Majorityrights News > Category: World Affairs

Tens of thousands protest against Putin in Russian far east

KHABAROVSK/MOSCOW (Reuters) 25 July 2020 - Tens of thousands marched in the Russian far east on Saturday, the third such weekend protest in a row, to express their anger over what they say is President Vladimir Putin’s mishandling of a local political crisis.

Residents of Khabarovsk, around 3,800 miles (6,110 km) and seven time zones east of Moscow, are unhappy about the detention this month of the wider region’s popular governor, Sergei Furgal, who was arrested on murder charges he denies.

His arrest, which his supporters say was politically motivated, triggered the protests and created a headache for the Kremlin which is trying to troubleshoot a COVID-19-induced drop in real incomes and keep a lid on unrest.

Protesters chanted “Putin resign!” and “Putin is a thief!”. Demonstrators say they want Furgal, who they think has been set up, to be flown back from Moscow and put on trial in Khabarovsk.

City authorities estimated around 6,500 people had taken part. One local media outlet put the number at up to 20,000, while other outlets and opposition activists said upwards of 50,000 had attended and that it was the biggest protest of its kind so far.

“Give us our Furgal back,” said a local businesswoman called Viktoria. “This is our choice.”

The protests have highlighted anger among some over what they see as policies emanating from detached Moscow-based authorities.

Supporters of Furgal, a member of the nationalist LDPR party, feel he is being belatedly punished for defeating a candidate from the ruling pro-Putin United Russia party in 2018. The Kremlin says Furgal has serious charges to answer.

Such sustained demonstrations are unusual for Russia’s regions, as is the fact that the authorities have not yet moved to break them up.

In an apparent move to defuse tensions, Putin on Monday named a new acting governor. But protesters said they felt insulted by the choice of Mikhail Degtyaryov, who has no connection with the region, and have demanded he step down.

Reporting by Yury Zolotarev and Andrew Osborn; Editing by Louise Heavens and Grant McCool

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

       
        Sergey Furgal
        Photo By Kremlin.ru, CC BY 4.0,
        https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=75357245

Paleoconservatism as “Cultural Controlled Opposition” in response to Neo-Conservatism and its Clean Break Memo.

They typically come across as your best asset. If you recognize it for what it is and keep it on the radar screen as such, not getting caught up, controlled opposition can have its utility as they are often funded to provide valuable resource, typically enlisting intelligent people and allowing them fine and clear articulation of some important information for WN. Nick Fuentes nicely articulates Israeli Operation Clean Break, a.k.a., “Project for a New America Century.”

Although Nick’s Paleoconservatism is not what most people consider to be classic controlled opposition, make no mistake. While we are tossing around the word “culture” of late, adding “cultural capitalism” and “cultural nationalism” on the radar screen with cultural Marxism, it can be said quite accurately that Paleoconservatism is a “cultural controlled opposition”.... a bit softer and more flexible perhaps than classic, but undoubtedly allowing the enemies of European peoples to act on key points.

“Secure Tolerance”: The Jewish Plan to Permanently Silence the West, Part 1

13 July 2020 by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.

       
“The promotion of secure tolerance will be permanent and irreversible.” - Moshe Kantor, Manifesto on Secure Tolerance, 2011.

In 2010, Harvard duo Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons published The Invisible Gorilla, which detailed their study of the human capacity to overlook even the most obvious things. In one of their experiments, Chabris and Simons created a video in which students wearing white and black t-shirts pass a basketball between themselves. Viewers were asked to count the number of times the players with the white shirts passed the ball, and many were later very satisfied to find that they were accurate in their counting. This satisfaction was tainted, however, when they were asked if they had spotted “the gorilla.” Amidst considerable confusion, the video would then be replayed for the puzzled viewers, who were stunned to see a man in a gorilla suit walk among the students and balls, take up a position in the center of the screen, and wave at the camera. They’d missed him entirely in their initial viewing. The study highlighted the capacity for humans to become fixated on set tasks, events, or other distractions, and miss even the most elaborate and remarkable of occurrences.

When it comes to Jewish activism, and especially Jewish activism in the area of censorship and mass migration, I fear that the same dynamics are at work. Panicked by this or that website or YouTube channel being defunded or banned, we miss the ‘Invisible Gorilla’ — a plan of action far more horrifying and deadly in its implications than any single act of censorship.

There are essentially two forms of censorship. The hard kind we are very familiar with. It consists in the banning or removal of websites, videos, books, podcasts, and social media accounts. It extends to defunding and deplatforming, and it reaches its apogee in the banning of activists from entering certain countries, in the arrest of activists on spurious grounds, and in the development of new laws with harsh criminal penalties for speech. These methods are dangerous and rampant, and I myself have fallen victim to several of them.

I think, however, that softer, more diffuse methods of censorship are even more insidious and perhaps even more catastrophic. We could consider, for example, the manipulation of culture so that even if certain speech is not illegal and carries no legal repercussions, it nevertheless leads to the loss of employment, the destruction of education opportunities, and the dissolving of one’s relationships. This is a form of cultural self-censorship, involving the modification of in-group standards, that has demonstrable Jewish origins. “Soft” censorship can also take the form of socio-cultural prophylaxis. Take, for example, the recent initiative of the U.S. State Department to initiate a drive to engage in the global promotion of philo-Semitic (pro-Jewish) attitudes. I really don’t believe that this will play out in the manner the State Department hopes, and I watch with interest to see precisely what the methodologies of this policy will be. I sincerely doubt its prospects for success. But what other way can this be interpreted than as a preventative measure, obstructing the growth of organic attitudes that, let’s face it, are more likely to skew to the anti-Jewish? Finally, isn’t it in the nature of contemporary culture, with its emphasis on entertainment, consumption, and sex, to be the perfect environment in which to hide many “Invisible Gorillas”? Isn’t it a whirlwind of fixations and distractions, replete with untold numbers of “woke” viewers happy to report that they’ve been enthusiastically counting passes and have the accurate number? Isn’t it rather the axiom of our time that, from the idiotic Left to the idiotic Right, Invisible Gorillas stroll freely and unhindered, laughing and waving as they go, hidden in plain sight?

Moshe Kantor: Oligarch Activist, Dedicated Zionist

If I could single out one point in time at which a process was set in motion that culminated in the heightened censorship that we see today, it wouldn’t be the recent banning of the NPI/Radix YouTube channel, or the removal of the Daily Stormer from the internet after Charlottesville. No answers will be found in the banning of Alex Jones, of Stefan Molyneaux, the European travel ban on Richard Spencer, the eviction of NPI from Hungary, or recent revelations about PayPal’s selective banning process. These are all symptoms that possess no answers in themselves. I do believe, however, that we can locate the immediate intellectual and political beginnings of our present situation in 2011, in the publication of a document titled Manifesto for Secure Tolerance. The document was written by Moshe Kantor, a Russian billionaire, pernicious oligarch, and president of no less than the European Jewish Congress, the European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation (ECTR, which we will return to), the World Holocaust Forum Foundation, the European Jewish Fund, and the Policy Council of the World Jewish Congress. In short, this Jewish billionaire is the quintessential strongly-identified leading Jewish activist, fully committed to the advancement of the interests of his ethnic group.

As leader of so many groups, and mover in so many high circles, Kantor fulfils the qualifications of the early modern stadtlans, Court Jews who boasted of significant wealth and intensive relationships with non-Jewish elites. And he exemplifies many of the same qualities, acting always in un-elected but highly-influential intercessory roles, seeking to improve the tactical and material advantages of his tribe. When not crossing the continent bleating about ‘tolerance,’ Kantor also advances Jewish interests in his capacity as the President of Moscow’s Museum of Avant-Garde Mastery — a dubious establishment dedicated to extolling the disgusting and poisonous art of co-ethnics like Marc Chagall, Chaim Soutine, and Mark Rothko (Rothko is the subject of a 3-part series of TOO articles by Brenton Sanderson).

Although masquerading as a world-renowned “peace activist,” Kantor is in fact a devoted practitioner of international Zionism. A citizen of Russia, the United Kingdom, and Israel, this world parasite wages unconventional warfare by means of backstage diplomacy, policy development, and ceaseless lobbying for repressive legislation to be imposed on Europeans everywhere.

Let’s start with his Manifesto for Secure Tolerance. Its ethos can be summed up in its slogan: “Restrictions are necessary for the freedom to live a secure life.” The instinct is to describe such as phrase as Orwellian, but surely the time has come to describe such concoctions more accurately and plainly as “Judaic.” Surely only the Judaic mind has both the shamelessness, arrogance, and spiteful aggression required to present the removal of freedoms as the key to freedom?

Kantor argues that “tolerance,” which in his definition basically means acquiescence to globalism (promoted by Kantor as a universal good) and mass migration, is an essential aspect of a successful society. He argues that in order to protect “tolerance,” we should therefore impose “security requirements” (oppressive laws) that focus on “racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism.” Thus, Kantor’s creation of the idea of “Secure Tolerance,” which will see the gradual expansion of cultural and legislative repressions on Whites/nativists, first in the European Union, and then throughout the rest of the West. In Kantor’s own words:

Secure tolerance must be promoted in the public mind and practised in the most democratic way, that is, through law-making. In this way alone will the promotion of secure tolerance be permanent and irreversible. There is no better field in which to implement this project than the European Union because that in itself is a product of tolerance shown by twenty-seven nations for each other and because it is fully exposed to all the challenges of the day. The crucial factors, among others, however, determine the promotion of secure tolerance:

Education, above all primary education (we may be too late forever if we start to teach this difficult new language of communication to children over five years of age).

Secure tolerance is inseparable from the need to develop techniques or practices of Reconciliation in society, which, in turn, are based on the legal recognition of the historical truth of the Holocaust.

And, last but not least, secure tolerance and Reconciliation techniques should be formalized in a code of laws, both national and supra-national, the making of which, once started, is never to stop.

There is a lot to unpack here, but we should start with Kantor’s over-arching expressed goal, the one that opens and closes this section of his Manifesto: the imposition of supranational legislation imposing “tolerance” and outlawing dissent. Kantor’s appeal here to law-making being “the most democratic way,” is pure theater. As we will see, there is nothing democratic about the later course of Kantor’s proposals into becoming law. The Western public has never heard of Kantor’s manifesto or its later incarnations (honestly, have you?), and certainly never had an opportunity to vote on it. Kantor wants repressive laws, “permanent and irreversible,” the “making of which, once started, is never to stop,” in order to deal with, in his words, the “neo-Fascist politicians and organizations, radical nationalists and militarised racists who, in their turn are jeopardising European democratic accomplishments” and therefore represent “destructive manifestations of anti-globalism.”

Further theater is observed in Kantor’s choosing the European Union as a starting point because it “is a product of tolerance.” Of course, I’m sure it had nothing to do with the tactical advantage offered by the opportunity to give his legislative proposals a running head start by ensuring their adoption in twenty-seven countries in one swoop. Jews, of course, have much love for European unity in its current, bureaucratic incarnation. The EU is useful to Jews, who believe that Europe must be compelled to undergo its demographic death as a Continent and sooner rather than later. Supranational government in the form of the EU is seen as the most efficient means to this end. Why go to the effort of separately promoting mass migration in Germany, Britain, France, Spain etc., and navigating speech laws through each of their legal systems and parliaments, when the EU is the purse seine that can reap them all? It’s the same in the U.S. where Jews have always championed a strong central government rather than states’ rights. Jews have always perceived the capabilities of the EU as an engine of mass immigration. When Brexit happened, Ari Paul, writing in The Forward, argued in terror that a reversion to the nation-state government across Europe would be a “return to the state of affairs that gave us two world wars and the Holocaust.” His proposed remedy is the suggestion that the populations of the E.U. should be more tightly controlled through speech and hate laws, and the final solution “is to make the E.U.’s policy more favorable to multiculturalism and migration. … Jews are certainly going to play a role in which direction Europe goes.”

Moshe Kantor is one of those Jews. His insidious education proposals, designed to brainwash our children as early as possible, are mere copies of the tactics of the ADL and countless Jewish activists within psychiatry. And his call for the international legal protection of the Jewish historical narrative of the Holocaust is simply the worldwide criminalization of “Holocaust denial.” He is making speedy progress on all fronts.

READ MORE...

DW Documentary Jul 9, 2020

Time bombs are ticking on the world’s sea beds. During World War II, 6,300 vessels were sent to the bottom. For years, they have been rusting beneath the waves and leaking toxic oil into the oceans. The biggest oil spill in history is imminent.

Experts estimate that the wrecks could hold up to 15 million tons of fuel, posing a threat to both holidaymakers and wildlife. This documentary takes viewers to Poland’s Baltic coast, to Norway, the USA and the Pacific Ocean. It accompanies scientists who are investigating how heavily the seabed has in some places already been contaminated by leaking oil, observing the rotting wrecks, developing danger scenarios and issuing warnings: the oil from several sunken ships urgently needs to be pumped out. There is still time to safely dispose of the sea’s “black tears.” But, despite all the warnings, so far very few governments are prepared to take action. Although pumping out the wrecks is technically possible, it would be a complex and expensive process. But we are at the start of a critical phase. After decades of corrosion in salty seawater, sometimes the slightest vibration is enough to cause the steel hulls of the sunken warships to split open. Marine researchers, coastguards and salvage experts worldwide agree the question is not if, but when, further massive oil spills from World War II wrecks will cause an environmental disaster.

—————————————————————————————————

Observing that Marxism’s internationalist trajectory aims ultimately at the withering-away of the state, Majorityrights has put forth an ethnonationalist platform pro-actively, one which I call White Left Ethnonationalist in order to distinguish it from Jewish power and influence, from Abrahamism of any denomination, from Nazism, from scientism and nutty conspiracy theories. The concept White Left Ethnonationalism places only a bit more emphasis on social accountability in order to give the fact of our social indebtedness a modicum more attention, compensatory of what we are used to and what we have been allowed as a people in order to facilitate borders for our people (once bordered, our emergent qualities will take care of most problems); and this platform also corresponds to anti-supremacism and anti-imperialism. As such, it is consonant with international nationalism - nationalism for all peoples. It can also be consonant with Dangerfield’s newly coined term and concept, “Cultural Nationalism.”

Because it is defined by ourselves, it is drastically different from economic Marxism; we can have private property, free enterprise, outcomes according to merit; and naturally it is the opposite of Cultural Marxism; on the contrary, it is pro-White for both our genus and species of ethnonationalism; facilitating the interest of our people and our natural predilections, individual liberty, science and tech, etc.

Again, for all those who have unwittingly gone along with the Jewish program to rail against “the left” and “lefties” your efforts are not in vain as it is easily understood that you speak of the internationalist/anti-nationalist, anti-White left.

And we reclaim our terminology of the left for our definition as nationalists, to wrest its correspondence with social capital and unionization thereof, thus providing a structure of accountability, social correctivity and thereby group maintenance along with other positive and necessary social features that have been obstructed for our people; while averting the Jewish trap of reaction - and their “solutions” into sundry, destabilizing right wing perfidy, back doors from accountability and means for their infiltration, coercion and direction, whether identifying as right or turd positiononism.

Andy Ngo Testifies About Antifa at Congressional Hearing

Jun 29, 2020

Andy Ngo

On 29 June, 2020, Andy Ngo provided congressional testimony at a hearing on “Government Violence Against Peaceful Civil Rights Protesters.” It was exactly one year after the antifa beating he was a victim of in Portland. The hearing was headed by the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. Democrats dismissed antifa and blamed the recent violent riots on police and the far-right. Link to full unedited hearing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnBMw...

Please support my journalism:
https://www.paypal.me/MrAndyNgo
https://www.patreon.com/AndyNgo
https://www.subscribestar.com/AndyNgo

I hate to present a note of sarcasm, but the stultification of our people’s understanding as a result of red caping of important philosophical concepts for social organization has been unbelievably thorough.

Social Construction of the DNA Nations: A major problem, obstruction really, that I have had in getting better ideas understood and underway has been the misrepresentation of these better ideas for social organization of European peoples; so much so have ideas of social organization been misrepresented that European peoples have been repulsed by the very ideas that they need most to facilitate their social organization and homeostasis.

Social Constructionism is prominent among the misrepresented ideas made didactically repulsive. Social Constructionism properly understood doesn’t maintain that you can merely make whatever you like of your existence – you can try, but if your ideas are absurd they are going to be thwarted in one way or another (in a word, how is being solipsistic – deciding that you can be whatever you like completely irrespective of what other people think, let alone the laws of biology and physics - how is that “social”? - it isn’t. It’s Cartesian).

Social Constructionism is a correction to Cartesian estrangement, in either of its two extreme directions, either beyond nature or within nature, but on either side, veering toward no account, “that’s just the-way-it-isness”, which is susceptible to leave our people unprotected for the lack of accountability to their relative group systemic interests.

The group system, which Aristotle called praxis, is the middle range between the Cartesian extremes, the social world, provided structure by the concept of unionization – as opposed to Cartesian runway beyond nature or on course of brute nature, unionization structures human, social systemic accountability, thereby correctivity, which corresponds to group homeostasis, which is what we want, our autonomy, our sovereignty, our agency. Our social group, praxis, which should be the default calibration, while truth quests the feedback. Through accountability as such, we may establish coherence, the first task of any individual or specific group in the world, and with accountability as such, we may establish agency and warranted assertability:

The idea of social constructionism rather is to sensitize and centralize our people as the most relevant perspective – viz., our relations and their necessity; and with that accountability and coherence we can call attention to the agency that we have in the construction of our world; always a fact in one of three ways:

More literally, as in the construction of a building.

More metaphorically, as in the “construction” of a child.

Post hoc in relation to brute facts, as in we retain that capacity to negotiate to some extent how those facts come to count.

Why am I bringing this up now?

Social constructionism properly understood is an innocuous idea at worst and at its best, it is honest in the way the world and knowledge construction actually works; facilitating the ongoing social construction and correction of knowledge – knowledge imperative to our survival as a people.

Because our people react to misrepresentations of the idea, they are not taking advantage of this idea which the internet facilitates so well.

The Internet is here! We can interact in the construction of the DNA Nations concept! And yet for these past ten years, people have been acting like they are still sitting in front of the television, movie screen or radio, or going to the media of yesteryear as Bowery notes, of the bible, and that I am in front of the congregation: I have been treated as if I am either Moses on Mount Sinai, who is supposed to deliver the commandments by magic transmission to their brains, or, as they seem to prefer, that I am an impostor that they must debunk, with vicious ad hominum for their gods, be they Moses indeed, Jesus or Hitler or some other icon.

They’ll do anything, it seems, but join me in interaction, the way that social construcionism is supposed to work, in ongoing development and correction of ideas.

You think you are so smart? Fine, lets see how you can help refine and advance these ideas. Think I am mistaken about something? Let me know where I can make a correction..etc.

I have been maintaining all along that I know that I have set out solid, important specificatory structures, now lets shape and craft them in our interests!

So the task now is to wait for/and or find those people who will help me to build the DNA Nations concept - they might care to help develop other ideas that I’ve advanced as well, but - the DNA Nations concept is most important to develop at this point – for obvious reasons now, it is urgent that we get this underway.