“Jordan Peterson LIVE: 12 Rules for Life – An Antidote to Chaos”

His 4th appearance on the Rubin Report:

Thoughts on American exceptionalism and race relations

For all the critiques I may volley at my nation, the truth remains that the American national project continues to be the highest ideal dreamt up on this planet thus far. Not that all of its ideals have materialized or been brought into fruition to their fullest extent possible, but the original dream itself is exceptional and awe-inspiring.

Unfortunately, plenty out here today wish to undermine it, spit upon it, and dismantle it. Why? Because they see it as rooted in evil due to being the brain-child of white men from long ago. White men being synonymous with everything hate-filled and exclusionary, so some like to think. They take issue with the fact that slaves were brought to this country (though it can be argued that America engaged in slavery for a shorter duration than many other countries, particularly those in the Middle East). They also take issue with this land having been “stolen” from the natives who lived here before — as if any land hasn’t changed hands throughout the course of history, typically through much bloodshed. And nowadays they take issue with what they see as inherent corruption that they assume is deeply ingrained and a natural byproduct of a powerful Western nation (though all nation-states are vulnerable to corruption, as were all chiefdoms — and this is hardly a feature unique to the West).

Some take issue with our police forces and accuse them of racism. Though current research provides evidence that cops are actually less likely to use lethal force against black people as compared against white people. Then again, other findings suggest blacks are more likely to be handled roughly than whites by cops, so the narrative that cops are racist marches onward. One could ponder the general demeanor of black folks toward cops in trying to understand why cops might opt for a more rough-handed approach in dealing with them, but that’s a taboo topic to discuss publicly, lest you be labeled a racist as well. Seems to me that the general behavior of an easily identifiable demographic has the unfortunate consequences of leading all of them, even those who comply with lawful orders, to be treated with heightened scrutiny and cautiousness. Now, does that qualify as an inherent, institutionalized form of racism? Hmm. It doesn’t strike me as so since it appears more to do with risk assessment and police taking proactive measures to deescalate any potential threats. Is that unfair? Depends on how far it’s taken and what the circumstances are in a given situation. It’s not as if police officers are known for being extremely kind and gentle to all others suspected of wrongdoing. It seems to me this issue winds up being at least partly a matter of projection, whereby individuals break the law or are highly uncooperative when being questioned by police but then become indignant when any consequences are doled out.

Take, for instance, all the talk on Evergreen’s campus about an event in 2015 where a police officer shot two *unarmed* black male brothers named Bryson Chaplin (21) and Andre Thompson (24) shortly after they attempted to rob a grocery store of beer. In a piece titled “In Solidarity with the Struggle for Racial Justice at the Evergreen State College” written by Peter Bohmer (a member of the faculty at Evergreen State College, Olympia, WA — posted May 29, 2017), he harkens back to that off-campus case:

Two years ago, May 21st, 2015, two young Black men, Bryson Chaplin and Andre Thompson were both shot in Olympia, Washington by white police officer Ryan Donald in Olympia as they were going home on their skateboards after attempting to shoplift some beer from a local Safeway. In a miscarriage of justice and emblematic of the continuing racism here, although there were no injuries to the white police officer, and Bryson Chaplin was shot multiple times by Officer Donald and is in a wheelchair; the police officer was not charged with any crime nor disciplined while the two young men, Bryson Chaplin and Andre Thompson were convicted on May 18, 2017 of third degree assault. They will be sentenced in June. This is part of the context for the movement on campus which also contains demands against racism by campus police.

Peter Bohmer proved especially prolific in writing about that event in various places, every time characterizing the situation as a white cop mistreating black youths in a completely unwarranted fashion.

Evergreen State College’s student newspaper The Cooperpoint Journal contains several articles pertaining to this case, including one describing major protests in front of the Olympia police station the very next day:

“Whose lives matter? Black lives matter!” was the chant ringing out in downtown Olympia Thursday evening as hundreds of protesters took to the streets in response to the shooting of two unarmed black men, stepbrothers Andre Thompson and Bryson Chaplin, by an Olympia police officer, drawing national media attention.

The two men, Thompson, 24 and Chaplin, 21, remain in the hospital and are expected to survive, although Chaplin was still listed as in critical condition as of Thursday evening.

Officer Ryan Donald shot the brothers around 1 a.m. Thursday morning, after responding to a call about alleged shoplifting from the Westside Safeway, not far from The Evergreen State College.

Olympians awoke Thursday morning to news of the incident, and began organizing throughout the day, culminating in a march to city hall, where the Olympia Police Department is headquartered.

The biggest protest began around 6 p.m. in Woodruff Park, directly next to the Westside police precinct, and about a mile from the site of the shooting.

As hundreds gathered—predominantly from the Evergreen community—they formed a circle around organizers and community members who spoke about their experiences with police, the larger national context of police violence against black people, and organizing and resistance tactics. The speakers continued to discuss these issues over a megaphone as the crowd swelled to an estimated 400 people by 7 p.m. when protesters took the street on the corner of Harrison Avenue and Perry Street.

Protesters marched down the hill, blocking traffic in both directions on Harrison Avenue, while yelling and chanting “black lives matter” and “no justice, no peace, no racist police.”

Crossing the Fourth Avenue Bridge into downtown, the crowd’s numbers reached an estimated one thousand people, shutting down Olympia’s main thoroughfare on their way to the city center.

Once in downtown, protesters stopped and held the intersection of Fourth Avenue and Columbia Street, for the first time becoming quiet. Organizers asked the crowd to participate in a four and a half minutes of silence, symbolic of the four and a half hours Michael Brown’s body was left in the street after being shot by police earlier this year in Ferguson, Missouri. Everyone sat silently in the street, before beginning call and response chants of victims names: “Andre Thompson, Bryson Chaplin, we honor you.”

When the demonstrators reached city hall, they blocked the intersection of Fourth Avenue and Cherry Street, many demanding that Ryan Donald be indicted for his actions. They continued to hold a rally in front of city hall for nearly an hour, with more speakers and chants, before marching back through downtown and over the bridge to Woodruff Park.

On their way back, at least two motorists instigated confrontations with demonstrators, but the march resolved peacefully, with people dispersing between 9:30 and 10 p.m.

Later that night, a smaller number of protesters rallied again at the Artesian Well and occupied the intersection outside city hall. Most wore all black and covered their faces, marching behind a large banner reading “cops=murderers,” and “judges=executioners,” and emblazoned with a circle A, an anarchist symbol.

This group was more antagonistic towards the police, and the situation escalated when they began to clash with pro-police demonstrators in front of city hall. Police then used flash grenades to disperse the crowd at about 12:15 a.m. Friday morning, leading to moments of chaos in downtown as demonstrators and confused bystanders scattered, running and yelling.

The anger of protesters and community members is exacerbated by disputes about the details of the shooting. More information and facts concerning the incident are still being discovered. However, based on what we already know, many believe that Officer Donald’s use of force was not only unnecessary, but also racist.

Even a vigil was orchestrated for the shot brothers. And this year (2 years later, mind you) they circulated news of another gathering to show more support. Why? Because those students and faculty members view the incident as a clear-cut example of police brutality and the shooting of unarmed suspects, period. This is an ideologically influenced position they are taking, convinced that police are automatically in the wrong in pretty much all cases and that racial minorities are rarely deserving of whatever consequences befall them based on their actions and choices.

This is a problem nationwide currently, the spreading of this attitude. The narrative it promotes is not only anti-police and pro-minorities but it’s also recently showing itself to be outright anti-white and anti-American.

Some would say if you can’t beat it, then burn it down. That appears to be what’s trying to unfold at present across this land…

Nevermind the history — the same sort of people are responsible for tearing down Southern statues and monuments and have since been turning their attention toward trying to remove museum displays. So the modus operandi there appears to be to erase history, or any signs or mention of it.

Take as another recent example the case of a student group called “Reedies Against Racism” protesting a required humanities course at Reed College, wherein a student reportedly stated: “forcing students to take a mandatory Western Civilization course is really harmful.” That being a course said to focus on great thinkers from ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt, and Mesopotamia.

The protest continued this school year, as students interrupted the lecture, got in screaming matches with students, boycotted classes, and vowed to have silent protests during every lecture. The student activists have also brought in mental healthcare advocates for students who have reported having “panic attacks” due to the course material.

“The course in its current iteration draws from predominantly white authors and relies heavily on the notion that Western customs are the most civilized because they are derived from those of ancient Greeks and Romans who are considered the inventors of civilization,” Alex Boyd, a main Reedies Against Racism organizer, told The College Fix via Facebook recently.

Check out the list of demands put out by “Reedies Against Racism.”

It would be funny if it weren’t so goddamn obstructive.

So, what do these types of people want? What’s their primary objective here? Do they really detest all that America is or ever was? If so, why? Totally taking for granted the privileges they themselves do in fact partake in? Ideologically-possessed, yes, but what else is this? Is looking more and more to me like a will to destroy. One obstructs when they cannot or will not construct. So how does one effectively react to this? Arguments don’t seem to work.

Karen Straughan, Millennial Woes, racial grievances and what the future might hold

Came across a blog post by Karen Straughan earlier tonight that she had written a month back titled “Open letter to Sargon of Akkad.” In it she’s taking issue with where modern identity politics are taking us in Western nations and how it’s now become socially, morally and legally permissible to denigrate white people (and white straight cisgendered males in particular).

She goes on to bring up a legitimate concern about how those currently claiming minority status and thereby “epistemic privilege” (or “epistemic advantage” as Millennial Woes helpfully reworded it to better clarify) can and very likely will continue using the argument being advanced now that they have been oppressed and remain oppressed, even if their ethnic groups become a population majority and even if they switch from being under anybody else’s thumb and in fact become the oppressors (in this case, of white people). That’s a very interesting observation that I happen to agree with her on. Why? Because victim narratives die hard. And, as she well knows, victim narratives in this day and age have come to provide a sense of entitlement, which then can be experienced as a privilege of sorts in its own right (despite those claiming such a narrative refusing to acknowledge this reality).

Considering how humans tend to operate, I don’t doubt for a minute that people will continue exploiting such a situation. Why? Because people belonging to various ethnic groups in the West have indeed been indoctrinated into seriously resenting “the White Man” and all that he represents. Dates back several decades by now. See no signs of it slowing anytime soon. In fact, the trend appears to be on a sharp upswing once again, having simmered down a bit in the ’80s and early 2000s.

Makes me think of the Zimbardo prison experiment where students were randomly assigned to the position of prisoner or guard and how the guards in short order began abusing their power. Why? Because they could. Felt like a license to do so. What starts out as playful prodding can degenerate quickly when one desires a scapegoat or a target on which to direct their animosity. Add authority to the mix and one can feel empowered. Now, on top of that add years of steeping in racial grievance industry propaganda and being repeatedly told that you’ve been mistreated, you’ve been taken advantage of, you’ve been denied your proper dues, your ancestors were raped by these bastards’ ancestors, you were made into slaves and stolen from your native land and disrobed of the royalty you and your people once possessed — well, you can imagine that tensions will run high and that pain will indeed be inflicted when and where opportunities allow for it. Embolden black Americans and latinos and native Americans to take this view and to join forces against white people, and the result may surely be an eventual attempt at genocide.

I don’t doubt it. Sounds like the trajectory we may be on at present. Certainly is what some are foaming at the mouth in their wishing and praying to bring about. I can think immediately of examples of BLM members and “King Noble” and some man provided air time on CSPAN a few years back to promote his dream for white genocide. Some are indeed wanting this to be the outcome, and they clearly say so. How many are in agreement with them? More than makes me comfortable. Makes a person pause and wonder how many more will embrace such barbaric thinking in going forward. Time will tell…

So I can appreciate why Karen is nervous. She has three light-skinned, fair-haired, blue-eyed children (according to her). This is a future they will inherit, and it will be them who may wind up victims of these cries for vengeance. Surely I can understand why any parent today would be worried about what the future may hold. Doesn’t look too good. Makes me to ponder on what it might take to change this course.

Karen understands that tribal identities are deeply ingrained in people. I’d argue most especially in non-white people these days, for whatever reasons. Somewhere in all of this she stated (to paraphrase) that she’d rather her kids grow up in a white identitarian society than wind up “targets of a legally and socially acceptable hate campaign.” And what parent wouldn’t prefer the former if the latter were the alternative? I get it. Don’t have kids of my own and considerations like this only added to my reasons over time for refusing to have any.

She asked the following (rhetorical) questions: “Would leaving your entire estate to people of color, as that BLM leader he vlogged about suggested whites should do, be enough to remove the stain of original sin and spare your children? Would paying reparations be enough? Is there anything that would be enough to wash a white person clean of their unearned privilege and the blot of having benefited from a system of white supremacy that has uniquely exploited all other groups? How could it, when the system is set up so that you can’t help but benefit, and cannot, because of your privilege, even appreciate how you’ve benefited?” NO. Because it’s not about achieving equality among the races/ethnicities anymore, if it ever really was. It’s become a power grab, plain and simple, and for some it’s driven by a sadistic desire to unleash hell on others. POWER.

Why do I say that? Because power has been the focal point among many of these identity groups for decades, and at the exclusion of nearly all else. It’s what their teachers resented most and what so many have been actively taught to desire to wrest from others. Why? Because they believe it is their due. Where does it eventually end? Probably in such a major moral crisis that those claiming victimhood today will be forced to see themselves as having become the victimizers. Which is to say far past the point of initiating violence and dispensing of protection of rights for all across the board and fairness under the eyes of the Law. Why? Because people can’t resist pushing envelopes, most especially when they’re ideologically possessed to the point where they are rendered blind to the reality of the situation and cannot clearly ascertain their own hypocrisy in the least.

Humans are sons of bitches, that much is true. We can be wonderful, giving, considerate beings, but we can also be hellish beasts bent on revenge based on distorted worldviews who refuse to accept the possibility that we might indeed be wrong. Even inhumane in our own right. Heaven forbid we turn out actually worse than those we’re claiming were such god-awful oppressors. But then again, we can rationalize anything if we try hard enough. “They made us into the beasts we are now. It is because of them and centuries of slavery under them. They had it coming.” And all will be deemed justified until enough within their own ranks experience a crisis in conscience and choose to forcefully speak out and resist (assuming enough ever do so — that’s not guaranteed).

So yes, I can completely understand why the future looks so bleak and why white folks are concerned. They/we should be. How do you make it stop? Millennial Woes was right in his video where he stated that those on the extremes are done talking. They don’t want to work it out because they see any compromise in this regard as futile or it doesn’t deliver what they desire. Some indeed do see it that way. I personally don’t, nor can I view this situation entirely in terms of race and join a group accordingly. Am one of those mixed beige misfits he spoke of who probably would wind up rejected along racial lines, so I have no choice but to seek answers elsewhere. My view is that this is more about culture than it is expressly about race. Western cultures have European roots which were white in origin, but that doesn’t mean all who are white currently embrace Western cultures or their extensive history, nor does it automatically exclude all not in possession of European ancestry and blood from heartily appreciating, upholding and fighting to protect Western cultures and values. To make this about race is a losing game, and I don’t just say that based on my own bias. I honestly don’t see a massive race war ending well for hardly anybody.

At this point I’d like to offer up Millennial Woes’ video response to her:

Watched it shortly after reading her blog post. In his video he discusses thread commentary that must’ve taken place in Sargon’s comment section. Now, as far as alt-righters go, I happen to like MW. Don’t agree with him on everything and recognize that he’d probably view someone like me as an irrelevant distraction and not to be trusted (based on half of my ethnic bloodline). Fair enough. But I still watch his videos from time to time and take into consideration his views despite where our opinions starkly differ. He said some interesting things here that I’d like to draw attention to.

Pausing at 33:35: He spoke of society having the option of being either “white dominant or white vulnerable” due to assuming that all this hate being generated toward white people will likely result in legal protections not being granted toward white people if ever they are removed from power in our Western countries. That gets me thinking about an academic journal article I read yesterday titled “The Case For Colonialism” by Bruce Gilley. Kind of hate to mention it in this context since the paper is receiving enough heat as is, but what I appreciated about it was the emphasis on the benefits bestowed by colonialism and how its removal has led to devastating collapses and social unrest in many third world nations. Basically the author reframes the role colonialism once played and discusses how technological, legal and political advancements became possible in those regions while under foreign rule. I see no harm in entertaining the proposal that colonialism provided benefits to nations that otherwise couldn’t have arisen, as was also true for European societies who themselves were once upon a time colonized by more advanced Romans and the like. Cultural appropriation was key in the advancement of societies up through history.

And before people begin screaming in horror, read his article to the end where Gilley discusses how modern colonies might be established whereby the governed provide consent (and how a number of people in these foreign lands indeed do wish to be recolonized after witnessing the disappointing outcome after gaining independence). Gilley’s proposition to bring multinational corporations into the mix was off-putting for me, but the idea could be extended to the formation of intentional communities ran by Western expatriates who choose to reside on location rather than govern from afar. The idea has merit, or at least it could if more details could be hammered out, and I think such projects are overdue in being attempted. Though I don’t doubt the most radicalized among us would probably like a crack at bringing about their idealized utopia in such places, which very likely would lead to more disastrous failure. But then again, the most extreme among us probably wouldn’t leave the West if paid to do so, seeing as how they’re most interested in exploiting this land and this culture for all it might be worth.  Though I’d be down with trying to pay them to go off and try out their ideas. Let rubber hit the pavement and experience why it won’t work firsthand. But if they do fail, naturally they will find a way to blame the West regardless. So maybe the extremists should just stick around here and be dealt with accordingly since they’ll bring misery wherever they go. But those possessing sound minds and an interest in advancement and the formation of a stable, sustainable system could prove to be a major asset in these third world regions where hope is currently dwindling and nation-building isn’t proving to be the natives’ strong suit.

Everything in life being a trade-off. Maintain one’s stubborn pride in the face of warring factions and a destroyed infrastructure and a black market takeover, then that’s on you. Instituting and enforcing effective law and order hasn’t arisen everywhere where populations no longer can be governed according to tribal customs. That’s a reality we’re confronted with, whether we like it or not. What Gilley referred to as “anti-colonial” movements indeed do appear to have done their fair share of harm since the WWII era, if not more than the colonists they claim to take issue with. So paying empty lip service to conditions in unstable regions and laying all blame at the feet of white imperialists for ever colonizing such places in the first place isn’t doing a damn thing to help at this point in history when populations have already expanded and a desire for more modern standards has long-since arisen. Most people on earth don’t desire to return to living in the proverbial grass huts, nor do many (if not most) of those facing such conditions wish to remain in them. But then again, there is the question of whether it’s even feasible at this point to construct and maintain modern infrastructures elsewhere on the planet when necessary resources are growing more scarce, with competition mounting over their acquisition. So, maybe it’s all a pipe dream on my (and the author’s) part.

Anyway, getting back on topic, such inquiries do help one to consider the benefits that colonialism brought to distant lands, which then helps us to recognize it not as simply an evil thrust upon others by white men but an expansion of Western technologies and culture to places where otherwise they might not have naturally arisen for many ages to come. Basically sharing and spreading modernity. At this point I expect my fellow social science-lovers to protest, saying that lands outside of the West would’ve been better off if never introduced to such technologies and cultural values in the first place. Okay. But nearly everybody stating that lives within our Western nations and was educated by our Western schools, and every single one of us has benefited from this setup, whether we care to acknowledge it or not.

That’s my next point: All of us growing up in America (or Canada or the UK or elsewhere in Europe) in this day and age can’t help but be privileged in the eyes of the rest of the world. We have ALL benefited from what Western values and advancements have furnished society. That can’t be helped. From our social programs to our universities; from indoor plumbing to a pretty darn fair legal system (in global standards); to the countless comforts we take for granted everyday. Yet people balk in the face of all of this, as if life would be better were we still trying to eek out an existence on the savanna. Really wish for a return to hunting and gathering? Most of us would never survive it, especially us spoiled on Western conveniences (despite what we might like to imagine). This is what we’ve got, and it’s the best humans have been capable of coming up with. Yet people protest and spit at modernity and its history. Because it was not the product of African nations, then it is rubbish?

Sometimes we can’t appreciate what we have until it’s gone. Our fantasies and concocted ideals like to lead us astray…

I’d like to continue this ramble, but the night has come to an end. Need sleep. Hopefully a topic to be resumed tomorrow.

“Not All”

That video was by a youtuber named Colttaine. First heard of his channel through one of I, Hypocrite’s videos. Very reasonable guy from what I’ve watched thus far.

“CULTURAL MARXISM: The Corruption of America” (plus my thoughts)

This film might strike some as a piece of shameless propaganda:

In it’s own special way, it indeed is. Plenty of truths contained therein, so I would recommend it to others, but only if you promise to sit through the whole 90 minutes. Made me twitch with rebuttals and quibbles, but still I’m glad I watched that tonight because it got me thinking.

Said before and will keep saying that the term “cultural Marxis” has become a misnomer. And this matters because accuracy in language is especially needed on concepts of this magnitude. Previously wrote on here how I view Karl Marx being blamed for all modern problems due to this ideology that continues to bare the name “cultural Marxism” despite it having little to nothing to do with what Marx was actually about. Ok, there are a few points to be made here.

First off, economic class concerns in the 1880s during the rise of Industrialization coinciding with the rise of what we know of as capitalism, which in short order began paving the way toward corporatism. Karl Marx was a product of the 19th century when agrarianism was still common and factories were pretty new. Conditions within those factories hadn’t been regulated yet, so employees could be treated as relatively disposable, creating a situation arguably not a huge step up from slavery. He foresaw what that might develop into, so far as one reasonably could way back then, pre-20th century modernization. And he rightfully protested it, like any luddite worth his salt would. Hell, had I been in his shoes I’d likely have tried sounding the alarm too, and so did plenty of others. Not like Marx was the only one to ever express an opinion on this matter, nor that his teachings were the primary ones to prove super influential on the predecessors to those now known as SJWs. Lots of thinkers contributed to the ideology being referred to as “cultural marxism.”

It’s obvious what it is now is an ideology fashioned over the last century to suit the interests of globalists and power-seekers. Certainly not benefiting the people Marx ever had in mind. Complete reversal instead. That’s what’s so insidious and destructive and outright dishonest about continuing to refer to that ideology as “cultural marxism.” How can opposites both be forms of Marxism? Because it’s evolved, you say? Then why keep calling it by defunct language? Only confuses people, like the maker of that otherwise pretty interesting documentary. Or maybe for some people the term “cultural marxism” really just serves as politically-less-incorrect code for Jews. That’s what I’m starting to think this business of holding onto that term and warning people off of having anything to do with the Frankfurt School authors as though their books were possessed by the devil.

I’ve read number books by Erich Fromm, and guess what, folks! He’s on our side. Read him and see. He wrote against us becoming automatons and corporate and/or government slaves. Not on the side of the globalists. Which people might realize if they actually took time to read the authors they’re criticizing (or in Fromm’s case there, a title page merely flashed across the screen — deemed automatically guilty by association for being a member of the Frankfurt School — no one who studied Marx’s writings could possibly be nuanced and critical in his treatment of it, right? NOT IF THEY WERE IN THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL. Oy.  rolleyes_smilie  Yet another example of how we remain willfully blind.) Excerpts from a few of Fromm’s books I’ve transcribed onto this blog for anyone curious enough to take a glimpse into the sort of things he actually said.

So anyway, Marx wasn’t aiming to be some sort of malicious devil or usher for the rise of totalitarian states. Goes to show how much control we have over what’s done with our ideas once we’ve shared them. Can take on a life of their own. Or be co-opted. Maybe also inverted so that the public gets the message that being class conscious is no different than being race or sex/gender conscious. All are the same and all belong on the political Left. And that’s where there’s a serious problem, considering how much class consciousness really ought to matter to so many of us relative to the few who’ve become an enormously influential economic elite. That’s on a special level way above snowflake identity politics or even race relations seeing as how we’re all in the same societal basket headed in the same direction. That is key, and I don’t think it’s a mistake that the situation has been framed the way it was in that film in relation to so-called “cultural marxism.” Plenty of other sources do the same thing, I’ve seen.

All those dots connected around the 1-hour mark onward — valuable. Too bad they’re packaged in with”cultural marxism”-declaring propaganda. Reduces the whole film’s credibility, that along with the hokey voice-overs and lack of informative explanation on what was proposed by Marx and Frankfurt School authors. Basically just pointed to them and sneered, booing us away from paying too much mind to them other than aiming to avoid them at all cost. Not useful. Propagandist dick move there. Inaccurate for the sake of protecting some semblance of what capitalism was envisioned to be. We’re now post that, whether we like it or not.

This is where I deviate sharply from this film and others like it. Is there a conspiracy of Jews influenced by Marx and whomever else trying to run the world? Who cares? Would it really matter what ethnicity they happen to be? Followers of a globalist agenda obviously aren’t all Jewish (like the Clintons and Bushes and Obamas). Everybody like to form an elaborate theory about who’s angling for power and why and what all they may be tied into. Here’s all we need to know: totalitarianism is the ultimate threat. It’s anti-capitalist, anti-true socialism even, anti-individual, anti-social, anti-human. Whatever form it may take isn’t of particular importance, not in the big picture. At least not outside of comprehending the steps of that rise and consolidation of power.

Are certain relationships about power? Yes, they are. Probably not all, but when it comes to politics there’s most definitely always the threat of a power grab.

Now, in my own personal opinion, I don’t rightly care to nitpick anymore over what elements involved may have come about via intentional collusion and what might simply be the luck of the draw or mounting consequences of short-term opportunism or whatever else. Lots of moving parts at play in the 20th century. The convergence of a plethora of technologies inside growing nation-states and the rise of consumerism and a public education system and wars and exploring the sciences (including psychology) and corporatism and the explosion of our economy….on and on it goes. So much unprecedented shit happening all at once, coming in from every which way. Distractions galore. Looks to me to simply be a conspiracy of Life. So much culminated into the conditions we’re experiencing now, so much that couldn’t have been foreseen or predicted. And some people take advantage of the situation, as to be expected.

Tyranny lurks and seeks out opportunity. Why? Because power does matter to us humans, and to some a whole lot more than others. The will to play god will probably never go out of style. Something psychological within inclines us that way. And some succeed from time to time. Tragic when that happens.

Acknowledging all of that, the part in the film where they talk about our U.S. Constitution and the visions of our forefathers I am deeply in agreement with, BUT we nowadays face the conundrum of living in such complex societies that are indeed already globally connected through markets and military threats. The notion of doing away with our standing army at this point would strike nearly all as ludicrous and surely national suicide. Having a standing army (or in our case, a whole military-industrial complex) is deemed a necessity to at least remain sovereign. But then, of course, that’s never what a military remains limited to, especially not one as powerful as ours. Then there’s also the concern about how the U.S. military is essentially an employment sector by now, and a huge one at that. Employs over a million citizens, I believe. How would anyone wish to go about dismantling that mammoth? Would prove political suicide for a candidate to even suggest such a thing.

See, this is where we’re wrapped up in paradoxes of our own human creation. Not sure how we wriggle out of this mess. It’s become self-perpetuating. And, unfortunately, increasingly less transparent as well as less accessible by the average citizen. I completely agree with the documentary-makers’ sentiments expressed about state and local rights, but how do we check federal powers at this point? Sure, absolutely most of Congress deserves to be impeached. I’ve been saying that for over a decade. But how? We’ve become so divided and are firmly bogged down arguing over so many less important matters. Which propaganda aided in bringing about.

Sure, people should cancel their cable subscriptions and quit believing what’s put on by the mainstream media. Stop paying for pop culture garbage over intellectually-beneficial content. Easy to say, but no way to enforce it. Barely can entice those who aren’t already curious and seeking. Demonstrating how Americans got in this mess in the first place: we suck at remaining vigilant and principled.

Is pessimism also a feature of “cultural marxism”?  lol  He claimed so, but that’s ridiculous. One can recognize the present situation for what it is and still work toward protecting what we’re able. I won’t pretend to be optimist about what may lay in store. But we work with what we can. We start clarifying our values and living in accordance. Whether we ultimately triumph as a people in the end or not, it’s the journey that’s of most concern since that’s day by day. One foot in front of the other. Less overwhelming when we each try to take it on as that.

That’s enough to say on this for one evening.

“Postmodernism and Cultural Marxism | Jordan B Peterson”

Further pondering on protests and resistance

Currently finishing up watching this conversation concerning the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, VA:

After having filmed my own reaction to the event earlier this evening. I do get irritated with movements…

Sometimes I feel like a dog barking on the sidelines. Heh  But I live nowhere near where this stuff’s been happening, so online is where it’s at.

Taking in what I can on this event and continuing to ponder. Hate antifa getting away with starting shit and whoever’s calling the shots in ordering police restraint are indeed letting them get away with it. Saw it at the University of California protests too.

And, admittedly, the car crash is pretty odd. Some details surrounding that do sound kinda strange. Gonna have to wait to hear how that all shakes out.

Ditto on the helicopter crash.

I don’t mean to seem aggravated with everybody involved since I do understand that white folks have a right to stand up for themselves by peaceably assembling. Every other race of people have no problem doing so. The Political Left has gone nutty, big time, and appears largely unconstrained by this point. We know this goes higher. So what can be done about this?

Are we losing our right to peaceably assemble on top of free speech? Looks like it. I know responses are necessary, but it becomes a question of what might even prove effective at this juncture. MSM has been useless for years. Google’s decided to act up, which could threaten the internet as we know it (particularly Youtube) and obstruct the flow of information. This is where we’re at currently.

Then you mix people carrying nazi flags into the crowd and turn off potential allies further. Why? Some say they were either planted there or just were stupid tools without the sense to realize they weren’t helping. I’m willing to bet a few of the latter were there, and what can be done about that? Their presence does not help in the least. Sets everything back. Totalitarianism sucks, as do its promoters and sympathizers. People see that and want nothing more to do with any of you. So much for making progress in that respect.

How do you keep plants, instigators, and idiots out of a movement? Probably can’t. And because of them others don’t wish to join ranks. Disturbs folks with decent sensibilities. So then what? Keep tolerating your rallies being sabotaged?

Perhaps that’s the problem in a nutshell — maybe all can come out for a common cause but need to self-segregate, plus you need more than Right-wingers and nazi-sympathizers. There’s a whole bunch of us outside of the Left-Right paradigm who feel strongly about free speech issues but we’re not going to stand alongside people displaying swastikas. They can sport whatever they wish, but I don’t have to associate with it willingly. Not gonna either. Some of us have as big a problem with those types as we do antifa and  black supremacists. People need to come together to defend shared values, but damn. On one hand it feels petty to worry about protesting alongside some nazi-wannabe douche, but the reality is that most of us will refuse to do so. Just flat out. Argue all you want on the matter, remind us about their right to assemble also — yeah, sure, great…still. Changes nothing. People won’t go for it. Just saying. Makes one feel sick just in contemplating doing so. Because it’s not only about a long ago time in German history — it’s about the trajectory of collectivistic ideologies. Communism runs the same way. That trend is insidious and persistent.

No one in their right mind wants to defend or help totalitarians. Leave it to Leftists to make excuses for antifa, a bunch of commie provocateurs, because they apparently don’t have the sense to recognize that those jackasses aren’t truly liberal and are savages and will turn on them in due time. Antifa is paving the way to some Orwellian shit, bused in on rich people’s dimes to ruin people’s rallies, treated with kid’s gloves by the mainstream media outlets. I see it for what it is. And I wonder how one might get around it.

On one hand you have to appeal to the rest of society, because numbers do matter when it comes to physically standing your ground. But you can’t make that appeal while fascism-loving plants and idiots are hovering over your shoulders. On the other hand, the internet won’t save us. Most will probably watch rather than offer to lend a hand. I’m not even sure what we could do in person. Get beat by the cops, go to jail, and consequently lose our jobs? Get maced by commie shitheads, knowing if we do try to defend ourselves that we’ll likely wind up being the ones on trial? Only to have the whole thing spun against us by the legacy media?

OK. That’s one approach. Is there a smarter, more effective option than that? This is what I’m stewing on over here tonight. Seems to me people need to be united under something better than Left/Right politics and race identity groups. That right there appears to be creating the biggest obstacle for resistance.

Styxhexenhammer Time

“Trump Assaults Congress’ Personal Healthcare Subsidies”:

Strongly agreed there!

“Blind Enrollment: The Alternative to Affirmative Action”:

While I can’t get behind Styx’s optimism toward Trump’s presidency, I continue to find his channel worthwhile.