Dialectical Lemonade: The MAGA Hat Kids

Like everyone else who listens to any amount of mainstream media on a regular basis, I heard the story of the racist kids from Kentucky wearing Make America Great Again hats and taunting a tribal elder in DC at the Women’s March. I tuned it out as a psyop immediately for numerous reasons. With stories like this I am often reminded of the scene in The Mission where the cardinal, about to order devastation upon the Indians in Paraguay, is rightly troubled by what he is set to do. His aide tries to comfort him by saying, “The world is thus, Your Excellency.” The cardinal replies, “Thus have we made the world.” Reports of obnoxious and overtly racist kids crashing the Women’s March wearing MAGA hats and attacking Native Americans are meant to convince us, “The world is thus.” I see how inorganically these incidents (to the extent they are ever accurately reported) have emerged and I think, “Thus have we made the world–are we making the world.” And I refuse to participate by engaging in the dialectical bait even intellectually. But the story did end up engaging me in the end….

At first the dialectic was “privileged white racist Trump supporting teenage boys menace peaceful Native American elder engaging in a call to prayer.” Not much of a dialectic really–who’s on the other side of that? The boys are not sympathetic–a dialectic has to have adherents on both sides to drive toward a pre-planned solution. (The dialectic is simply understood as Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis or Problem-Reaction-Solution.) This wasn’t really a dialectic, just another pulse in the “Trump’s America Is a Racist America” meme. But then something strange happened. As other videos emerged, it became clear that the story offered by the Native American, Nathan Phillips, and his supporters, was false, and the media had accepted their narrative of this out-of-context moment with very little to go on but bias. No matter…as Saul Alinsky advised, if your original goal isn’t achieved, take the outcome as it is and turn it toward your own interests anyway. That is, you get lemons? Make lemonade.

And so it was done…

Read moreDialectical Lemonade: The MAGA Hat Kids

Smombie (new glossary entry)

smombies-900x440Smombie, or smartphone zombie, noun: A person walking around unaware of his surroundings entirely absorbed in his smart-phone.

This seems to be a real problem in Germany where they invented the term. One town even put traffic signals in the sidewalks after several people were hurt and one was killed by a passing vehicle due to smartphone-induced oblivion.

Alt Right or Alt Wrong? Podcast of Aug 27 2016 show

cucksden-flag

This week’s podcast on youtube 🙂

Hour 1

Hour 2

Hour 3

This is a good time for a RedSilverJ video 🙂

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrnB-RacXJA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrKrfl2Wea4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_C3j-nzNIs

Church v. State

churchandstate18

All government authority derives from our right to self-defense. Anything we authorize our government to do by force of arms must be something that can be justified as self-defense. Legislating morality, or using the force of government to control the private behavior of others, does not fall into that category. I have many calls challenging me on this, so I think it’s worth clarifying.

One point that is often made is that all laws, even those forbidding rape and murder, legislate morality, but that’s not true. Yes, rape and murder are immoral, but that is not why they are illegal.

Read moreChurch v. State

The Century of the Self

This is a fascinating documentary…

century_self
From topdocumentaryfilms.com….
This series is about how those in power have used Freud’s theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy. Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, changed the perception of the human mind and its workings profoundly.

His influence on the 20th century is widely regarded as massive. The documentary describes the impact of Freud’s theories on the perception of the human mind, and the ways public relations agencies and politicians have used this during the last 100 years for their engineering of consent. Among the main characters are Freud himself and his nephew Edward Bernays, who was the first to use psychological techniques in advertising. He is often seen as the father of the public relations industry.

Freud’s daughter Anna Freud, a pioneer of child psychology, is mentioned in the second part, as well as Wilhelm Reich, one of the main opponents of Freud’s theories. Along these general themes, The Century of the Self asks deeper questions about the roots and methods of modern consumerism, representative democracy and its implications. It also questions the modern way we see ourselves, the attitude to fashion and superficiality.

Happiness Machines. Part one documents the story of the relationship between Sigmund Freud and his American nephew, Edward Bernays who invented Public Relations in the 1920s, being the first person to take Freud’s ideas to manipulate the masses.

[vimeo 48842811 w=500 h=381]

<<continue reading>>

An Interesting Passage from Quigley’s Tragedy & Hope

On Saturday’s show I mentioned a concept I picked up from Carrol Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope: that culture changes when children’s values are disconnected from their parents;’ this can happen in any of a number of ways from technological progress to outside cultural influences. I believe this method is deliberately used in the United States to move us from our individualist past to the “collectivist future.” Specifically I believe childhood education (literally disconnecting us from our parents), higher education (indoctrinating us to the state), high taxes (causing both parents to work), welfare (breaking up families), the drug war (creating outlaw subcultures), immigration policy (deliberately

Read moreAn Interesting Passage from Quigley’s Tragedy & Hope

An Interesting Passage from Quigley's Tragedy & Hope

On Saturday’s show I mentioned a concept I picked up from Carrol Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope: that culture changes when children’s values are disconnected from their parents;’ this can happen in any of a number of ways from technological progress to outside cultural influences. I believe this method is deliberately used in the United States to move us from our individualist past to the “collectivist future.” Specifically I believe childhood education (literally disconnecting us from our parents), higher education (indoctrinating us to the state), high taxes (causing both parents to work), welfare (breaking up families), the drug war (creating outlaw subcultures), immigration policy (deliberately

Read moreAn Interesting Passage from Quigley's Tragedy & Hope

Talk About “In A Nutshell!” The big picture in 75 seconds

This whole thing is worth watching – it’s great – but the BIG PICTURE is distilled down to 75 seconds from 11:34 to 12:49.*

A note on political philosophy:

From what I can tell by listening to these guys a number of times, they are socialists** who feel that the right role of government is to make sure everyone gets economic necessities. I’m an anarcho-capitalist – I could not be further from this position (see the William Graham Sumner quote at the top right of my website!) To the extent there can be a case made for socialism or other governmental responsibility for social well-being, I would say it must lie in a common value system among the populace. I think this is why a small homogeneous society like those in the Nordic countries are more likely to make socialism work than a melting pot like the United States.

I believe that my libertarian philosophy also requires a common value system, but my system is self-perpetuating and need not be based on ethnic or religious commonality, rather on the self-selection of those who choose to participate in it. The economic self-sufficiency required by my system (augmented per force by voluntary personal associations and institutions), means even immigrants will have to embrace the system and assimilate into it in order to survive. Democracy can undermine this, unfortunately. I was surprised to read recently in an essay written almost 100 years ago, that the author believed poor European immigrants were ruining America through the democratic process! He could have been right–that is when our system really passed the tipping point. Democracy can destroy the system if the basic laws can be changed. The law has to be acknowledged as objective and immigration and emigration need to be voluntary and organic.

All this by way of saying, I do think these guys are right about what’s wrong, but I think they’re wrong about what’s right!!!!

*I have not been convinced that GMOs are bad for our health or even that they will or are meant to destroy native seeds, but I do know there has been a concerted effort by the UN and others to make sure all land and food growing capability is taken out of the hands of the people. This could be part of that effort.

**I got a little pushback from a Corbett fan. (h/t John Jasper.) I guess I used the term “socialist” too cavalierly so I owe it to Mr. Corbett to investigate and clarify. I found a personal interview in which Corbett says, “I used to be on the left side of the spectrum so everything I thought had to jibe with that.” He says he is now not ideological, that he has broken out of the left-right political spectrum. That makes sense, but he does still seem to take for granted that governments should use money to help people eat. I can understand thinking of that as a baseline – I only object to it because the modern state will never limit itself to this function, rather it will use this power to control everything!! (Well, I also have a moral problem with wealth redistribution, but that’s a different subject.) To listen to James for yourself, here is his “Meet James Corbett” interview (https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-163-meet-james-corbett/).

I believe Michel Chossudovsky is a self-described socialist, or in any event that’s the impression I get from his excellent article Destroying a Country’s Standard of Living: What Libya Had Achieved, What has been Destroyed, which describes Qaddafi’s socialism without apology.

Talk About "In A Nutshell!" The big picture in 75 seconds

This whole thing is worth watching – it’s great – but the BIG PICTURE is distilled down to 75 seconds from 11:34 to 12:49.*

A note on political philosophy:
From what I can tell by listening to these guys a number of times, they are socialists** who feel that the right role of government is to make sure everyone gets economic necessities. I’m an anarcho-capitalist – I could not be further from this position (see the William Graham Sumner quote at the top right of my website!) To the extent there can be a case made for socialism or other governmental responsibility for social well-being, I would say it must lie in a common value system among the populace. I think this is why a small homogeneous society like those in the Nordic countries are more likely to make socialism work than a melting pot like the United States.
I believe that my libertarian philosophy also requires a common value system, but my system is self-perpetuating and need not be based on ethnic or religious commonality, rather on the self-selection of those who choose to participate in it. The economic self-sufficiency required by my system (augmented per force by voluntary personal associations and institutions), means even immigrants will have to embrace the system and assimilate into it in order to survive. Democracy can undermine this, unfortunately. I was surprised to read recently in an essay written almost 100 years ago, that the author believed poor European immigrants were ruining America through the democratic process! He could have been right–that is when our system really passed the tipping point. Democracy can destroy the system if the basic laws can be changed. The law has to be acknowledged as objective and immigration and emigration need to be voluntary and organic.
All this by way of saying, I do think these guys are right about what’s wrong, but I think they’re wrong about what’s right!!!!
*I have not been convinced that GMOs are bad for our health or even that they will or are meant to destroy native seeds, but I do know there has been a concerted effort by the UN and others to make sure all land and food growing capability is taken out of the hands of the people. This could be part of that effort.
**I got a little pushback from a Corbett fan. (h/t John Jasper.) I guess I used the term “socialist” too cavalierly so I owe it to Mr. Corbett to investigate and clarify. I found a personal interview in which Corbett says, “I used to be on the left side of the spectrum so everything I thought had to jibe with that.” He says he is now not ideological, that he has broken out of the left-right political spectrum. That makes sense, but he does still seem to take for granted that governments should use money to help people eat. I can understand thinking of that as a baseline – I only object to it because the modern state will never limit itself to this function, rather it will use this power to control everything!! (Well, I also have a moral problem with wealth redistribution, but that’s a different subject.) To listen to James for yourself, here is his “Meet James Corbett” interview (https://www.corbettreport.com/episode-163-meet-james-corbett/).
I believe Michel Chossudovsky is a self-described socialist, or in any event that’s the impression I get from his excellent article Destroying a Country’s Standard of Living: What Libya Had Achieved, What has been Destroyed, which describes Qaddafi’s socialism without apology.

Shirtless Cheeseball or Class Act?

Russia's President Vladimir Putin fishes in the Yenisei River in Siberia

This video demonstrated something interesting to me about standards, dignity, decorum, etc. My last facebook post was a video (see below) of how ignorant our college kids can be and I think those low standards reach up to the highest levels in our society, certainly in our government–but that’s not true everywhere. Putin really looks like a cheeseball when he takes his shirt off, but he often demonstrates statesmanship and dignity, albeit in the context of his own culture (e.g., “blanketgate” where he gave the first lady of China a blanket in the cold).

In the video, Putin was thanking his police escort and I don’t think it was a photo op as it first appeared because if you watch the video to the end, you will see he wouldn’t board the plane before the stewardess, he made her go first (as in “ladies first”) – who would even think that way in that context? That’s ingrained etiquette…

Vladimir Putin+Russia+China first lady+Peng Liyuan+Beijing++2+Chivalry+Blanket+Coat+Nonverbal Communication Expert+Body Language Expert+Speaker+Keynote+Consultant+Las Vegas+Los Angeles+Orlando+NYC

This contrasts with a clip I heard in 2008 of Rachel Maddow lambasting Bush for not reneging on the Australian ambassador who was slated to stay as a guest at the White House so that the Obamas could stay there and get their feet wet before the inauguration. Maddow said something like, “It’s the OBAMAS for God’s sake – the OBAMAS!” as if Obama’s status meant Bush should slight a “lesser” person. That’s when I saw how really trashy elitism is. (h/t Hugh)

 

UPDATE: For another contrast to Putin’s manners, check this video out of Obama’s state visit to India. He’s chewing gum! Am I old fashioned to think that’s inappropriate? I guess it must be nicotine gum – but then that just makes me feel lied to.

 https://gma.yahoo.com/michelle-obama-india-buzzing-her-outfit-125803169–abc-news-topstories.html