[Majorityrights News] Trump will ‘arm Ukraine to the teeth’ if Putin won’t negotiate ceasefire Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 16:20.
[Majorityrights News] Alex Navalny, born 4th June, 1976; died at Yamalo-Nenets penitentiary 16th February, 2024 Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 16 February 2024 23:43.
[Majorityrights Central] A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity’s origin Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 25 July 2023 22:19.
[Majorityrights News] Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 18 May 2023 18:55.
Germany’s anti-Islam PEGIDA movement staged rallies in several cities across Europe on Saturday to protest against the arrival of hundreds of thousands of migrants from the Middle East and Africa ...
After almost fizzling out early last year, the movement has regained momentum amid deepening public unease over whether Germany can cope with the 1.1 million migrants who arrived in the country during 2015.
The alleged involvement of migrants in assaults on women in Cologne on New Year’s Eve has also spurred PEGIDA, which says it is proof that German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s welcoming stance to refugees is flawed.
“We must succeed in guarding and controlling Europe’s external borders as well as its internal borders once again,” PEGIDA member Siegfried Daebritz told a crowd on the banks of the River Elbe who chanted “Merkel must go!”
Police in Dresden declined to estimate the number of protesters. German media put the number at up to 8,000, well below the 15,000 originally expected by police.
Hundreds of counter-demonstrators also marched through Dresden under the motto “Solidarity instead of exclusion”, holding up placards saying “No place for Nazis”.
Far-right groups see Europe’s refugee crisis as an opportunity to broadcast their anti-immigrant message. There were 208 rallies in Germany in the last quarter of 2015, up from 95 a year earlier, Interior Ministry data showed.
CALAIS, PRAGUE
Protests also took place on Saturday in other cities, including Amsterdam, Prague and the English city of Birmingham.
In Calais, in northern France, more than a dozen people were arrested during a protest that was attended by more than a hundred people despite being banned, local authorities said.
Thousands of migrants fleeing war and poverty in Africa and the Middle East camp out in Calais, hoping for a chance to make the short trip across the English Channel to Britain.
In Prague, an estimated 2,200 people including both supporters and opponents of Pegida held a series of rival demonstrations around the Czech capital. Police had to intervene in one march when supporters of the migrants came under attack from around 20 people who threw bottles and stones.
Later, around 20 masked assailants threw Molotov cocktails during an attack on a center that collects donations for refugees, forcing the evacuation of the building and injuring one person who was hit by glass, police said.
In Warsaw, hundreds of people waved Polish flags and chanted “England and France are in tears, that’s how tolerance ends”.
“We’re demonstrating against the Islamisation of Europe, we’re demonstrating against immigration, against an invasion,” Robert Winnicki, leader of Poland’s far-right Ruch Narodowy (National Movement), told demonstrators.
... as thousands of people taking part in far-right anti-Islam protests clashed with pro-immigration groups and riot control police.
Police in Dresden, Germany, saw about 2,000 protesters at a rally organised by the group Patriotic Europeans against the Islamisation of the West, making it the biggest of a coordinated series of demonstrations across European cities …
Nationalist groups in Europe have been galvanized by the unprecedented influx of refugees from Africa, Asia and the Middle East last year. Today similar, smaller PEGIDA-style protests were planned in France, Britain, Poland, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands.
In the Czech capital of Prague, thousands rallied against the influx of refugees and others in support of them and opposing protesters clashed and had to be separated by police.
Martin Konvicka, a leader of the anti-Muslim movement, is calling the influx of refugees an ‘invasion’ that poses a ‘huge threat for us all’. Two other anti-migrant groups are rallying in Prague and another in the second-largest Czech city of Brno.
In Dublin, scuffles broke out between people who had gathered to protest against the launch of PEGIDA in Ireland, and those who attended the launch of the group.
In Birmingham, meanwhile, police said about about 200 PEGIDA supporters and 60 counter demonstrators turned out. Other demonstrations took place in Warsaw and Graz in southern Austria.
In Amsterdam, riot police have clashed with PEGIDA demonstrators as they tried to hold their first protest in the Dutch capital.
A square near Amsterdam city hall that had been earmarked for the rally had to be shut down shortly before the gathering as police and explosives experts examined what police called a ‘suspect package’.
Only about 200 PEGIDA supporters were present, where they were heckled by left-wing demonstrators who shouted: ‘Refugees are welcome, fascists are not!’
Dutch riot police detained several people as officers on horseback intervened to separate the two groups of demonstrators.
Other demonstrations took place in Warsaw, Bratislava and in Graz in southern Austria …
In nearby Calais, fighting broke out as more protesters clashed with the police during a banned demonstration. France’s Interior Ministry had tried to stop the march by members of PEGIDA.
They are particularly angry about the build up of some 5,000 refugees sleeping rough in Calais as they try to get to the UK, where they will claim asylum or disappear into the black economy.
‘This is our home - migrants get out,’ they chanted today as they gathered by the port town’s station.
A large force of CRS riot police confronted around 150 of them, as a senior officer announced on a loudspeaker that all were banned from demonstrating.
The PEGIDA rallies even reached as far as Australia, where a small but vocal group of supporters marched through Canberra. Sherman Burgess, known as the Great Aussie Patriot, and Blair Cottrell, leader of the United Patriots Front, were among the speakers.
Some background on the British demo:
During last week Paul Weston was posting commentary at Breitbart and the DT explaining the PEGIDA anti-Islam strategy, and defending it against those who find the Jewy nature of counter-jihadism frustrating and annoying. That includes me. I don’t object to the political realism involved, but I do struggle to understand why Jews are permitted to claim leading roles in a movement of and for our people.
Here is a sample of Paul’s commentary:
we will never get them to come unless everything is peaceful and civilised. If we can achieve that, then there are a number of people I would like to invite to speak. But first things first, which is peaceful events!
Geert Wilders, Marine Le Pen, Sweden Democrats etc, all polling first or second in their countries. What would happen if they suddenly started banging on about Jews? They would be finished overnight is the answer. Hence impossible, hence you are quite astonishingly thick if you cannot see this.
Look what happened in Dover this weekend and then look at Dresden Pegida. One works, one doesn’t. Having said that, if a civilised Pegida UK fails to catch on, then it is all over as far as democratic resistance goes. I wonder what the brave Jew haters here will then do? Type more bullshit in their armchairs or actually DO something?
Before we cross that junction, we at least have to have tried all possible democratic means. After that, lets see…....
How many years do you think we have left to mount a defence against Islam, in the manner of Geert Wilders or Marine Le Pen? Not many….How many years do you think it would take to persuade the British public to return a Prime Minister who talked about the Jews all the time? Fifty? Are you for real? You think we have that sort of time? And by making things impossible, you are part of the problem, which is why it is you as the traitor.
The reference to Dover was to the National Front demonstration in that town a week ago, which garnered nationalpublicity. Britain First has also been on the campaign trail in Dewsbury, hot on the heels of this ballsy “Christian March” through Luton:
Ms Fransen definitely looks ideologically sound. I don’t see her donning a bin-bag any time soon.
Illegal speech has always been forbidden on Facebook. And there are also opinions which are classified as “hatred and intolerance.” Now Facebook is taking a hard line against dissent by building a system wherein you can report friends whose opinions are dissident of their party line regarding migrants and their assimilation.
Facebook’s COO, Sheryl Sandberg, yesterday presented its new strategy at the World Economic Forum in Davos. This week it has launched a new project which is called the Initiative for Civil Courage online.
“Civil Courage”
From left, Sasha Havlicek, Gerd Billen, Sheryl Sandberg, Peter Neumann, Anetta Kahane at the launch of the initiative at the World Economic Forum
There is much talk about stopping the IS and terrorism in the social media. But behind the new venture hides also other motives. It is mainly in response to protests flaring-up in social media against the great migration and refugee flows into Europe that the company now intends to take action. The initiative will particularly target Germany, where the protests were at their strongest according to Reuters.
- ‘Hate speech has no place in our society - not even on the Internet, said Sandberg of the new venture.’
Merkel and the German government are a significant party in pushing Facebook to apprehend “hatred and calls for violence.”
Clear illegality has always been forbidden to write and Facebook’s employees censure that sort of continent as soon as it is discovered. However, the company will now focus on detecting users who make “xenophobic remarks,” according to Britain’s “Independent.” It has now engaged media company Bertelsmann to clean up and monitor traffic on the German part of the platform. The company has also set aside a million euro to be allocated to “nonprofit organizations” to help in the effort.
Opinion based reporting
But the really big operation is not launched yet. Facebook will have an opinion reporting system that allows users to alert the company when friends’ opinions start to diverge too much. Then you should be able to flag that they are ‘at risk of being radicalized, “according to IDG.
It is still unclear what the definition of too radical will be, whose posts will be deleted and if it should be decided by a robot or by human judgment.
Markus Andersson
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Speaking at Davos, Facebook’s COO said the company believes ‘counterspeech’ by the online community is the best way to combat propaganda
Silicon Valley is now an open combatant in the war against Islamic extremism.
In increasingly brash tones, tech executives are discussing publicly how their companies can help the west stop Islamic State recruiting efforts online. That shift is welcome news in Washington, London and Berlin, but it could also raise questions about American tech firms’ role in the global marketplace of ideas.
Less than two weeks ago, Silicon Valley’s leading executives joined a closed-door meeting with America’s most senior security staff and law enforcement officials to discuss how to combat Isis’s recruiting efforts online. Agents for the terrorist organization have increasingly turned to platforms such as Facebook,
Alphabet’s YouTube and Twitter.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos on 20 January, Facebook’s COO Sheryl Sandberg pointed to one source of inspiration for the digital war against Isis – “a ‘like’ attack”.
She explained a recent effort by German Facebook users to “like” the Facebook page of the neo-Nazi party and then post positive messages on the page.
“What was a page filled with hatred and intolerance was then tolerance and messages of hope,” she said.
Google says Isis must be locked out of the open web.
She then pivoted to Isis and added: “The best thing to speak against recruitment by Isis are the voices of people who were recruited by Isis, understand what the true experience is, have escaped and have come back to tell the truth ... Counter-speech to the speech that is perpetuating hate we think by far is the best answer.”
Speaking separately in London on the same day, Alphabet’s director of Google Ideas, Jared Cohen, talked about efforts to force Isis agents off the public internet.
“It could be where we can see greater short-term wins,” said Cohen, who met with Pope Francis on 15 January along with Alphabet executive chairman Eric Schmidt.
Revealed: White House seeks to enlist Silicon Valley to ‘disrupt radicalization’
US officials, lawmakers and politicians have complained that the companies aren’t doing enough to keep terrorists away from civilians online. Donald Trump famously said last month he wanted to talk to Microsoft founder Bill Gates about “closing the internet up” in some places to stop Isis.
And while tech executives privately were sympathetic, they were often nervous about confronting the issue publicly. The internet, by its nature, is open. Tech firms – rooted in America’s liberal tradition of free speech – are skittish about playing traffic cop about posted content. Sandberg’s and Cohen’s remarks Wednesday suggest those concerns have diminished.
During the national security meeting in San Jose, Silicon Valley executives in the room, including Sandberg and Apple’s Tim Cook, appeared open to the idea of helping Washington combat Isis online.
The Guardian reported at the time that US officials asked Sandberg about Facebook’s technology that allows users to flag friends who are posting suicidal thoughts on the platform.
After Sandberg explained it, tech executives in the room discussed whether a similar system could be developed for flagging social media users showing signs of radicalization.
The first hypotheses of his celebrity and phenomenon are that they are likely to derive of neo-liberal motives to break up anything like coherent unionization of people; and Jewish motives to keep everything mixed-up while their culture remains stable and under control - they want to keep everyone else mixed and perpetually off balance while they increasingly rule the roost as the only coherent and sufficiently intelligent people to rule.
His celebrity, then, appears on the BBC to denounce his family who reject and oppose Islam. While groups in coherent White interests can work with Indian Hindus as staunch anti-Islamicists for one major point, he apparently began drifting away from his Hindu upbringing through Arab associations early in his life and fell into the YKW/Abrahamic/neo-liberal race-mix-it-up agenda: spawning a mixed child which abetted his commitment to antagonize genetically coherent, non-Abrahamic identities. He taunts British security as “not that great.”
Mixed in the sandbox - Jihadi Junior
Hence, he has emerged a veritable role model - a Jewish/neo-liberal celebrity. He is the face, the didactic face, of anti-liberalism. However, this “interesting” neo-liberal and Jewish turmoil over mixed relations and motives has a clarifying effect. The agency of simplification derives of overly complex interfacing - where lines between people and ways of life are overwrought with ambivalence.
Toward that end he wants to make life simple by making clear the fact that not only people like him, but Islam itself, like all Abrahamic religions, has no place in Europe. Islam should be illegal and mosques should be converted for other use and enjoyment - centers for European people to practice devotion and sacrament of their relationships and environment would be a nice alternative. In fact, institutionalized, though optional, non-Abrahamic alternatives to liberalism for Europeans would do well to occupy these places instead.
Failing this optional recourse to liberalism, Jihad, by contrast, is a short circuited expression of anti-liberalism in Abraham’s race-mixing agenda. When you mix circuits what happens? They short-out.
Jihadi Johns - Abrahamic servants - a short circuited expression of race-mixing and anti-liberalism.
Norway’s state broadcaster, NRK, has put in place a 5-year plan in order to chip away at its mostly-White Norwegian workforce and talent.
“The aim is to reflect the population to a greater extent than we do today”
Director of Broadcasting
Thor Gjermund Eriksen
Currently about 4% of NRK’s permanent staff are from a “multicultural background.” About 13% of Norway’s total population are immigrants, and about 6% are from non-Western countries. NRK is not very interested in catering to Western immigrants, and instead wants to focus on “children of immigrants from Asia, Africa and South America.”
“NRK’s ambition is to be a generous and diverse public arena” said Eriksen. “If an increasing part of the population does not feel included, as are some of the arguments for having a public broadcaster weakened.” NRK describe this racial quota as “multicultural competence.” It also brags that having employees who speak Urdu, and Vietnamese are “success stories.”
In order to open White countries to mass non-White immigration, anti-Whites say “it’s just skin color” and tell us not to worry about it. But when non-White groups become more numerous, suddenly the entire argument is all about “skin color”. It’s about how evil White people are and how we must forcefully “diversify” (destroy) all the White majority areas.
Trying to make a country minority White is NOT a “progressive” social policy. It is White genocide – this is not a figure of speech; this is a clear breach of the international laws which define genocide.
Norway is predicted to be minority White Norwegian by 2045. This, of course, is because of mass non-White immigration.
If it was just Norway where this was happening, it might be excused as just an accident. However, within this century, White people are predicted to be a minority in the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Britain, Sweden, Ireland, and Norway.
This is clearly more than a coincidence – this is White genocide.
Posted by DanielS on Tuesday, 15 December 2015 18:40.
There are war mongers operating behind the scenes of power whose motives highly resemble those of the Cold War era: Russia, adjacent geopolitical objectives, resource acquisition and control are seen as central problems which require strong military force.
What is insufficient in John Marshall’s investigative critique and whistle blowing article, however, is a failure to make clear the facts that:
1) The particular people, including at NATO, behind these strategies - viz., war with Russia, control in the Middle East and the borders of Russia - do not identify as White; and are not acting with White (i.e., European peoples) interests in mind first and foremost.
2) In normal ethno-nationalist terms, Russia is, in fact, a problematic nation, which is not circumscribed to their, let alone to our common White/European interests; not committed to cooperation in geopolitical ordering; border and demographic defense; and provisioning of The European Ethno-National Region and its necessary alliance with The Asian Region and its Ethno-Nations.
The point is, these are very real, not trumped-up concerns, and White Nationalism must take the helm in cooperation with Asian Nationalisms to handle these concerns.
I will venture an outline of why that is and how it might come about in few days. I will do this in anticipation that Kumiko will contribute her considerable insight to correct oversights, flesh-out a myriad of details and augment points where emphasis is needed.
My perspective on this is that we’ve got the stuff of war at hand all around us already. It is now up to us to wrest the lines from the hands of Jews and others who do not identify with Whites, to shape and craft the battle lines in White Nationalist interests instead. I will argue that that will require European and Asian cooperation and, in terms of their prior imperialist overreaches and capacity to offer cooperation, a significantly chastened U.S. and Russia.
First, a look at how “obscure people’ can start wars” by John Marshall - talking about Victoria Nuland and her fellow Jewish and neocon cohorts, though, of course, he does not name the YKW as such:
Exclusive: Official Washington’s anti-Russian “group think” is now so dominant that no one with career aspirations dares challenge it, a victory for “obscure” government bureaucrats, like Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, as Jonathan Marshall explains.
History isn’t just made by impersonal forces and “great men” or “great women.” Sometimes relatively obscure men and women acting in key bureaucratic posts make a real difference.
Thus, the international crisis in Syria traces back in part to the decision of President Barack Obama’s first ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, to reject peaceful rapprochement with the Damascus regime in favor of “radically redesign[ing] his mission” to promote anti-government protests that triggered the civil war in 2011.
Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland during a press conference at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, Ukraine, on Feb. 7, 2014. (U.S. State Department photo)
In much the same way, Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland did her best to foment the Feb. 22, 2014 putsch against the democratically elected Ukrainian government of President Viktor Yanukovych, “while convincing the ever-gullible U.S. mainstream media that the coup wasn’t really a coup but a victory for ‘democracy,’” as journalist Robert Parry wrote last July.
Nuland, a former adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and wife of neoconservative luminary Robert Kagan, helped achieve in Ukraine the kind of “regime change” that her husband had long promoted in the Middle East through the Project for a New American Century.
Nuland now has a new counterpart in the Department of Defense who bears close watching for signs of whether the Obama administration will keep escalating military confrontation with Russia over Eastern Europe, or look for opportunities to find common ground and ease tensions.
On Dec. 14, Dr. Michael Carpenter started work at the Pentagon as deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, with added responsibilities for the Western Balkans and Conventional Arms Control. He replaced Evelyn Farkas, who stepped down in October.
Farkas was a firebrand who accused Russia of “shredding international law and conventions that have held firm for decades.” In a call to arms straight out of the early Cold War, she wrote, “Russia’s challenge is so fundamental to the international system, to democracy and free market capitalism that we cannot allow the Kremlin’s policy to succeed in Syria or elsewhere.”
In a remarkable display of “projection” — ascribing to others one’s own motives and actions — she declared that “Russia has invaded neighboring countries, occupied their territory, and funded NGOs and political parties not only in its periphery but also in NATO countries.” Its goal, she asserted, was nothing less than “breaking NATO, the EU and transatlantic unity.”
Farkas declared that the United States must continue its military buildup to deter Russia; provide “lethal assistance” to countries on Russia’s periphery, including Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova; and step up economic sanctions “to pressure Russia . . . so that U.S. national security interests and objectives prevail.”
With people like that helping to shape official policy over the past three years, it’s no wonder U.S.-Russia relations have hit such a low point. Might her replacement, Michael Carpenter, take a less confrontational approach?
Carpenter moved to the Pentagon from the office of Vice President Joe Biden, where he was special adviser for Europe and Eurasia. Previously he ran the Russia desk at the National Security Council and spent several years in the Foreign Service.
Carpenter has kept a low public profile, with few publications or speeches to his name. One of his few quasi-public appearances was this April at a symposium on “Baltic Defense & Security After Ukraine: New Challenges, New Threats,” sponsored by The Jamestown Foundation.
His prepared remarks were off the record, but they were greeted warmly — “you’ve hit it right on the head” — by discussant Kurt Volker, former NATO ambassador under President George W. Bush and foreign policy adviser to Sen. John McCain. McCain has demanded that the United States arm Ukraine to fight Russia and he helped inflame the Ukraine crisis by meeting with the anti-Semitic leader of the country’s right-wing nationalist party for photo-ops in 2013.
During a short Q&A session at the symposium, captured on video, Carpenter declared that “Russia has completely shredded the NATO-Russian Founding Act,” a choice of words strikingly reminiscent of Farkas’s denunciation of Russia for “shredding international law.” He accused Russia of “pursuing a neo-imperial revanchist policy” in Eastern Europe, inflammatory words that Sen. McCain lifted for an op-ed column in the Washington Post a couple of months later. Carpenter also indicated that he would personally favor permanent NATO bases in the Baltic states if such an escalation would not fragment the alliance.
The fact that Carpenter chose to make one of his few appearances at the The Jamestown Foundation is itself highly telling. According to IPS Right Web, which tracks conservative think tanks, the foundation’s president, Glen Howard, “is the former executive director of the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, a largely neoconservative-led campaign aimed at undermining Russia by bolstering U.S. support for militant nationalist and Islamist movements in the North Caucasus.” He has also been consultant to the Pentagon and to “major oil companies operating in Central Asia and the Middle East.”
The foundation was formed in 1984 by “a leading Cold Warrior close to the Reagan administration,” with the blessing of CIA Director William Casey, to provide extra funding for Soviet bloc defectors to supplement meager stipends offered by the CIA. Its board members today include former CIA Director Michael Hayden, and previous board members included Dick Cheney and former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, a prominent neoconservative activist.
All this matters hugely for several reasons. Increased confrontation with Russia, particularly along its highly sensitive Western border, will continue to poison relationships with Moscow that are crucial for achieving U.S. interests ranging from Afghanistan to Iran to Syria. Ratcheting up a new Cold War will divert tens or hundreds of billions of dollars into military spending at the expense of domestic priorities.
Most important, the action-reaction cycle between NATO and Russia in Eastern Europe is dramatically increasing chances for an unwanted, unneeded and disastrous war involving the world’s great nuclear powers. Ian Kearns, director of the European Leadership Network, noted in a recent commentary for the Arms Control Association:
“Despite protestations by both sides that the exercises are aimed at no particular adversary, it is clear that each side is exercising with the most likely war plans of the other in mind. The Russian military is preparing for a confrontation with NATO, and NATO is preparing for a confrontation with Russia. This does not mean either side has the political intent to start a war, but it does mean that both believe a war is no longer unthinkable. . . .
“Too few appear to recognize that the current cocktail of incidents, mistrust, changed military posture, and nuclear signaling is creating the conditions in which a single event or combination of events could result in a NATO-Russian war, even if neither side intends it.”
In such a way, the actions of relatively minor figures in history – if their provocations are not reined in – can lead the world to cataclysm.
Posted by DanielS on Tuesday, 08 December 2015 11:47.
..give ‘who’ hell? For Jewish academics to play both sides of “PC” is nothing new. While the re-normalization and motion to institutionalize social classification is a positive development - via ‘give-em-hell Trump’ in his campaign talk - the most important issue in the end, is not just normalization, but where the lines of institutionalized discrimination are to be drawn.
Trump is saying some things that we might like to hear, with a candor that purports contempt for “political correctness”, a candor that has not been heard from the last 11 Presidents at least, spanning more than 60 years.
With that, he flouts the avoidance of “racial profiling” for having allowed the San Bernadino attack. It is indeed a positive development to assert the validity of “race” as a criteria.
“There were people who knew bad things were going on [with the family], and they didn’t report it because of racial profiling.”
Moreover, he takes the validity of “profiling”, i.e., classifying people, a bit further to say that there should be a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”
Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump on Monday called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” the most dramatic response yet to the string of terrorist attacks that have Americans increasingly on edge.
Trump released a statement citing polling data he says shows “there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population.”
Trump Calls for ‘Complete Shutdown’ of All Muslims Entering U.S.
“Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life,” Trump said.
Yes, it is a candor and a disdain for pseudo-intellectual and polite appearance that we have not heard from a President since “give-em-hell Harry Truman.”
Excellent though it is that race and other social classifications, and borders, are being re-invoked by “give-em-hell Trump” and that he is taking steps to re-normalize and re-institutionalize these criteria as a legitimate basis for discrimination…
one might wonder what, say, Japanese, et al., might think about who-for and how the “no-nonsense” lines are being drawn.
Playing “for/against PC” is nothing new for Jewish academia; i.e., one side playing “vanguard” while the other is “hand of restraint.”
Playing “for and against PC” is nothing new for Jewish academia: In this 1990 essay for the New York Times, Richard J. Bernstein is playing the role of “restraint” -
Central to p.c.-ness, which has roots in 1960’s radicalism, is the view that Western society has for centuries been dominated by what is often called “the white male power structure” or “patriarchal hegemony.” A related belief is that everybody but white heterosexual males has suffered some form of repression and been denied a cultural voice or been prevented from celebrating what is commonly called “otherness.”
But more than an earnest expression of belief, “politically correct” has become a sarcastic jibe used by those, conservatives and classical liberals alike, to describe what they see as a growing intolerance, a closing of debate, a pressure to conform to a radical program or risk being accused of a commonly reiterated trio of thought crimes: sexism, racism and homophobia.
“It’s a manifestation of what some are calling liberal fascism,” said Roger Kimball, the author of “Tenured Radicals,” a critique of what he calls the politicization of the humanities. “Under the name of pluralism and freedom of speech, it is an attempt to enforce a narrow and ideologically motivated view of both the curriculum and what it means to be an educated person, a responsible citizen.”
The restrained activist vs the activist vanguardist
In a generation before, Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter* played the role of “restraint,” viz., the role of “activist restraint” opposed to “activist vanguard” - a role that shabbos goy Earl Warren was duped to take the lead in, as Chief Justice of an “activist Court.”
We should be on the watch as well, then, for the shabbos goy being fore-fronted as the “vanguard activist”, as:
Either Trump or Hillary Clinton can be used for - what? - we might not know exactly what for sure yet, other than that it would be another travesty. Hillary Clinton may well fit the role of shabbos goy “vanguardist” for their next demonstration of “chutzpah.”
* Frankfurter, a Jew, presiding as Chief Justice in the Supreme Court prior, fancied his “a restrained activist Court” and referred to his successor, Earl Warren, as “the dumb Swede” - worried that he would take the bait in such a headlong way of “activist vanguardism” that he would create an overly strong reaction.
Demonstrators wave Polish flags during annual march commemorating Poland’s Independence Day in Warsaw. Photo: AFP
Organisers said that up to 50,000 were on the march which marked the anniversary of Poland’s independence after the Second World War.
Tens of thousands of protesters poured into Warsaw’s streets on Wednesday for a demonstration organised by the far right, marching under the slogan “Poland for the Polish” and burning an EU flag.
Demonstrators trampled and burned a European Union flag at one point, while a banner added to the anti-EU theme with the slogan “EU macht frei” (“Work makes you free” in German), a reference to the slogan over the gates at Auschwitz.
Police said 25,000 people joined the march, which marked the anniversary of Poland’s return to independence after the Second World War, while organisers put the numbers at 50,000.
“God, honour, homeland,” chanted the protesters as they marched under a sea of red-and-white Polish flags.
Demonstrators watch European Union flag burning during annual march commemorating Poland’s National Independence Day. Photo: AFP
“Yesterday it was Moscow, today it’s Brussels which takes away our freedom,” chanted one group of protesters.
Other banners read “Great Catholic Poland” and “Stop Islamisation”.
Polish nationalists (lit) flares in front of the National Stadium during the ‘March of Independence’ under the slogan ‘Poland for the Poles, the Poles for Poland’, which is part of Polish Independence Day celebrations in Warsaw.
Several thousand riot police officers were deployed for the protest, which was punctuated by numerous firecrackers and smoke bombs but otherwise went off peacefully.
The annual march, organised by Poland’s nationalist right, has seen clashes in previous years.
“I came here because I love Poland and want to show it,” said 27-year-old Piotr, who came with his fiancée. He added: “I came here for my grandfather, who fought in the Warsaw Uprising (against the Nazi occupation of the Polish capital), and for his father, who fought for independence”.
[...] thousands of Polish nationalists march(ed) on the Poniatowski bridge marking the Independence Day in Warsaw, Poland.
Poland is returning to conservative rule after eight years of centrist government, following the Law and Justice (PiS) party’s landslide election victory last month on a platform playing strongly on fears over the European migrant crisis.