11-29-2020, 11:55 PM
(11-29-2020, 06:17 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: ** 29-Nov-2020 World View: Stalinist control
Butler and Brower:
You two aren't even qualified to make a comment. You have no idea
what's going on because you're Democrats, and you're under the control
of the Democrat Stalinist censorship, which tells you what you're
allowed to read, what you're allowed to say, and what you're allowed
to think. Your Stalinist masters tell you to say "conspiracy theory,"
and so you obey your masters and say "conspiracy theory."
Right-wing media have been around for some time, and if they began as breaths of fresh air they have become increasingly stale and putrid. Media that manipulate a mood to create a predictable response are suspect in the extreme. It's clear that the Wall Street Journal is the go-to source for economic news related to the climate of business activity for the simple reason that the bulk of the America economy is the for-profit private sector. I might not trust its editorial page, but the economic news is highly reliable. This said, there is a huge difference between the Wall Street Journal and the worthless, even damaging InfoWars of Alex Jones. Toward the bottom right and bottom left the material becomes increasingly manipulative, cranky, and reckless. Toward the bottom and center one has non-news such as what appears in the tabloids that "the maid reads".
As for conspiracy theories... competent people do not do things with conspiracy. They have other ways to do things, like funding "institutes" and disseminating their ideas as "public relations"... or simply doing things directly and lawfully. "Conspiracy theories" assert that people capable of doing things above board seek to hide their sordid agenda with illegal behavior.
Conspiracies usually imply losers such as people who try to perpetrate insurance and inheritance frauds. As Bob Butler puts it, the broader the conspiracy the more can go wrong due to the human factor. Someone might break down under pressure that he misinterprets. Something about the story might not fit the reality. Do you want to invest an inheritance before your father croaks? Then pawn the promise to the Rothschild banking house (well, at one time) and if the Rotschild banking house sees it as a good idea they will lend the funds. That is the arguable start of modern capitalism, and it is far less troublesome from the standpoint of either guilty feelings or legal consequences than arsenic.
Quote:You knew nothing about the antifa-blm rioting, burning and looting,
you knew nothing about the Hunter Biden investigations, and you
certainly know nothing about the election rigging investigations.
Black Lives Matters is not about the promotion of criminal behavior. It is far better that black people not be so defensive about the police if they have done nothing wrong. Brutal policing does nothing to foster law and order, but it does make people more likely to attack the police. I can't say what sort of cop I would be, but I would probably be very much at the aggressive end in handcuffing people stopped for reason, irrespective of ethnicity. I would also have form letters ready to send as apologies to people whom I cleared.
The consensus of many across the political spectrum is "do the crime and do the time". That has nothing to do with trigger-happy police or with those who might apply deadly force such as suffocation. Bad cops must go.
The Hunter Biden investigations have gone nowhere. If anything the Trump Administration botched any investigation if there were one by insisting that the Ukrainian government make clear that there is one. Good police work lets offenders keep doing things that further incriminate themselves unless the offenses threaten to become dangerous crimes or if the offender becomes an obvious flight risk, that economic damage or harm to others is likely (as in child abuse) or that further investigation is fruitless and that an arrest might as well proceed.
As for rigging the 2020 elections -- many Democrats suspect electoral shenanigans in 2016, but couldn't figure out whether those had evidence behind them or were material enough to merit a challenge. We liberals generally accepted that Donald Trump got elected fair-and-square even if possible dirty tricks were involved. Controls for the validity of an electoral count are made in much the same way as accounting controls at giant, well-run corporations. Trump loses under the same assumptions applicable to his 2016 win.
Quote:During a phone interview on Fox this morning, Trump spent half an hour
reviewing a bit of the voluminous evidence of voter fraud. The
mainstream media summary of the phone call was, "Trump once again
refused to concede, and he claimed voter fraud without any evidence
whatsoever." That's all. That's what your Democrat Stalinist masters
want you to know, so that's all you know. So any comment you make is
out of total ignorance.
1. Repetition of discredited claims. Repeating the same nonsense (the Earth is flat, 2 + 2 = 5, Noah's Ark was real, aliens created the pyramids and supplied ancient esoteric knowledge that in part will solve some of the Great Questions of human existence such as eternal life, slavery in the New World was an uncompromised boons to Africans, the Holocaust didn't happen, pi is rational) makes it no more true.
2. Democrats did less well than they expected, especially in Senatorial elections.
3. Donald Trump really is a horrible person, and over 270 thousand deaths (which is between the 77th-largest city in America, Fort Wayne, Indiana and Toledo, Ohio, the 76th .... irony of ironies, Defiance, Ohio is on the most direct route, US 24, between those two cities) indict him for extreme incompetence in dealing with COVID-19. Donald Trump has used unjustifiable force to get his way, force of a sort that no prior President has ever used in domestic politics. Tear-gassing peaceful protesters so that he could be shown holding a Bible that he does not reed or heed at a church (it is the wrong denomination, as he is not an Episcopalian) that he does not attend?
This Presidency can end none too soon, Mr. X.
By the way... Stalin is accused at a minimum of ten million deaths (the count was higher, but some of that was double-counting, with "enemies of the people", "kulaks", and "bourgeois nationalists" being the same person... like most liberals I despise Stalin for his perversion of Lenin's failed dream into something even less, his debasement of all public life, his murders, his destruction of all moral independence of all his subjects, his brutal means of getting his way, and his sordid failure as a wartime leader. He beat Hitler only because he had three times as many soldiers against a genocidal regime... and considering how badly he did against Finland, which did not have a genocidal regime I am not impressed in the least. The British and Americans took much German-occupied and eventually German terrain itself with far smaller numbers of troops. It is far easier to win a war if the opposing side is left with nothing to fight for.
Spoof of Mussolini's party anthem Giovinezza:
Cannon fodder! Cannon fodder!
Sent into a pointless slaughter!
Brits and Yanks will fight in honor/
And respect your wife and daughter!
Isn't that the point?
Quote:By the way, in the Scandal tv series, the fictional president Grant is
a Republican.
I never watched the TV show.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
