I missed "they suspect free markets of being rigged by the elites." Imagine thinking that after Moderna and Pfizer made billions of dollars in profit selling products that governments forced people to take, or after a "progressive" Congress passed a "progressive" president's individual mandate to purchase a corporate product.
Read "Dark Aeon" by joe Allen, an expert on transhumanism. It will describe in detail what transhumanists (i.e. technocrats in wolves clothing) have in store for us.
“The question is, it enough in to get their hands off the wheel.”
Not hardly. Charlton Heston unknowingly summed up the dedication of the techno-incompetents, albeit on a different subject:
“I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed, and especially for you, Mr. Gore: 'From my cold, dead hands!'”
“Intellectuals” used to dedicate themselves to pursuing deep thoughts that explain the human condition. Now the term has devolved to mean “no productive skills whatsoever.”
Ah yeah you guys this is such a hobby horse of mine. Maybe our wordsmith Chris Bray can come up with a pithy and meme-able distinction here to go viral. You hear this complaining from the PMC that flyover Americans are "anti-intellectual," and "anti-expert." No, we're absolutely pro-intelligence/intellect and pro-expertise - we have to be, our livelihoods depend on it. We're skeptical or hostile towards the cultish regard of capital-E-Experts and capital-I-Intellectuals. Credentials are even a potentially good and useful thing! (Duh!) Just not when they are empty tools exploited for craven political purposes.
Thomas Sowell wrote a great book “Intellectuals and Society” (2009) in which he makes the point that society is suffering from “intellectuals” engaging in “brand extension” (my words), e.g., a famous nuclear physicist (or a tech pioneer) starts advocating re: climate change, an area in which he has zero expertise. The public is equally at fault b/c it gives weight to such people in areas in which they are utterly unqualified. The worst examples are giving Hollywood actors credence on anything except acting.
Yeah, Chris, you did miss it, but with so much nonsense to consider in such a small package, you can be excused for the oversight.
"they suspect free markets of being rigged by the elites."
What can anyone do with a sentence like that?
After all these years of observing market distortions, the very idea of a "free" market existing at any sort of scale becomes risible. The only question remaining is the nature of the self-interest motivating those imposing the distortions.
I’m not aware of ANY period since 1913 when we have had market interest rates. The Fed exists to move counter-cyclical to the market thereby preventing panics (1). Since the GFC, the Fed & Treasury have moved to prevent ANY market corrections.
(1) I’m 69, and I can’t count the number credit restrictions that have occurred solely because Wall Street and commercial bankers are nothing but lemmings.
I can only imagine this article is aimed at people who didn’t live through the S&L crisis, the .com bubble, and the subprime bailout or are simply retarded.
I can remember a time, maybe 30 years ago, when the Economist was an excellent magazine. I had a subscription for probably 5-6 years. Then they started shitting where they ate and I gave up on them. Now they delight in gaslighting on steroids. To paraphrase a recent meme, “They’re going to Hell in gasoline underpants.”
I bet it was when Minton-Beddoes took over, right? I noticed a very sudden drop in quality at that exact moment and my subscription didn't l last long after that.
At the end of “Cape Fear,” Robert De Niro‘s character is handcuffed to the floor of the bus. As the water rises, he’s babbling incoherently, and as it covers his mouth, the babbling continues, and even as the water goes over his head, he keeps jabbering with bubbles coming out…until they stop.
This seems a good analogy for today’s media and the “experts” who supply the grist for its mill. I can only hope that Leftist fanaticism reaches a similar end as De Niro’s character.
If you listen carefully, you can just make out what De Niro is saying…”Next time I see that ‘effen Trump, I’m gonna punch his lights out!” (Or words to that effect)
That's all par for the course for the likes of the Economist. What I find even more obnoxious are the supposedly independent, dissident commentators (I'm talking about you, Konstantin Kisin) who are accomplices to this gaslighting operation. In his most recent article, Kisin tells us, "Where the Woke Left has systemic racism, the Woke Right has globalism and the WEF, a shadowy global elite conspiring to deprive us of our rights, civil liberties and bodily autonomy." As if asserting a BS academic theory to explain disparate group outcomes in a way that comports with prevailing ideological nonsense is the same thing as pointing out that the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world are assholes who want more wealth and power and who do not share our values and interests.
This notion that it is somehow pathological to be opposed to the global oligarch class and the international institutions they fund and control is preposterous, especially when this notion is advanced by supposedly "alt-media" folks. The related argument The Economist advances here -- that opposing the global oligarchs and their institutions makes one a "statist" who is hostile to individual rights -- could not possibly be more "freedom is slavery."
What really assaults about their shtick is the "gee golly where do these people get such wacky ideas" tone while acknowledging in the next couple of paragraphs it's all true. It's that meme: it's not happening you're so ridiculous for saying so... but if it is happening it's good. Sorry "The Economist", you reek of failure and delusion and your globohomo dreams are crashing down around your heads. You can't head up globohomo when most of the globo ain't homo.
There was always something off about Kisin and his partner on their show ‘Triggernometry’ (his partner gurns and smirks and seems slightly backward - he is/was a school teacher, though…I remember the type….) I watched them before the 2020 nonsense, but can’t bear to now and so I’m not surprised Kisin is spouting nonsense like this. Kisin seems unhinged since the Ukraine war, as do many since the October 7th events - Douglas Murray for one (he’s an English ‘intellectual’). I’m not one for yelling controlled opposition…But sometimes…
Regardless of whether they are literally controlled, they function as controlled opposition. They create the illusion of robust debate while serving only to promote establishment orthodoxy and keep the Overton window nice and narrow.
Robert Barnes is a conservative attorney I respect. He has uncovered some info to the effect that Kisin’s father may have laundered quite a bit of money out of Russia through western banks.
Douglas Murray is an actual intellectual. The War on the West is his best book yet. I haven’t watched him lately but he doesn’t toe anyones line. I don’t always agree with him but he’s head and shoulders above most.
It was very suspicious, in my opinion, that he never said a word, and hasn’t to this day, about the horrific scam that was ‘Covid’ or the even worse scam that is the ‘vaccines’ and the on-going excess deaths and rise in all manner of serious ill health throughout the western world. Yes, he’s talks a good game on immigration and I have read the Strange Death of Europe, but why the silence on one of the most important issues of our time? (I also disagree with his stance on Gaza, but that’s another, even more contentious issue.)
I understand your position. I simply don’t think it’s his baileywick. I don’t say much about it either even though I think massive errors were made purposely and otherwise. I happen to agree with his stance on Gaza but either way he is an impressive intellectual. Check out this series on YT. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqoIWbW5TWd-hL5VKufKFfUEL8a0JNTmp&si=y7iXB2kCibW7uHsP
This is the same twisted logic that tried to define National Socialists as far right, but defined Soviet Socialists as far left. They were both Marxists, but that doesn't mean they were going to join hands and become one. They are murderous, power-hungry thugs who each wanted to control the world.
The only positive takeaways from the comments by Kisin are that "woke" is now being acknowledged for the evil it represents. The left created it, used it as a political tool, demanded that we genuflect to it, and now that it has proven to be nothing but malicious, they want to redefine it to smear conservatives with it? I guess that's what we should expect from people who will call anyone that simply has a different opinion as "racists."
They (the enemies of freedom) have an uncanny ability to change colors like chameleons and rebrand as soon as they realize they’re losing, then point to the damage they’ve done and accuse the opposition of doing it. I believe what we are facing today is the offspring that fascism and communism combined would have created.
Exactly. The latest is Democrats blaming Trump for the border invasion. Somehow the former "Xenophobe in Chief" induced millions of heretofore hated foreigners to illegally cross our border to provide himself a campaign issue. It's so stupid even the corrupt MSM should find it laughable, but likely will find a way to defend it.
An utter lack of morality is immensely freeing – you can say diametrically opposite things from minute to minute, constrained only by the audience’s memory. Given the Dems’ distance from the truth and exploding anti-Semitism, I fully expect them to suggest “camps.”
Describing the Nazis as socialists in the same breath as the Soviets without clarification is misleading. The Nazis supported private ownership and administration of small & medium sized businesses, and sold off state owned enterprises. For major economic players, the state entered into partnerships that gave it directional control of the businesses’ activities (e.g., Rheinmetall, IG Farben). This was all radically different from the Soviet model.
The difference between "you must obey the state because party operatives are at your offices telling you what to do" and "you must obey the state because the state is the formal owner" is merely playing with words. The Nazis were a totalitarian society, were they not?
It is not playing with words. There’s a significant difference between telling the largest corporations to produce products needed for national objectives in addition to those they choose to produce vs. collectivization of farms. Small and medium-sized businesses did not have Nazi apparatchiks sitting at the CEOs’ elbows.
The Nazis displayed aspects of both totalitarianism and authoritarianism, e.g., they actively fostered the preservation of German heritage. This is markedly different from Assad, Kim, Maduro, Hoxha, Ceaușescu, Mao, Saddam, et al.
While the history lesson is interesting, you have missed some salient points.
First, the name Nazi is from, "National-Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei," or National SOCIALIST German Workers' Party - it's in the name! They knew what it meant and claimed it for themselves. Not very misleading.
Next, you describe the methods used by the Nazis that gave them control over large businesses and the economy of the nation. While it is true the methods were different than yheir Soviet counterparts, the ultimate results were very similar - state control of the means of production. Even with their different, modus operandi, the ideology was the same, the rights of the individual are subservient to the state.
To me, these differences do not demonstrate the polar political opposites inferred by the terms "far right" or "far left." Compounded with the adoption by both groups the dogma and name of "socialist," I instead view them as two leaves on the same poisonous flower.
And yet there are plenty of people who eat this nonsense up, I’ve worked with many of them, and my own siblings are lost in this neverland?! We live in scary times, common sense and critical thought are not just under attack, they are mostly dead. The people who destroyed it are mostly college educated narcissists, of which women are the chief adherents, but you can’t say that out loud, or there will be serious consequences…. too bad I no longer care -
True, but people don't recognize this is what I meant. There is still a general consensus that trans moms are "brave and loving". Society doesn't seem to see how women can be toxic since it's usually passive aggressive as opposed to in your face.
Me too. You have my condolences. :) It's infuriating when people fall for this stuff that seems so obvious to me. I want to scream "look at the actions, NOT the words!" If your childhood is defined by a feeling of cognitive dissonance, the problem is not you.
Is it any wonder most news outlets no longer allow commenting? They don't want to know what your response is to the foolishness they routinely spout in their articles. THEY will tell YOU how to think and constructive criticism is not welcomed.
A second factor is their responsibility under their web service provider’s TOS to moderate comment boards. A royal PITA due to cost. Most news sites’ comment boards are cheerleading for one side or the other, and add little to anyone’s understanding.
When Fani Willis took the stand, she came across like a blaxploitation hustler doing her best caricature of a ghetto black woman with sassy 'tude: talking about how "black people" all have a stash of thousands in cash stuffed into their mattresses and they can't possibly know where the hell it all came from. This was the cringest "black" performance I've seen since that hilarious covid vax commercial put out by the state of Arkansas Tim Dillon covered back in '21. (if you haven't seen it, its a must watch):
This is what rich white liberals think of and expect from black women and Willis aimed to please. The liberal media can spin her performance however they want but the vast majority of Americans, including blacks, don't find it amusing or appropriate to act that way in a courtroom or anywhere else.
I honestly can't believe the levels of BS and gaslighting re the Fani Willis testimony. These spin levels are at risk of starting an actual tornado!
What's depressing is to read the comments under the CNN full video of it, on YouTube. Thousands of people doing the whole "How DARE they disrespect this black Queeen! You get 'em Fani, yasss!" etc. And hundreds and hundreds of comments about evil Mr Trump, and that she has every right to have a boyfriend.
I mean, yeah, she does have every right to have a boyfriend. Probably best if it's not someone else's husband though. And probably best not to hire him in a job he is unqualified for, and then pay him $700k of tax dollars, and then proceed to start living like Kylie Jenner with that money.
I don't think 'having a boyfriend' was where she went wrong. I think it was more the ill-conceived money laundering operation, involving her married lover/employee. This seems to be too subtle a point for many to grasp though, as the comments attest. Gah!
This is amazing. You're right, though -- this is the 68 year old Rachel Maddow watching rich liberal lady in Charlottesville version of blackness. Look how cute they are with their "hustling"!
Actually, no. The accusation was based on a similar but different dress (Nordstrom $129). Willis’ dress has been spotted on Amazon for $42.99 and was correctly oriented. I wonder if the bulge in the seat that looks like a “Biden load” is standard?
It's displaying white and black progressives who equate being black with crime and poverty in a bad light. The audience, consisting of many white people, is in on the joke. It's entertaining and funny. I'm not going to scour everything for anything that might be part of the narrative. Seeing white debasement everywhere is no better than feminists who see the patriarchy everywhere. It's refreshing that the absurdity of this particular aspect of the narrative is being skewered. That's all.
Reading the Economist now (I used to from the 90s to before the Great Trump Cataclysm) is like revisiting an old band or movie you were *convinced* was the Greatest Thing Ever Produced when you were 22, and now you think, what the *fuck* was I thinking?
I think it's just devolved into another legacy, trash "prestige" brand that upper middle management types like to have on their coffee tables, along with a Taschen book and overpriced pinot on the rack that telegraphs empty, performative fealty to the talismans and rituals of rancid, careerist credentialism.
And if Economist writers are indeed hostages, they are embracing Stockholm Syndrome wholeheartedly.
The Economist used to be required reading and I was a long time subscriber. It started to fly off the rails sometime during Obama's reign but it became evident during the Trump years. I still read it from time to time but the Economist's shameless and purely subjective Biden endorsement was my personal point of no return.
Your 'great band' analogy is apt. For me, it's more like a band that was once great but then completely sold out, it's the Aerosmith of news magazines.
What you noticed is the appointment of a new chief editor in Jan 2015. The previous editor Micklethwait was able to keep the magazine relatively neutral and well informed about obscure topics. Once they appointed Minton-Beddoes though (hailed at the time as their first female editor) there was a sharp step change towards generic leftist dogma. The insight vanished overnight and it became identical to many other publications in tone and stance. You could tell she was a far more politically aggressive person and wholly unsuited for the role. During the reign of the previous editor the Economist was widely respected, she managed to trash that reputation in only a handful of years. Very sad.
Make sure you click on the link and read the Washington Post article. Apparently Fani’s eye make up was “precise and intentional”. Thank goodness we have journalists of this quality, speaking truth to power.
The Post "journalist" is no more a journalist than Fani is a "prosecutor."
They are both black females in the throes of Black Female Superiority Complex (BFSC). The Post creature, as she must, supports and celebrates the Atlanta court creature. Both (as all BFSCs) are in way over their head, but that is not allowed to be noticed or commented on. The only thing they, and their PC-Prog cheerleaders, can do is pretend, fake it, and lie: "Stunning! And brave!"
Affirmative Action created these monsters.
How can this vile repudiation of all that is natural be stopped?
Yeah, I just needed to see the picture of the writer to know exactly what the article would say. Completely unbiased and an even handed presentation of the facts.
As people living in a bubble of elite-think, they believe the two words, national and conservative, are denigrating, insulting, deplorable, unacceptable, homophobic and racist. Being the opposite of the preferred and sophisticated, highly "moral" terms, progressive and global, the offense and the whole story is established right there at the beginning of the article in the Luciferian and "prophetic" rag, The Economist. This publication's habit in depicting obscure and symbolic images in its covers that depict future occurrences is smug in showcasing its insider's insight on the script of the powerful before plots are rolled out onto the gameboard of the world.
There is some kind of attempt to spread the damage/fallout of woke around. The mental gymnastics is stupid.
In 2016 i was shocked that the elites waged a war on 'populism'. Recently I was shocked they took a run at PTA moms. Nothing shocks me anymore and they've run out of wholesome identity groups to demonize. Their pitch is that we should love feudalism. They sound increasingly desperate.
A non-economist colleague asked me and two other professors of economics if economists thought the Economist was a legit publication. Small sample size but 2/3 said no.
Since I have been paying attention, they went from compelling, to interesting, to drivel. I can't tell how much is me updating or them downgrading, but certainly their narratives have felt overtly driven by someone's marketing department for some time.
Similar for me. I imagine I’m pretty rare as a college professor who has had this type of reaction, rejecting classical liberalism, in response to 2020.
I would not have characterized moving away from main stream culture as rejecting classical liberalism. From my view, i have made this distinction and placed the economist et al in this placeholder admixture neocon/neoliberal category until I figure it out. But what you're saying is interesting, how do you mean that you rejected classicsl liberalism?
Thinking strictly in the category of individual. The proper unit of society is the family. CL is about individual liberty, and is allergic to duties placed on a person by society and familial structures.
Interesting, thank you and I agree with you, although I have certainly followed that path, I am not sure that I thought about it in that frame. Lots to think about.
AHAHAHAHAHA are we being trolled right now? Are they pretend freaking out so that we can get excited that conservatism is spreading? What’s happening right now? 😂😂😂 also I like how the Economist said “a motley crew of western politicians”. Reminds me of the LA Times’ line: “odd and sometimes menacing fellowship of Christian evangelicals, vaccine conspiracy theorists, anti-government militias and more moderate parents who believed they lost their voice during the prolonged COVID-19 shutdowns” These people act like they hate us but also keep unwittingly painting us like rag tag under dogs 😂 dummies. Americans love underdogs.
These are the same people who claim that third-party candidates are a threat to democracy. Nothing they say makes sense if you think about it for more than three seconds, but fortunately for them, most people don't.
Will be mostly offline until Tuesday morning for family stuff, so responses to comments and emails will be slow.
I missed "they suspect free markets of being rigged by the elites." Imagine thinking that after Moderna and Pfizer made billions of dollars in profit selling products that governments forced people to take, or after a "progressive" Congress passed a "progressive" president's individual mandate to purchase a corporate product.
we have the dumbest smart people I've ever heard of.
The human condition is an incurable disease.
Read "Dark Aeon" by joe Allen, an expert on transhumanism. It will describe in detail what transhumanists (i.e. technocrats in wolves clothing) have in store for us.
“The question is, it enough in to get their hands off the wheel.”
Not hardly. Charlton Heston unknowingly summed up the dedication of the techno-incompetents, albeit on a different subject:
“I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed, and especially for you, Mr. Gore: 'From my cold, dead hands!'”
— Charlton Heston, May 20, 2000
The Progressives confuse the word Intellectual, with Intelligent. A simple mistake, for simple minds.
“Intellectuals” used to dedicate themselves to pursuing deep thoughts that explain the human condition. Now the term has devolved to mean “no productive skills whatsoever.”
Ah yeah you guys this is such a hobby horse of mine. Maybe our wordsmith Chris Bray can come up with a pithy and meme-able distinction here to go viral. You hear this complaining from the PMC that flyover Americans are "anti-intellectual," and "anti-expert." No, we're absolutely pro-intelligence/intellect and pro-expertise - we have to be, our livelihoods depend on it. We're skeptical or hostile towards the cultish regard of capital-E-Experts and capital-I-Intellectuals. Credentials are even a potentially good and useful thing! (Duh!) Just not when they are empty tools exploited for craven political purposes.
Thomas Sowell wrote a great book “Intellectuals and Society” (2009) in which he makes the point that society is suffering from “intellectuals” engaging in “brand extension” (my words), e.g., a famous nuclear physicist (or a tech pioneer) starts advocating re: climate change, an area in which he has zero expertise. The public is equally at fault b/c it gives weight to such people in areas in which they are utterly unqualified. The worst examples are giving Hollywood actors credence on anything except acting.
Yeah buddy, Gell-Mann Amnesia doing a lot of heavy lifting
Yeah, Chris, you did miss it, but with so much nonsense to consider in such a small package, you can be excused for the oversight.
"they suspect free markets of being rigged by the elites."
What can anyone do with a sentence like that?
After all these years of observing market distortions, the very idea of a "free" market existing at any sort of scale becomes risible. The only question remaining is the nature of the self-interest motivating those imposing the distortions.
Chris, you need to take a step back and see the big picture:
1. High cost groceries will finally address our plague of fatsos!
2. Being single, never having kids, and living in a 400 square foot house leaves lots more time and money for gaming.
3. Fentanyl is so cheap and available, recreational drugs are finally within reach of everyone on earth now.
Heaven on earth!
Interest rate policy (QE etc) would also suffice as an example. No free market in interest rates since the GFC.
I’m not aware of ANY period since 1913 when we have had market interest rates. The Fed exists to move counter-cyclical to the market thereby preventing panics (1). Since the GFC, the Fed & Treasury have moved to prevent ANY market corrections.
(1) I’m 69, and I can’t count the number credit restrictions that have occurred solely because Wall Street and commercial bankers are nothing but lemmings.
I can only imagine this article is aimed at people who didn’t live through the S&L crisis, the .com bubble, and the subprime bailout or are simply retarded.
I can remember a time, maybe 30 years ago, when the Economist was an excellent magazine. I had a subscription for probably 5-6 years. Then they started shitting where they ate and I gave up on them. Now they delight in gaslighting on steroids. To paraphrase a recent meme, “They’re going to Hell in gasoline underpants.”
I bet it was when Minton-Beddoes took over, right? I noticed a very sudden drop in quality at that exact moment and my subscription didn't l last long after that.
At the end of “Cape Fear,” Robert De Niro‘s character is handcuffed to the floor of the bus. As the water rises, he’s babbling incoherently, and as it covers his mouth, the babbling continues, and even as the water goes over his head, he keeps jabbering with bubbles coming out…until they stop.
This seems a good analogy for today’s media and the “experts” who supply the grist for its mill. I can only hope that Leftist fanaticism reaches a similar end as De Niro’s character.
De Niro's character in Cape Fear was relatively rational by comparison.
If you listen carefully, you can just make out what De Niro is saying…”Next time I see that ‘effen Trump, I’m gonna punch his lights out!” (Or words to that effect)
I have ZERO doubt! 🤣 (Amazing how De Niro could foresee Trump’s political future 24 yrs ahead…)
The original was better.
I defer to your experience. I caught only the end of the remake, and it instantly struck me as the perfect metaphor for Leftist gibberish.
1962, Robert Mitchum, Gregory Peck et al…
I second that motion.
That's all par for the course for the likes of the Economist. What I find even more obnoxious are the supposedly independent, dissident commentators (I'm talking about you, Konstantin Kisin) who are accomplices to this gaslighting operation. In his most recent article, Kisin tells us, "Where the Woke Left has systemic racism, the Woke Right has globalism and the WEF, a shadowy global elite conspiring to deprive us of our rights, civil liberties and bodily autonomy." As if asserting a BS academic theory to explain disparate group outcomes in a way that comports with prevailing ideological nonsense is the same thing as pointing out that the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world are assholes who want more wealth and power and who do not share our values and interests.
This notion that it is somehow pathological to be opposed to the global oligarch class and the international institutions they fund and control is preposterous, especially when this notion is advanced by supposedly "alt-media" folks. The related argument The Economist advances here -- that opposing the global oligarchs and their institutions makes one a "statist" who is hostile to individual rights -- could not possibly be more "freedom is slavery."
What really assaults about their shtick is the "gee golly where do these people get such wacky ideas" tone while acknowledging in the next couple of paragraphs it's all true. It's that meme: it's not happening you're so ridiculous for saying so... but if it is happening it's good. Sorry "The Economist", you reek of failure and delusion and your globohomo dreams are crashing down around your heads. You can't head up globohomo when most of the globo ain't homo.
It’s a corollary to Rod Dreher’s Law of Merited Impossibility: That’s not happening, but when it does, you deplorables will deserve it.
There was always something off about Kisin and his partner on their show ‘Triggernometry’ (his partner gurns and smirks and seems slightly backward - he is/was a school teacher, though…I remember the type….) I watched them before the 2020 nonsense, but can’t bear to now and so I’m not surprised Kisin is spouting nonsense like this. Kisin seems unhinged since the Ukraine war, as do many since the October 7th events - Douglas Murray for one (he’s an English ‘intellectual’). I’m not one for yelling controlled opposition…But sometimes…
Regardless of whether they are literally controlled, they function as controlled opposition. They create the illusion of robust debate while serving only to promote establishment orthodoxy and keep the Overton window nice and narrow.
“…keep the Overton window nice and narrow.”
And directionally distorted.
Robert Barnes is a conservative attorney I respect. He has uncovered some info to the effect that Kisin’s father may have laundered quite a bit of money out of Russia through western banks.
Douglas Murray is an actual intellectual. The War on the West is his best book yet. I haven’t watched him lately but he doesn’t toe anyones line. I don’t always agree with him but he’s head and shoulders above most.
It was very suspicious, in my opinion, that he never said a word, and hasn’t to this day, about the horrific scam that was ‘Covid’ or the even worse scam that is the ‘vaccines’ and the on-going excess deaths and rise in all manner of serious ill health throughout the western world. Yes, he’s talks a good game on immigration and I have read the Strange Death of Europe, but why the silence on one of the most important issues of our time? (I also disagree with his stance on Gaza, but that’s another, even more contentious issue.)
I understand your position. I simply don’t think it’s his baileywick. I don’t say much about it either even though I think massive errors were made purposely and otherwise. I happen to agree with his stance on Gaza but either way he is an impressive intellectual. Check out this series on YT. https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqoIWbW5TWd-hL5VKufKFfUEL8a0JNTmp&si=y7iXB2kCibW7uHsP
"Woke Right?" Did you catch that?
This is the same twisted logic that tried to define National Socialists as far right, but defined Soviet Socialists as far left. They were both Marxists, but that doesn't mean they were going to join hands and become one. They are murderous, power-hungry thugs who each wanted to control the world.
The only positive takeaways from the comments by Kisin are that "woke" is now being acknowledged for the evil it represents. The left created it, used it as a political tool, demanded that we genuflect to it, and now that it has proven to be nothing but malicious, they want to redefine it to smear conservatives with it? I guess that's what we should expect from people who will call anyone that simply has a different opinion as "racists."
They (the enemies of freedom) have an uncanny ability to change colors like chameleons and rebrand as soon as they realize they’re losing, then point to the damage they’ve done and accuse the opposition of doing it. I believe what we are facing today is the offspring that fascism and communism combined would have created.
Exactly. The latest is Democrats blaming Trump for the border invasion. Somehow the former "Xenophobe in Chief" induced millions of heretofore hated foreigners to illegally cross our border to provide himself a campaign issue. It's so stupid even the corrupt MSM should find it laughable, but likely will find a way to defend it.
An utter lack of morality is immensely freeing – you can say diametrically opposite things from minute to minute, constrained only by the audience’s memory. Given the Dems’ distance from the truth and exploding anti-Semitism, I fully expect them to suggest “camps.”
Describing the Nazis as socialists in the same breath as the Soviets without clarification is misleading. The Nazis supported private ownership and administration of small & medium sized businesses, and sold off state owned enterprises. For major economic players, the state entered into partnerships that gave it directional control of the businesses’ activities (e.g., Rheinmetall, IG Farben). This was all radically different from the Soviet model.
The difference between "you must obey the state because party operatives are at your offices telling you what to do" and "you must obey the state because the state is the formal owner" is merely playing with words. The Nazis were a totalitarian society, were they not?
It is not playing with words. There’s a significant difference between telling the largest corporations to produce products needed for national objectives in addition to those they choose to produce vs. collectivization of farms. Small and medium-sized businesses did not have Nazi apparatchiks sitting at the CEOs’ elbows.
The Nazis displayed aspects of both totalitarianism and authoritarianism, e.g., they actively fostered the preservation of German heritage. This is markedly different from Assad, Kim, Maduro, Hoxha, Ceaușescu, Mao, Saddam, et al.
https://www.britannica.com/question/What-is-the-difference-between-totalitarianism-and-authoritarianism
How This Ends
Subscribe
Sign in
135 Comments
Share
Write a comment...
⭠ Return to thread
5 mins ago
While the history lesson is interesting, you have missed some salient points.
First, the name Nazi is from, "National-Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei," or National SOCIALIST German Workers' Party - it's in the name! They knew what it meant and claimed it for themselves. Not very misleading.
Next, you describe the methods used by the Nazis that gave them control over large businesses and the economy of the nation. While it is true the methods were different than yheir Soviet counterparts, the ultimate results were very similar - state control of the means of production. Even with their different, modus operandi, the ideology was the same, the rights of the individual are subservient to the state.
To me, these differences do not demonstrate the polar political opposites inferred by the terms "far right" or "far left." Compounded with the adoption by both groups the dogma and name of "socialist," I instead view them as two leaves on the same poisonous flower.
👏👏👏 Hell yes!
And yet there are plenty of people who eat this nonsense up, I’ve worked with many of them, and my own siblings are lost in this neverland?! We live in scary times, common sense and critical thought are not just under attack, they are mostly dead. The people who destroyed it are mostly college educated narcissists, of which women are the chief adherents, but you can’t say that out loud, or there will be serious consequences…. too bad I no longer care -
Women and men are equally capable of narcissism, true, although in women it often goes unrecognized.
I think narcissism is incredibly visible in women if you look at their children. (Trans children, for example).
True, but people don't recognize this is what I meant. There is still a general consensus that trans moms are "brave and loving". Society doesn't seem to see how women can be toxic since it's usually passive aggressive as opposed to in your face.
Ugh, I grew up with a toxic mom so unfortunately I can spot one a mile away.
Me too. You have my condolences. :) It's infuriating when people fall for this stuff that seems so obvious to me. I want to scream "look at the actions, NOT the words!" If your childhood is defined by a feeling of cognitive dissonance, the problem is not you.
“If it feels crazy, maybe it really is crazy.”
Addendum to my post: https://open.substack.com/pub/adambcoleman/p/the-media-is-complicit-in-the-proliferation?r=7y6hi&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
Much easier to see when there are multiple trans or gay children in one family, of which the parents are “incredibly proud.”
Exactly
Is it any wonder most news outlets no longer allow commenting? They don't want to know what your response is to the foolishness they routinely spout in their articles. THEY will tell YOU how to think and constructive criticism is not welcomed.
Canada’s CBC. Exactly!
Its final form as a reincarnation of Izvestia c. 1986 is not far off ahead.
A second factor is their responsibility under their web service provider’s TOS to moderate comment boards. A royal PITA due to cost. Most news sites’ comment boards are cheerleading for one side or the other, and add little to anyone’s understanding.
When Fani Willis took the stand, she came across like a blaxploitation hustler doing her best caricature of a ghetto black woman with sassy 'tude: talking about how "black people" all have a stash of thousands in cash stuffed into their mattresses and they can't possibly know where the hell it all came from. This was the cringest "black" performance I've seen since that hilarious covid vax commercial put out by the state of Arkansas Tim Dillon covered back in '21. (if you haven't seen it, its a must watch):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxT2OIH8QZE
This is what rich white liberals think of and expect from black women and Willis aimed to please. The liberal media can spin her performance however they want but the vast majority of Americans, including blacks, don't find it amusing or appropriate to act that way in a courtroom or anywhere else.
That Tim Dillon clip is hilarious, he's so right.
I honestly can't believe the levels of BS and gaslighting re the Fani Willis testimony. These spin levels are at risk of starting an actual tornado!
What's depressing is to read the comments under the CNN full video of it, on YouTube. Thousands of people doing the whole "How DARE they disrespect this black Queeen! You get 'em Fani, yasss!" etc. And hundreds and hundreds of comments about evil Mr Trump, and that she has every right to have a boyfriend.
I mean, yeah, she does have every right to have a boyfriend. Probably best if it's not someone else's husband though. And probably best not to hire him in a job he is unqualified for, and then pay him $700k of tax dollars, and then proceed to start living like Kylie Jenner with that money.
I don't think 'having a boyfriend' was where she went wrong. I think it was more the ill-conceived money laundering operation, involving her married lover/employee. This seems to be too subtle a point for many to grasp though, as the comments attest. Gah!
Don't get too blackpilled by CNN comments. Only the world's most submental morons comment on (or even watch) CNN.
Good point.
Thanks Peebo!
The entire Fani Willis performance could be described as an opera bouffe.
Hahaha!
Yes.
Learned a new term!
Excellent synopsis.
If a white person had written her act as a skit it would have been decried as the most racist thing ever.
This is amazing. You're right, though -- this is the 68 year old Rachel Maddow watching rich liberal lady in Charlottesville version of blackness. Look how cute they are with their "hustling"!
She wore the “stunning pink dress” backwards, btw…. Brilliant.
Actually, no. The accusation was based on a similar but different dress (Nordstrom $129). Willis’ dress has been spotted on Amazon for $42.99 and was correctly oriented. I wonder if the bulge in the seat that looks like a “Biden load” is standard?
Thanks for the correction - I did see the correction some time later. Still, somehow the backwards dress works on a metaphoric level ….
“metaphoric level”
Agree 110%!! 👍
American Fiction is a movie that nails this! https://youtu.be/i0MbLCpYJPA?si=d9LYwcu5zk4ipphz
To me, this just looks like yet one more show, displaying white people as the stupid ones. Be careful to recognize propaganda.
It's displaying white and black progressives who equate being black with crime and poverty in a bad light. The audience, consisting of many white people, is in on the joke. It's entertaining and funny. I'm not going to scour everything for anything that might be part of the narrative. Seeing white debasement everywhere is no better than feminists who see the patriarchy everywhere. It's refreshing that the absurdity of this particular aspect of the narrative is being skewered. That's all.
This looks great!
These people are constantly coming up with new ways to either be destructive, strange, or just nonsensical. This one is nonsensical.
Reading the Economist now (I used to from the 90s to before the Great Trump Cataclysm) is like revisiting an old band or movie you were *convinced* was the Greatest Thing Ever Produced when you were 22, and now you think, what the *fuck* was I thinking?
I think it's just devolved into another legacy, trash "prestige" brand that upper middle management types like to have on their coffee tables, along with a Taschen book and overpriced pinot on the rack that telegraphs empty, performative fealty to the talismans and rituals of rancid, careerist credentialism.
And if Economist writers are indeed hostages, they are embracing Stockholm Syndrome wholeheartedly.
The Economist used to be required reading and I was a long time subscriber. It started to fly off the rails sometime during Obama's reign but it became evident during the Trump years. I still read it from time to time but the Economist's shameless and purely subjective Biden endorsement was my personal point of no return.
Your 'great band' analogy is apt. For me, it's more like a band that was once great but then completely sold out, it's the Aerosmith of news magazines.
What you noticed is the appointment of a new chief editor in Jan 2015. The previous editor Micklethwait was able to keep the magazine relatively neutral and well informed about obscure topics. Once they appointed Minton-Beddoes though (hailed at the time as their first female editor) there was a sharp step change towards generic leftist dogma. The insight vanished overnight and it became identical to many other publications in tone and stance. You could tell she was a far more politically aggressive person and wholly unsuited for the role. During the reign of the previous editor the Economist was widely respected, she managed to trash that reputation in only a handful of years. Very sad.
Thank you. Great explanation.
Make sure you click on the link and read the Washington Post article. Apparently Fani’s eye make up was “precise and intentional”. Thank goodness we have journalists of this quality, speaking truth to power.
The Post "journalist" is no more a journalist than Fani is a "prosecutor."
They are both black females in the throes of Black Female Superiority Complex (BFSC). The Post creature, as she must, supports and celebrates the Atlanta court creature. Both (as all BFSCs) are in way over their head, but that is not allowed to be noticed or commented on. The only thing they, and their PC-Prog cheerleaders, can do is pretend, fake it, and lie: "Stunning! And brave!"
Affirmative Action created these monsters.
How can this vile repudiation of all that is natural be stopped?
Yeah, I just needed to see the picture of the writer to know exactly what the article would say. Completely unbiased and an even handed presentation of the facts.
“Democracy dies in darkness”
It also dies when it’s smothered in bullshit.
Don’t forget the poster girl VP Kamala Harris!
Thanks, I needed a laugh!
Oh I'd just love the be able to have that writer explain what they meant, and what the opposite of "precise and intentional" make up would look like!
They don't teach writers to read their own texts out loud before submitting them, do they?
The opposite: makeup that is ‘Imprecise and unintentional.’
Beyond parody. Unbelievable
As people living in a bubble of elite-think, they believe the two words, national and conservative, are denigrating, insulting, deplorable, unacceptable, homophobic and racist. Being the opposite of the preferred and sophisticated, highly "moral" terms, progressive and global, the offense and the whole story is established right there at the beginning of the article in the Luciferian and "prophetic" rag, The Economist. This publication's habit in depicting obscure and symbolic images in its covers that depict future occurrences is smug in showcasing its insider's insight on the script of the powerful before plots are rolled out onto the gameboard of the world.
“Over and over and over again, journalists write things that flatly do not match the world you know you live in.” A perfect summation.
There is some kind of attempt to spread the damage/fallout of woke around. The mental gymnastics is stupid.
In 2016 i was shocked that the elites waged a war on 'populism'. Recently I was shocked they took a run at PTA moms. Nothing shocks me anymore and they've run out of wholesome identity groups to demonize. Their pitch is that we should love feudalism. They sound increasingly desperate.
A non-economist colleague asked me and two other professors of economics if economists thought the Economist was a legit publication. Small sample size but 2/3 said no.
Since I have been paying attention, they went from compelling, to interesting, to drivel. I can't tell how much is me updating or them downgrading, but certainly their narratives have felt overtly driven by someone's marketing department for some time.
Similar for me. I imagine I’m pretty rare as a college professor who has had this type of reaction, rejecting classical liberalism, in response to 2020.
I would not have characterized moving away from main stream culture as rejecting classical liberalism. From my view, i have made this distinction and placed the economist et al in this placeholder admixture neocon/neoliberal category until I figure it out. But what you're saying is interesting, how do you mean that you rejected classicsl liberalism?
Thinking strictly in the category of individual. The proper unit of society is the family. CL is about individual liberty, and is allergic to duties placed on a person by society and familial structures.
Interesting, thank you and I agree with you, although I have certainly followed that path, I am not sure that I thought about it in that frame. Lots to think about.
AHAHAHAHAHA are we being trolled right now? Are they pretend freaking out so that we can get excited that conservatism is spreading? What’s happening right now? 😂😂😂 also I like how the Economist said “a motley crew of western politicians”. Reminds me of the LA Times’ line: “odd and sometimes menacing fellowship of Christian evangelicals, vaccine conspiracy theorists, anti-government militias and more moderate parents who believed they lost their voice during the prolonged COVID-19 shutdowns” These people act like they hate us but also keep unwittingly painting us like rag tag under dogs 😂 dummies. Americans love underdogs.
These are the same people who claim that third-party candidates are a threat to democracy. Nothing they say makes sense if you think about it for more than three seconds, but fortunately for them, most people don't.