Race riots 2020

DanielH

Woodpecker
I think it's good to understand there are no "left liberals" anymore, only disaffected ones. The best example of other disaffected left liberals in the wild are Tim Pool, Joe Rogan, Michael Tracey, Bret Weinstein. These folks are not the enemy, they may disagree on certain points (the Religion stuff specifically), but they are essentially allies in preserving the union and preserving our right to free speech. Rather than dividing our ranks, we should aim to expand the number of reasonable human beings who are not going to bow to the poz. The biggest thing at stake right now is the union and our freedoms. We can find agreement with the dissident left on those issues, even if there are other issues we may disagree with in the future. I am not sure how this translates to real life friendships and relationships, I tend not to hang out with shitlibs lol.
The normal, civil left you're talking about is perfectly fine with a number of policies that are an abomination in God's eyes, and are miles left on social issues than the average American a couple decades ago. America is the new Babylon and there is nothing enviable about “moderate” or “civil” Babylonians.
 

FullThrottleTX

Woodpecker
The normal, civil left you're talking about is perfectly fine with a number of policies that are an abomination in God's eyes, and are miles left on social issues than the average American a couple decades ago. America is the new Babylon and there is nothing enviable about “moderate” or “civil” Babylonians.

Replace "God" with "Social Justice". Replace "miles left" with "miles right". You have Antifa.
You're the mirror image of the other side.

The difference between Antifa and the alternative is...
Believing in freedom of speech, diversity of opinions, allowing disagreement, constructive debate.
Also, preserving the union.

This isn't a left vs. right battle.
 

gework

Ostrich
Gold Member
of other disaffected left liberals in the wild are Tim Pool, Joe Rogan, Michael Tracey, Bret Weinstein.

I noted in another thread that these left-liberals have only started coming out of the woodwork for free speech now the liberal-left are routinely called conservative in the MSM, being canceled and thrown under the bus. The same has been happening to conservatives for many decades and they did nothing.

This is the only possible outcome in a system based on man-made rules. Once those who enforce them die or loose position, a whole host of new rules will be injected by other groups, for their own material and status benefit.

We are really starting to see that you can't have a working society with 250 million differing, morphing sources of morality.

From another thread re. JK Rowling:

By and large they are only having this reaction, as their soft-power, which requires a liberal sprinkling of grievances is being washed away. Rowling types have been the dominant group for two generations and in the ascendancy for the previous two. They require a mild paralysis of conservative men and women to be able to assume leadership roles, which they are not made for. They can only hold those positions from behind the veneer of representing marginalised people.

An analysis of what they say shows they always sympathise with the causes of the far-left, but only so far as it can support liberal dominance. When it comes to these causes supporting the far-left ascendancy they start to get very defensive and offer condemnation of the far-left that verges on censoriousness. They are not interested in engaging the far-left. They want them gone, so they can continue to offer milquetoast policies for systemic oppression. The freaks at the end of the spectrum are useful, but they shouldn't be grappling for position with well-educated, cognizant and well spoken academics(-types).

Conversely they are much more hostile to the moderate-right and conservatives than they are the far-left. They see these people as having no validity, demagogues. I've heard numerous of the liberals say how they don't want to talk with conservatives. They won't come out and say they want them banned. They want them 'over there', out of the way. Somewhere where they don't have to deal with them. That somewhere is the place they pushed them using softer versions of the same ploys the far-left wield against them. Note that we have seen them say very little on the wholesale banning of conservative voices from the internet ghettos of Silicon Valley. They are only coming out now liberals are getting hit.

In particular Eric Weinstein has said on multiple occasions that he wants the intellectual dork web to instantly root out people who should not be part of the conversation. When you put it together with other things he says, there are less than 1% of people who would be allowed to participate in their great 'liberal' debate.

More: https://www.rooshvforum.com/threads/then-they-came-for-jk-rowling.37820/#post-1345433
 

FullThrottleTX

Woodpecker
I noted in another thread that these left-liberals have only started coming out of the woodwork for free speech now the liberal-left are routinely called conservative in the MSM, being canceled and thrown under the bus. The same has been happening to conservatives for many decades and they did nothing.

Either we can make our tent bigger, or we can make it smaller. It's our choice.
We can recognize the common ground we have on issues, or we can hold grudges based on perceived past ills.

I don't think we can afford to push allies away because of stupid grudges.
 
Last edited:

FullThrottleTX

Woodpecker
My ally is someone with a strong connection to God and who base their life off of obeying him. Doesn't even have to be the same religion as me necessarily. As soon as you step out of what God "said" as your moral compass, I no longer consider you an ally, you are now at minimum a danger to yourself and at maximum a danger to me and my family.

Interesting.
So even people who defend your freedom of speech, if they disagree on the religious points, are an enemy.
 

gework

Ostrich
Gold Member
Either we can make our tent bigger, or we can make it smaller. It's our choice.
We can recognize the common ground we have on issues, or we can hold grudges based on perceived past ills.

I don't think we can afford to push allies away because of stupid grudges.

I don't have grudges about the fact it was the liberal-left you suggest engaging with who created the environment of very few self-identifying conservatives in institutions. I am at peace with society going off the edge an am grappling with that reality as best I can.

As mentioned this is the inevitable outcome of society being controlled by man-made ideologies. When one ideology gains control it will become in some ways supreme. The liberal-left has been supreme in recent years, now it's increasingly the radical, globalist-backed left.

Most people on this forum would not be in line to be engaged by the intellectual dark web, never mind formed into a new coalition. As mentioned Weinstein is very aggressive about policing who is engaged. And that engagement is with a few people talking on the internet with no institutional power and virtually no organisation beyond occasionally meeting up in Joe Rogan's pot cave. The liberal-left is utterly nuked and they cannot grapple with the left who use the same mechanism they did to scrub conservatives.

Granted, the IDW are much stronger on free speech than the left. But they have no intention to engage beyond a narrowband. This is to their great detriment as while they spent decades closing the door on conservatism, they are the ones who opened the doors to the radical left who now run amok.

It seems the option I am being presented with is joining a movement with no institutional power, that has destroyed its power with its own rules and softness for left-wing perspectives and which I can shut up and sit at the back of the bus while they try and rekindle their ideology.
 
Interesting.
So even people who defend your freedom of speech, if they disagree on the religious points, are an enemy.

I didn't say they have to be the same religion as me. We will disagree on religious points no question about that. But I simply do not trust people that don't believe in God and try to please him, its a personal preference. Not saying its the right one Im just saying its mine.
 

FactusIRX

Woodpecker
My ally is someone with a strong connection to God and who base their life off of obeying him. Doesn't even have to be the same religion as me necessarily. As soon as you step out of what God "said" as your moral compass, I no longer consider you an ally, you are now at minimum a danger to yourself and at maximum a danger to me and my family.
All atheists are our greatest enemies and always have been. They have rooted God from life so consistently and forcefully for decades, leaving only nihilism or Satanism that is now the dominant ideology of the left. This will lead to mass murder and atrocities that will make the Soviet Union look like child’s play.

I hate, hate, hate these atheist liberals like JK Rowling or Rogan or Sam Harris the Tractor that say they are only concerned about “logic” or “reason” to “disprove“ God, when they should full well know that neither concept exists outside of God. And as they deny God, they deny life and bring in death.
 

FullThrottleTX

Woodpecker
All atheists are our greatest enemies and always have been. They have rooted God from life so consistently and forcefully for decades, leaving only nihilism or Satanism that is now the dominant ideology of the left. This will lead to mass murder and atrocities that will make the Soviet Union look like child’s play.

I hate, hate, hate these atheist liberals like JK Rowling or Rogan or Sam Harris the Tractor that say they are only concerned about “logic” or “reason” to “disprove“ God, when they should full well know that neither concept exists outside of God. And as soon as they deny God, they deny life and bring in death.

Yikes. Even Einstein believed in God. He also believed in Reason. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
Plenty of liberals are believers. Catholics tend to be liberals.
 
Is it even worth pointing out that most people aren't rabid leftists? History is written by fanatics. A coup d'etat is carried out by a tiny group of people and everybody else is taken for a ride.The Bolsheviks weren't a majority by any stretch of the imagination, but with their global funding and zeal, they crumbled Russia and killed astronomical numbers of people. These people in our lives, the "normal" people who do things like watch TV and go shopping to relieve boredom, these people are the spoils for the political victors to tax or oppress at their discretion. They aren't involved in machinations of active politics or history, they aren't part of the game. Most don't even know what the game really is. Who cares if your co-workers or boomer parents think the left is "going a little too far"? Is their impotent disapproval going to mean anything to a group of violent leftist zealots and their billionaire patrons?

This is right on the ball

Marxism in its basics is heavily rooted in the principle of democratic centralism. It was a structure thought out by Lenin and has been embraced by basically every Marxist organisation on this planet

Democratic centralism means that there is a democratic element involved *before* decision making. Think large gatherings at Party conferences. However, after the decision has been made at a Party level, there has to be ideological unity, both inwards and outwards. Dissent will be punished harshly

To translate this to today, the infighting that you see on the Left doesn't make them weaker, it makes them stronger. It means they are aiming for ideological purity and are rooting out people and ideas that could potentially derail their movement and ideology


More importantly, democratic centralism means that the Revolution is led by a vanguard. This vanguard is dedicated to the cause and ideologically well versed. As can be seen throughout history, most of these people are middle/ upper class individuals that are university educated

Historically it have always been, ironically, bourgeoisie elements that are leading the masses of peasants and workers.

Now replace peasants and workers with blacks and Hispanics

Anyway, that's why the argument that 9 out of 10 Democrats don't really support this doesn't matter (which isn't factually true anyway, the amount of support they have is making me uncomfortable). The Democratic Party, media, educational facilities etc. etc. have all been hijacked by the rabid hateful vanguard of this unholy alliance between neo-liberalist oligarchs and cultural Marxism.

The vanguard guides this ship. The 90 percent is in their huts below deck. Their opinion is irrelevant
 

DanielH

Woodpecker
Interesting.
So even people who defend your freedom of speech, if they disagree on the religious points, are an enemy.
Satan loves freedom of speech if it allows his useful idiots to pick away at the Church and moral institutions. Freedom of speech has never been a thing anywhere, ever, so I'm not sure why you're so hung up on that. In the US we've locked up journalists in several major wars, even look at the alien and sedition acts. In Heaven you're not free to slander God, and you shouldn't be free to do so here, either. In a household you cant slander the father, as a child. In church you can't belittle the priest. At work you can't excessively criticize your boss. Nowhere does this freedom of speech exist, present, past, America, or Zimbabwe.

These degenerates you're talking about are only upset because the riots are getting close to interrupting their constant flood of sex, money, attention, and drugs. Joe Rogan is absolutely fine with two dudes sodomizing each other while doing DMT. Tim Pool I believe is fine with abortion. If these are the allies I use to take down the evil progressives, we're at best buying ourselves time.
 

FullThrottleTX

Woodpecker
I didn't say they have to be the same religion as me. We will disagree on religious points no question about that. But I simply do not trust people that don't believe in God and try to please him, its a personal preference. Not saying its the right one Im just saying its mine.

You assume you can afford to be picky about who to include in your personal list of allies, I don't think that's the case.
 

FullThrottleTX

Woodpecker
Satan loves freedom of speech if it allows his useful idiots to pick away at the Church and moral institutions. Freedom of speech has never been a thing anywhere, ever, so I'm not sure why you're so hung up on that. In the US we've locked up journalists in several major wars, even look at the alien and sedition acts. In Heaven you're not free to slander God, and you shouldn't be free to do so here, either. In a household you cant slander the father, as a child. In church you can't belittle the priest. At work you can't excessively criticize your boss. Nowhere does this freedom of speech exist, present, past, America, or Zimbabwe.

These degenerates you're talking about are only upset because the riots are getting close to interrupting their constant flood of sex, money, attention, and drugs. Joe Rogan is absolutely fine with two dudes sodomizing each other while doing DMT. Tim Pool I believe is fine with abortion. If these are the allies I use to take down the evil progressives, we're at best buying ourselves time.

Okay. Well, I mean. I'm not going to argue with you. You don't like what the United States of America is about. You don't like the Constitution.
You want a religious monarchy. I'm not going to argue with that like we're on the same page. It's a different point of view. You definitely have a right to your opinion as I have a right to mine.
 

FullThrottleTX

Woodpecker
Keep in mind some of these people aren’t set in stone.

For example Roosh converted. Tim Pool is now
saying some things that indicate he’s starting to believe.

The battle is between those who reason and those who can’t. Those who do reason will inevitably find their way to faith.

Yes. This is pretty spot on.

My own critique of the dissident left is they underestimate how much a need religion is for a large percentage of the population. BLM/Antifa/Socialism has replaced religion. If you listen to the protestors, this is a RELIGIOUS movement. It's not coherent. It's not spiritual, but it has the same properties of a religion essentially, without the good moral messages or basis in reality.

I think some of the dissident left will come back into the Christian fold eventually.
They'll realize that there is no other path forward.

Still, I think there is merit in working together. I don't think you can have religious liberty without freedom of speech. That's a big problem in our society.
 

Easy_C

Crow
Yep. The only ones I think who can’t really be reconciled with a juvenile anti-authority mentality like Styx. The dude is smart and has been a damn good predictor of political events but that flaw prevents him from having any workable ideology.

You also have some like Rogan who are shills. A lot of them will become open to conversion once their usefulness runs out and they money dries up.
 

FullThrottleTX

Woodpecker
Yep. The only ones I think who can’t really be reconciled with a juvenile anti-authority mentality like Styx. The dude is smart and has been a damn good predictor of political events but that flaw prevents him from having any workable ideology.

You also have some like Rogan who are shills. A lot of them will become open to conversion once their usefulness runs out and they money dries up.

Rogan is a political Switzerland. In a world without these spaces, his work has tremendous value. Without Rogan, a huge number of thinkers would not get any kind of airtime. Rogan would be cancelled if he hadn't already built his podcast empire. He's good at knowing what the line is.

We need political Switzerlands.
This is what is lacking.
 
Rogan is a political Switzerland. In a world without these spaces, his work has tremendous value. Without Rogan, a huge number of thinkers would not get any kind of airtime. Rogan would be cancelled if he hadn't already built his podcast empire. He's good at knowing what the line is.

We need political Switzerlands.
This is what is lacking.

One of the MAIN reasons Rogan hasn't been cancelled, is because of his (((wife))). Course he knows where the (((line))) is. Heard through the grapevine her family has some connections up the totem pole in the media world. But hell, I'm just a gentile, what do I really know???
 
Top