been histrionic over Trump, have been histrionic over her, too, so...
      Btw, this gets at another dimension of the nation-confidence factor: how much you wrap yourself in gays.

      Putin: ha!
      Eastern Euro leaders: ha, ha, ha!!!
      Trump: I'll be a father to them.
      Le Pen: they're my bffs
      Wilders: gives talk at Twinks for Trump event.

      God, I'd hate to see what the German populist would do.

      Delete
  26. Do Western Euros have crappy elections out of spite towards the American system?

    In America, as you hint, candidates are given ample time to make a case to a variety of people and regions before the big decision, though the Dem primary stupidly gives more weight to urban areas (which are devalued in the general election). We get a lot of feeling out, and a lot of cooling off. The GOP played (relatively) fair, let Trump make his case and persuade people to get him the nom. The Dems screwed Sanders, didn't get a populist nominated, and Trump rode the populist wave to victory.

    As we see with Euro run-offs and the US primaries, it's difficult to get two populists sufficient momentum to carry them through the whole way. But we're generous enough to give the populace time to consider which person to choose ultimately, whereas in France, a non-establishment candidate, should they clear the run-off, has just two weeks to persuade a big chunk of the electorate that hasn't even processed that a maverick candidate has a respectably sized base and perhaps isn't insane.

    Osoff, Macron, McMullin....Is this BS finally going to end when cocooning abates in 5-10 years? So many women, subconsciously, thinking "my new gay BFF!"

    ReplyDelete
  27. OT:
    I love Comrade Stumps embrace of Stalin. He's surely in Hell, but it was so great sending my spoiled kid brother a Stalin-MAGA hat meme after he bragged about getting away with paying less $$$ cuz of a fake price sticker on something; only a spoiled rich kid thing to do. My poor (1/2) brother, his soul, he needs all the prayers he can get. To know him would be to understand why "spoiled" is perfectly apt and why Jesus said it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle... On earth, he's already living in Hell.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Pat has a great article on the press vs Trump and that they face a lose-lose situation:
    http://buchanan.org/blog/nixons-revenge-fall-adversary-press-126896

    "For the mainstream media, seeking to recover the lost confidence of its countrymen, this war looks like a lose-lose."

    Immediately after reading this, I noticed Trump had an #ICYMI item about two executive orders he signed this weekend. Of course, my husband and I *had* missed them. Constantly, constantly, CONSTANTLY the press ignores Trump actions relevant and good for his base and simply ponders, "Why do they still have faith in him though he fails them?" Or, put another way, "How are we failing in our propaganda mission?"
    It wouldn't be so irksome if the media and writers on the Right could analyze and discuss, but instead, they're getting into constant fights with the Lefty writers. More fun for the journalists, I'm sure, but I think everyone else is ready to move on, especially because he is a transformative president.

    Presidential Executive Order on Establishment of Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/05/01/presidential-executive-order-establishment-office-trade-and

    Presidential Executive Order Addressing Trade Agreement Violations and Abuses

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/05/01/presidential-executive-order-addressing-trade-agreement-violations-and

    ReplyDelete
  29. Dahlia doxxed:

    https://twitter.com/MaineFirstMedia/status/859197889590984704

    ReplyDelete

You MUST enter a nickname with the "Name/URL" option if you're not signed in. We can't follow who is saying what if everyone is "Anonymous."