[Majorityrights News] KP interview with James Gilmore, former diplomat and insider from first Trump administration Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, 05 January 2025 00:35.
[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.
Posted by DanielS on Saturday, 11 April 2020 06:27.
US Census poses a dilemma for Jews — are you white and what are your ‘origins’?
For first time, question on race asks white and African-American respondents to fill in origin, and for many it’s a surprising, sometimes unwelcome, invitation for self-reflection
WASHINGTON (JTA) — It’s the ninth question on the census, and for many Jewish respondents, it’s a surprising — and sometimes unwelcome — invitation to consider who exactly they are.
For the first time, the US Census question on race is asking white and African-American respondents to dig deeper and fill in more detailed origins.
“Mark one or more boxes AND print origins,” the printed form says. For white, it adds, “Print, for example, German, Irish, English, Italian, Lebanese, Egyptian, etc.”
The request for “origins” has existed for decades for Native American, Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islander respondents. But whites and blacks were previously asked to simply check a box.
The question has launched countless Jewish conversations: “What did you list?” “What should I?”
The answers reveal a community grappling with what it means to announce one’s Jewishness in the 21st century, and to consider the myriad paths that have brought American Jews to the present day.
“I didn’t see a box for ‘stateless people being abused and kicked out of one Eastern European region after another,’ so this seemingly straight-forward question turned out to be quite a head-scratcher,” said Jonathan Kopp, a communications strategist who lives in Brooklyn.
Kopp, 53, abandoned the form for a while before returning and checking “white.” He entered “Eastern European Ashkenazi Jew” in the origins box.
Jeff Weintraub, 72, an academic who lives in the Philadelphia area, said he thought the race/ethnicity/national-origin questions on the census form “were a little bizarre.”
“I checked ‘White’ and then, for elaboration, wrote something along the following lines in the box: ‘Jewish — grandparents from the former Russian Empire & the former Austro-Hungarian Empire,’” he said.
A 7-year-old girl was stabbed to death by a total stranger in a park in North-West England on Mother’s Day, March 22, as she rode her scooter at Queen’s Park, Heaton.
Police say Emily Jones was with her family at a public park when a 30-year-old woman, who is now being held at a high-security facility under the Mental Health Act, was arrested for murder at the scene.
The woman, whose name has yet been released, is reportedly a Somali migrant according to Voice of Europe.
Other reports on social media and alternative media publications make the same claims over the woman’s nationality, while the mainstream media remained silent in an act that, to some, exposes a continual double standard in reporting when the victim’s identity cannot be exploited for political capital.
Local media briefly covered the murder, but did not note that the suspect was a Somali migrant. Emily reportedly died around an hour after emergency services rushed her to hospital.
Author Janice Atkinson wrote on Twitter, “Let us not forget that evil is allowed and encouraged to walk and murder amongst us.”
“MSM reported her murder but not the perpetrator. Somali migrant.”
Imagine living in a country where a beautiful 7 year old girl has her throat cut in broad daylight and the media refuses to cover the story in order to protect the savage killer who is a Somali immigrant.
The anger I feel is indescribable.
Her name was Emily Jones Bolton.
View image on Twitter
2,395
10:54 AM - Apr 4, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
1,662 people are talking about this
Another social media wrote “Imagine living in a country where a beautiful 7 year old girl has her throat cut in broad daylight and the media refuses to cover the story in order to protect the savage killer who is a Somali immigrant.
“The anger I feel is indescribable.”
“Her name was Emily Jones Bolton.”
The Conqueror
@Maximus43246579
Imagine living in a country where a beautiful 7 year old girl has her throat cut in broad daylight and the media refuses to cover the story in order to protect the savage killer who is a Somali immigrant.
The anger I feel is indescribable.
Her name was Emily Jones Bolton.
12:29 AM - Apr 4, 2020
The tweets following the report of the killer’s identity–which many had suggested at the time of the attack due to the random nature of the crime and anonymity of the suspect’s name–led to an almost viral Twitter campaign memorializing the young victim.
Paying a tribute to their daughter, Emily’s parents, Mark Jones and Sarah Barnes, said “Emily was 7-years-old, our only child and the light of our lives. She was always full of joy, love, and laughter. Emily had such a cheeky smile and was beautiful inside and out. She had a heart as big as her smile.”
“It is truly heartbreaking to wake up to a world without Emily in it and we cannot comprehend why this has happened.
“We are beyond devastated that this random act of violence means that we will never get to see our beautiful little girl grow up into the wonderful young lady she was showing such promise of becoming.”
The Financial Times, the strange colored newspaper you see at airports, is not known for its skepticism of modern global economics. Therefore, it was a bit of a shock to see the mouthpiece of global finance come out in favor of a radical rethinking of the economic order. They argued that all options must be on the table in order to address the tattered relationship between the people and their governments. In their words, the social contract must be restored after the virus panic ends.
The alleged sentiments behind the editorial are not wrong. The primary duty of any government is the welfare of the people. It’s why we have government. Sure, we assign it functions like protecting private property and enforcing contracts, but that’s not the reason we invented government. Similarly, the state defends the privileges of the rich at the expense of everyone else. This has been true since the dawn of man, but again, this is not why human societies have governments.
The point of government is the general welfare of the people. That means defending against attacks from abroad and attacks from within. The former is straight forward, but the latter is where things get complicated. Defending against internal threats is about a set of laws and customs for the purpose of maintaining order. The character and nature of the people will determine these internal structures. Good order in the lands of the Mohammedan is different than good order in the Orient.
This is not a concern in a world of nations and nation states. In a world of global capital and the free flow of goods and people across borders, it is nearly impossible. The state cannot enforce the customs of its people when its people change with each generation, maybe with each decade. When economics requires the people to yield their ancient customs and liberties, the point of government is no longer the welfare of the people, but as middle-man, facilitating conformity to economic necessity.
This is where the globalist on the Financial Times editorial board fail in their analysis of the current crisis. The social contract, if there is one, is not built around a set of economic policies. It is not a set of rules imposed by the keepers of the economy in order to make transactions as efficient as possible. The social contract is the invisible bonds between the people. It is this dedication to the shared welfare that necessitates the creation of the state in order to maintain those bonds.
Those invisible bonds are not the creation of the state, but the result of the mating decisions of our ancestors. The social contract between Finns is just the conceptualization of their shared history and ancestry. It is unique to them. What makes a Finn and Finn is not where he stands on the map or how he does business. What makes him a Finn is he is the fruit of the Finnish family tree. To be Finn means the ability to one day make more Finns. That’s biology, not economics.
The social contract can only exist among a people with a shared ancestry. If the goal is to restore the social contract, the first step is not a new round of economic fads, but a restoration of the ancient bonds among people. The West must first become a collection of nations again. Only in a world of nations can the governments of those nations preserve and defend the social contract. Safeguarding the welfare of the people can only happen when there is a people, rather than just people.
This is the fundamental flaw of the current order. Cosmopolitan globalism rests on the false notion of homo economicus. This is the assumption that humans are rational, self-interested, and pursue their subjectively-defined ends optimally. More important, it assumes that people are defined internally, rather than by the untold number of invisible bonds and interactions with their society. Globalism assumes man lives in a particular society, because it benefits in some way to do so.
Not only is this false, but homo economicus is in direct contradiction with the concept of a social contract. Socrates could not flee Athens and avoid death, because to do so would mean he was no longer Socrates. Who he was as a person was defined by his membership in the polis called Athens. The social contract cannot exist in a world of atomized individuals. The social contract can only exist in a world where people are defined by their membership in a society of their people.
It took only a few days for Congress to unanimously pass the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which will be doling out $2.2 trillion in crisis relief, most of it going to Corporate America with few strings attached. (Photo: Public domain)
Was the Fed Just Nationalized?
Did Congress just nationalize the Fed? No. But the door to that result has been cracked open.
It took only a few days for Congress to unanimously pass the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which will be doling out $2.2 trillion in crisis relief, most of it going to Corporate America with few strings attached.
Mainstream politicians have long insisted that Medicare for all, a universal basic income, student debt relief and a slew of other much-needed public programs are off the table because the federal government cannot afford them. But that was before Wall Street and the stock market were driven onto life-support by a virus. Congress has now suddenly discovered the magic money tree. It took only a few days for Congress to unanimously pass the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which will be doling out $2.2 trillion in crisis relief, most of it going to Corporate America with few strings attached. Beyond that, the Federal Reserve is making over $4 trillion available to banks, hedge funds and other financial entities of all stripes; it has dropped the fed funds rate (the rate at which banks borrow from each other) effectively to zero; and it has made $1.5 trillion available to the repo market.
It is also the Federal Reserve that will be picking up the tab for this bonanza, at least to start. The US central bank has opened the sluice gates to unlimited quantitative easing, buying Treasury securities and mortgage-backed securities “in the amounts needed to support smooth market functions.” Last month, the Fed bought $650 billion worth of federal securities. At that rate, notes Wall Street on Parade, it will own the entire Treasury market in about 22 months. As Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari acknowledged on 60 Minutes, “There is an infinite amount of cash at the Federal Reserve.”
In theory, quantitative easing is just a temporary measure, reversible by selling bonds back into the market when the economy gets back on its feet. But in practice, we have seen that QE is a one-way street. When central banks have tried to reverse it with “quantitative tightening,” economies have shrunk and stock markets have plunged. So the Fed is likely to just keep rolling over the bonds, which is what normally happens anyway with the federal debt. The debt is never actually paid off but is just rolled over from year to year. Only the interest must be paid, to the tune of $575 billion in 2019. The benefit of having the Fed rather than private bondholders hold the bonds is that the Fed rebates its profits to the Treasury after deducting its costs, making the loans virtually interest-free. Interest-free loans rolled over indefinitely are in effect free money. The Fed is “monetizing” the debt.
Chinese journalists have shed light on their country’s deadly coronavirus cover-up which has led to tens of thousands of deaths and sent global economies crashing to a halt.
Sky News Australia presents COVID-19: Ground Zero – an investigation into what caused the killer coronavirus and how China managed to bury the truth for so long.
South China Morning Post news editor Josephine Ma told Sky News her government covered up more than 200 cases of coronavirus in 2019, delaying global warnings and allowing the spread of the virus to leak into other countries.
Ground Zero also details the incredible steps nations around the world are taking to minimise the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
It took only a few days for Congress to unanimously pass the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which will be doling out $2.2 trillion in crisis relief, most of it going to Corporate America with few strings attached. (Photo: Public domain)