Can a state government dictate the political views of those individuals and companies with which it does business? From Alan Leveritt at archive.vn:

Can a state government dictate the political views of those individuals and companies with which it does business? From Alan Leveritt at archive.vn:

Posted in Civil Liberties, Government, Law, Media, Philosophy, Politics
Tagged Israel anti-boycott laws
Here’s a prepping and survival strategy that looks like a hell of a lot of fun. From Ray Jason at theseagypsyphilosopher.com:
HOW DARK ARE THEIR PLANS?
Because our shrieking rulers are so fiercely demanding that all of us must be vaccinated, I suspect that they are concealing their true agenda. Previously, I assumed that it was just the age-old quest for money and power.
But now I believe that they intend to use these “vaccines” for much more sinister reasons. My fear is that their ultimate goal is the “cyborging” of humanity. Could it be that this mRNA technology actually re-programs the human operating system? Are they injecting us with compounds that will induce submissiveness, eliminate fertility, secretly track us and potentially even instantly terminate us through sound frequencies or light impulses?
Will those who have been vaxxed be altered – without their knowledge or permission – into a Humanity 2.0.? And will the anti-vaxxers be transformed from mere resistors against Tyranny, into the last remnants of the natural, biological and un-augmented Humanity 1.0?
Will the divide become so vicious that the vaxxed will be privileged and the unvaxxed will be pariahs? And will the Pure Bloods be hunted down, shipped to “quarantine” camps … and possibly eliminated?
Our Malignant Overlords, as I like to call them, have been claiming for over a century that the Earth is overpopulated. Many wise observers argue that the Jab is what will provide them the massive depopulation that they crave. Certainly, the first several months of the injections indicate how dangerous and deadly they are.
Posted in Civil Liberties, Collapse, Governments, Philosophy, Politics
Tagged Survival at sea
The Russiagate hoax had a cast of hundreds, maybe thousands, but rest assured, the search for a few good scapegoats has begun and the rest will thrive, getting off scot-free. From Matt Taibbi at taibbi.substack.com:
“There is an old saying in journalism: You’re only as good as your sources,” wrote Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler, in a piece about the indictment of “Steele Dossier” source Igor Danchenko. The latter is being set up to take the rap as the dirty Russian rat who hoodwinked poor civic-minded Christopher Steele, the FBI, and the entire American press corps into propping up the biggest hoax since the WMD affair.
After America invaded Iraq and failed to turn up weapons of mass destruction, the press went into CYA mode. Pundits who’d panted for war now cooked up a new narrative, that the WMD “mistake” had been caused by a combination of faulty intelligence, over-confident officials in the George W. Bush White House, and one New York Times writer named Judith Miller. Everyone else who so forcefully screwed the pooch on that story, from New Yorker editor David Remnick to New York columnist Jonathan Chait to current Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg, emerged either unscathed, or draped in awards and promoted.
Now, the Russiagate tale many of those same people hyped is falling apart, and the industry is again building battlements to protect careers from a cascade of humiliating revelations. This time, a combination of Danchenko, Buzzfeed editor Ben Smith, and perhaps a few organizations like McClatchy will be tossed out of the lifeboat. If you’re ever tempted to think there’s honor among thieves, check out this recent flurry of Russiagate finger-pointing.
Posted in Crime, Cronyism, Government, Horseshit, Investigations, Media, Philosophy, Propaganda
Tagged Igor Danchenko, Mainstream media culpability, Russiagate
They’re guilty because we don’t like their politics is not a principle. From Glenn Greenwald at greenwald.substack.org:

The FBI has executed a string of search warrants targeting the homes and cell phones of Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe and several others associated with that organization. It should require no effort to understand why it is a cause for concern that a Democratic administration is using the FBI to aggressively target an organization devoted to obtaining and reporting incriminating information about Democratic Party leaders and their liberal allies.
That does not mean the FBI investigation is inherently improper. Journalists are no more entitled than any other citizen to commit crimes. If there is reasonable cause to believe O’Keefe and his associates committed federal crimes, then an FBI investigation is warranted as it is for any other case. But there has been no evidence presented that O’Keefe or Project Veritas employees have done anything of the sort, nor any explanation provided to justify these invasive searches. That we should want and need that is self-evident: if the Trump-era FBI had executed search warrants inside the newsrooms of The New York Times and NBC News, we would be demanding evidence to prove it was legally justified. Yet virtually nothing has been provided to justify the FBI’s targeting of O’Keefe and his colleagues, and the little that has been disclosed by way of justifying this makes no sense.
The FBI investigation concerns the theft last year of the diary of Joe Biden’s daughter, Ashley, yet Project Veritas, while admitting they received a copy from an anonymous source, chose not to publish that diary because they were unable to verify it. Nobody and nothing thus far suggests that Project Veritas played any role in its acquisition, legal or otherwise. There is a cryptic reference in the search warrant to transmitting stolen material across state lines, but it is not illegal for journalists to receive and use material illegally acquired by a source: the most mainstream organizations spent the last month touting documents pilfered from Facebook by their heroic “whistleblower” Frances Haugen.
Posted in Civil Liberties, Collapse, Government, Law, Media, Philosophy, Politics, Propaganda
Tagged FBI, Kyle Rittenhouse trial, Project Veritas
A beautifully written article about families and relationships in the age of Covid. From Hardscrabble Farmer at theburningplatform.com:
I got the call that my cousin had passed just after dark. I had been butchering a hog all day by myself and I was tired and needed a shower, but all I could think of was reaching out to his sons. My younger cousin had been looking after him for the last two years as he slowly disappeared into his dementia and I knew how hard this was going to hit him. I made the call from the bedroom in the dark and stood up against the windows looking out at the leafless trees and distant, rolling hills enveloped in a lead-colored mist.
I hadn’t spoken to him since the last family funeral- we are ten years part and by the time I was heading out into the world he was just hitting middle school- and so we never really bonded closely, but we were familiars to one another over the span of our own lives, family. The phone rang half a dozen times and then went to voice mail so I began to leave my heartfelt condolences. After a few halting words that sounded stiff, the phone picked up and I heard his voice across the distant miles and months between us, desperate and broken.
I repeated what I had just said into the void a moment earlier and then he began to speak, not really to me at first, just a torrent of anguish and grief that rambled on from the horrible treatment of the hospital and worse yet the insurance syndicate and the various agents of Medicare and Medicaid and their endless abuses, to the deep and profound loss he had just experienced, and the sudden hole that had just been left in the middle of his life.
Posted in Collapse, Government, Medicine, Morality, Philosophy, Politics, Propaganda, Society
Tagged Covid-19 vaccinations, Death, Family, Relationships
There’s communism the pipe dream and there’s communism the reality. From Eric Peters at ericpetersautos.com:
Communism is a fundamental lie.
Simple statement, easily substantiated.
What is meant by “communism”? Or rather, what is misled by the term?
It is not communal ownership. That is an idiocy for moral and actual imbeciles; a rhetorical trick, the play on words that plays on some people’s resentments over their condition and that of others, whom they regard as unfairly having more – or just because they have more.
So-and-so’s family has money, a nice house. Others do not.
Under “communism” things will be more “equitable.”
It all sounds very nice – to the morally and actually imbecilic. And it perhaps it would be nice – if it were voluntary – as greasily implied by the term. Just everyone coming together, all pitching in for the “common good.”
Share and share alike.
But communism – the actual thing, in practice – is coercive collectivism; an oligarchical hierarchy in which the operational ownership of everyone by a few someones – the ones who control the apparatus of coercion – defines the order of things.
A ruling elite – the Party and those positioned to leverage the Party’s power to apply coercion – the administrators and bureaucrats – control all economic and thus human activity, since there is an economic element to every human action – even to the extent of going to the bathroom. Who shall provide the plumbing? What sort of plumbing? Who will have access to the plumbing?
This is the actuality. It is incontestable. Unless a person is an actual imbecile.
“Communism” is a fantasy, an unreality. A mind trick played upon people with weak minds by people with evil minds. Has there ever – even once – been a communist ruler who did not have the blood of millions – literally – on his hands?
Ah, but this time it will be different!
Those communists were not true “communists.”
Posted in Business, Civil Liberties, Collapse, Economy, Governments, History, Philosophy, Politics, Tyranny
Tagged Communism
Is humanity going to end up like the mice in the “Universe 25” experiment? From Chris MacIntosh at internationalman.com:

Any organized structure is corrupted over time. That is a law of entropy.
The “Universe 25” experiment is one of the most terrifying experiments in the history of science. It involves the behavior of a colony of mice, and is an attempt by scientists to explain human societies.
Here is what happened. Between the late 1960s and early 1970s, American ethologist John B. Calhoun created a seemingly perfect utopia for mice. Calhoun built a predator-free, disease-free enclosure, furnished it with limitless food and even an upper level with miniature mouse condos.
Essentially, the mice would enjoy all the modern comforts that people in the developed world have come to enjoy and now actually expect today as a “right”.
Consider what we are witnessing today. What I call “safety extremists” run the Western liberal democracies. It is as if hall room monitors all got put in charge. No climbing trees for Johnny because he may fall. Safety extremism. You can’t ride your bike without a helmet on. Safety extremism. Warning signs on hot coffee cups, telling you that the coffee is hot.
The list of safety extremism is endless. So, you see, we’re like these mice. Now, along comes the hand-wringing lefties who believe it’s everyone’s “right” to enjoy all the benefits of a modern world.
Let’s see what happened to the mice because it’s instructive for what is happening to Western societies.
Posted in Civil Liberties, Collapse, Economy, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Science, Society
Tagged Affluence, Universe 25
Many of us have seen more insanely disturbing things since the Covid outbreak began than we saw our entire lives before it. From Doug “Uncola” Lynn at theburningplatform.com:

No man has been shattered by the blows of Fortune unless he was first deceived by her favours. Those who loved her gifts as if they were their own forever, who wanted to be admired on account of them, are laid low and grieve when the false and transient pleasures desert their vain and childish minds, ignorant of every stable pleasure. But the man who is not puffed up in good times does not collapse either when they change. His fortitude is already tested and he maintains a mind unconquered in the face of either condition: for in the midst of prosperity he has tried his own strength against adversity.
– Seneca
You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.
– Revelation 3:17
There is no denying the Creature from Jekyll Island is a snake eating its own tail. Unfortunately, the tail is the entire world and it was devoured slow and sure: banking, Wall Street, sovereign governments, international corporations, and, now, Main Street and entire populations around the globe.
It’s been a year and a few days since The Great Reset officially began on November 3, 2020. That was when a handful of Democrat Party controlled precincts, in Democrat Party controlled cities, in key electoral swing states, all stopped counting votes in the middle of the night. Forgetting that Trump received more votes than any other president in history and Sleepy Joe was said to have received even more votes with the winning margins secured in those Democrat-controlled precincts – the unbelievable irony is now this: Those who believe Biden is a legitimate president consider those who disagree with that consensus as believers of “The Big Lie”.
Quite a paradox, indeed.
Posted in Civil Liberties, Collapse, Government, Law, Medicine, Philosophy, Politics, Propaganda, Psychology, Science, Tyranny
It looks like the Supreme Court is going to come down on the side of the Second Amendment. From Jonathan Turley at jonathanturley.org:
We have been discussing (here and here and here) the Supreme Court challenge in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. (NYSRPA) v. Bruen, the first Second Amendment case before the Supreme Court in over ten years. Yesterday’s oral argument appeared to confirm the expectations in those columns on the likely reversal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and a reinforcement of Second Amendment rights.
In 2008, the Supreme Court recognized the right to bear arms as an individual right in District of Columbia v. Heller. Two years after Heller, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the court ruled that this right applied against the states.
This case concerns concealed-carry restrictions under N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f) that require a showing of “proper cause.” Lower courts have upheld the New York law, but there are ample constitutional concerns over its vague standard, such as showing that you are “of good moral character.” New York wants to exercise discretion in deciding who needs to carry guns in public while gun owners believe that the law flips the constitutional presumption in favor of such a right.
The oral argument quickly confirmed the likely votes of five justices against the New York law. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh appeared clearly committed to a reversal as well as a possible expansion of protections for gun rights. Chief Justice John Roberts appeared committed to vote against the law but not necessarily on board with a significant expansion of protections from the earlier holdings of the Court.
The surprise of the argument came from Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who wrote a strong Second Amendment opinion as an appellate judge. Barrett appeared open to arguments that greater regulation of guns may be appropriate in cities or “sensitive places.”
As I wrote earlier, justices like Roberts could vote down the law but retain the view in Heller that “like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” That includes restrictions in “sensitive places.”
However, in one telling moment, Roberts noted that gun rights should be more expansive in cities to allow self-defense. After all, he asked New York Solicitor General Barbara Underwood, “How many muggings take place in the forest?”
Posted in Civil Liberties, Government, Law, Philosophy, Politics
Tagged Second Amendment, Supreme Court
Run, don’t walk, from those espousing their great ideas for improving humans, and then do everything possible to expose them for what they are: misanthropic killers. From Cynthia Chung at strategic-culture.org:
Huxley makes it crystal clear that he considers the world to be overpopulated, and that science and progress cannot be free to advance without limits.
In Part 1 the question was discussed what was Aldous’ real intention in writing the Brave New World; was it meant as an exhortation, an inevitable prophecy or as an Open Conspiracy? An Open Conspiracy closely linked to not only H.G. Wells, who clearly laid out such a vision in his book by the same title, published in 1928, but a vision also in the vein of Aldous’ famous grandfather Thomas Huxley “Darwin’s bulldog” and mentor to Wells.
It is from here that we will continue to discuss what exactly were Aldous’ views on such matters, did he in fact believe in the need for a scientific dictatorship? A scientific caste system? Was he actually warning the people that such a dystopia would occur if we did not correct our course or was it all part of a mass psychological conditioning for what was regarded as inevitable, and that Aldous’ role was rather to “soften the transition” as much as possible towards a “dictatorship without tears”?
Posted in Civil Liberties, Collapse, Crime, Governments, History, Literature, Medicine, Philosophy, Politics, Propaganda, Science, Tyranny
Tagged Aldous Huxley, Eugenics