We’re Still Standing

Posted on by Sarah A. Hoyt

The bad news is that we’re an occupied country. I’ve said that for a long time. The country itself is all right. It’s the structures of power.

Someone on American Greatness not only agrees with me, but traces it to exactly the inflection point:

Since 1933 and the rise to prominence of FDR, America has been an occupied country, governed by a ruling class that hates the nation’s older way of life and wants to see America on the side of the global revolutionary Left. This is why FDR’s administration was filled with communists and the American government gave $300 billion to the USSR in its existential war of survival against the fascists. America did not remain neutral in that conflict because the American ruling class was explicitly on the side of the communists.

I mean, he’s wrong insofar as, well two things:

First, this started under Wilson, which paved the way to FDR. Second, well, being on the side of the Nazis wouldn’t have improved anything. And staying out might not be possible. But the thing is not only did we aid the USSR in war, but we continued aiding it. It was when that help was removed and pressure added by Reagan that it collapsed. But it was barely surviving before. Communist countries can’t survive without aid.

He’s also right absolutely that all of our upper echelons of everything, even those that are supposed to be on the side of the right and the good are corrupt and if not explicitly communist are implicitly so: this is true of everything from grocery chains to churches and yes, the army too.

This was accomplished by corrupting the universities way back in the early 20th century. Communists were seen as not just the wave of the future, but also “just” and “fair” and wanting the best for others. What it meant in practical terms is that universities which run on virtue signaling and are ever willing to embrace of virtue that requires no sacrifice went into it with both feet. Being a commie became “just smart”. There was a brief period of confusion, because the USSR fell. For about a blink they didn’t know what to do or why. And then they realized their networks were still in place and they could do what they’d always done. BTW more or less the same happened in Russia, only it couldn’t get its vassals back without active US help. It’s been trying to ever since. They want the USSR back. And if you say “Oh, but they’re nationalists” I’ll tell you they always were. The “international” in socialism was a ruse. It was always Russian Nationalism Everywhere. Just every other country was supposed to bow to Russia. Seriously, if you were in one of the countries it was doing its best to swallow this was painfully — literally — obvious. Russia swallowed communism as a vehicle for its expansion. The idiot US commies swallowed communism as “Russia is our model.” Bah.

Anyway, you could tell the moment the academics went back to doing what they always did and being part of the brain dead commie net. There stopped being discussions about the plight of Russia and how badly off they were left. There was no more mention of the horrors that happened under communism. Hell, even in Germany, with living proof of how bad it was in their midst, the talk stopped, and eventually the komissars started getting elected again, because communism was just “smart you know” and definitely the way of the future.

When the universities are corrupted, in a society soaked in credentialism, means that every one of the upper echelons that require the right credentials are corrupted.

In theory at least.

Except something happened on the way to the glorious communist revolution. It met America. And America never behaves as expected.

So we didn’t let them convince us we needed a revolution. We ignored the propaganda. The basic programming of America won out over the indoctrination, and the fact that communism was “cool”. Most people parroted the lines we had to to stay okay socially, or to climb the social ladder. To move ahead. But we still lived as Americans where it counted. And the attitude that we’re never poor only temporarily embarrassed millionaires is with all of us. Which means we make lousy revolutionaries. We certainly make lousy communists.

To convince our young people they’re socialists, the left has had to define socialism as everything that is done in a group, from schools to roads, as though those hadn’t worked under every single regime since the Romans, or probably the Egyptians, long before Karl Marx’s misbegotten birth.

The truth, guys is that it took them too long. It took them too long to institute the glorious dictatorship of the proletariat. It took them past the fall of the USSR. It took them till the system put in place by FDR has slowly decayed, till it’s falling apart visibly. Till the internet exists and we know that we’re not alone. We know it doesn’t work. We know. Everyone knows.

And the fourth generation of of leftists, promoted just because they’re leftists, are so totally incompetent, they actually drink their own ink and are trying to institute DEI, and hire the mentally ill to fly planes and–

And with all that, with complete control of all the institutions, the only way they could seize the Federal government in the US was by cheating. By cheating huge, in front of G-d and everyone. Yeah, the cheating was more subtle in 22, but it was still visible, if you knew how to look.

Even having full control of the levers of government, all they can do is stomp their little hooves and say “obey my authoritah” while the American people say “Nah, bro, we’re fine.” They managed to lockdown, through immense effort, and through fooling the entire world. But they aren’t doing it again. Heaven knows they’re trying. And they’ll probably do completely crazy things from here on.

But here’s the thing: Everything they do sours and turns out wrong.

What they are trying to do is akin to trying to build the Berlin wall while people are ripping out chunks of it and driving off in their ladas and trabants. Driving off, as far and as fast as they can, until they hit the ocean.

I’m not saying we’ll win this year. The fraud is so deep and thick, it might be impossible. It doesn’t exempt us from trying. But be aware we’re fighting against a tide of fraud and corrupt information streams.

But–

They can’t win. Not the elections, but in installing a communist regime here. Everything they do turns wrong and upside down.

And eventually we win. Eventually. Now this might not be in our time. History doesn’t move at the pace we want it. I think it will be in our time. But if it’s not, it’s not the end of the world. Just the end of us, but the world goes on.

It is our duty, it is our very great privilege to do everything we can, in every way we can to thwart their putrid and horrible vision for our country and the world. Voting, sure. But more importantly opposing them every day, in every way we can.

After everything they threw at us, the American people went out and voted against them in 2020 so hard that their fraud had to be obvious.

And that was at the end of just about a hundred years of work — slow crawling through the institutions — to throw us over.

They still haven’t done it. We’re still standing.

And we’ll be here long after they’re gone. Oh, maybe not us as individuals, but America will.

Be not afraid. Keep being American.

*Truth in advertising. The first half of this post was written in September 2023. I’m fairly unslept and dealing with getting the pipe repaired. So I couldn’t write an entire post. But I could finish one. I say this, so if there are inconsistencies, you know why. – SAH*

182 thoughts on “We’re Still Standing”

    2. I like this. “Free American” or “American Free”

      Not somewhere I need to proclaim my pronouns. Being retired and not involved volunteering.

      Will keep this in the back pocket.

      Like

  3. I wouldn’t start with Woodrow Wilson. Theodore Roosevelt had already embraced a lot of the same progressive dogmas, and taken steps to implement them. He wasn’t as thoroughgoing a monster as WW (hardly anyone was) but he was definitely on the wrong side.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. C.S. Lewis puts it pre-Marx, when the concepts of, “evolution,” and “progress,” entered public consciousness (he pointed out the poetic image of beings evolvng from Titans to Gods pre-dates Darwin). A lot of people combined the two, so that any change in social systems was “inevitably” proof of “evolution,” and added the belief that evolution was from an “inferior,” to a “superior,” form simply because it was, “evolutionary.”
      In that view, Marx was simply riding the wave.
      If you want a really silly version of “evolutionary progress,” see Wells, “Food of thr Gods,” where children become giants and the story ends with them vowing to eat the growth food and have their descendants grow to infinite heights. Maybe he was trying to do allegory, but if so, he failed. Bigly.

      Like

      1. Leaving aside all the issues with social Darwinism, this
        added the belief that evolution was from an “inferior,” to a “superior,”
        is a remarkably common belief despite how obviously wrong it is.

        Evolution is a generational thing. The shorter the generation the faster it works. The most evolved organisms on the planet are bacteria.

        Although, one can redefine “inferior” and “superior” to take that into account: Superiorly fit for their environment. That’s not what people usually mean. They define “superior” as “most like humans”.

        Like

        1. Evolution invites this song:

          “Nobody knows the future,
          Or what skill betters the odds.
          So it’s best to say we’re all born equal and leave the rest to the gods.”

          Like

          1. I’m rather fond of C. S. Lewis’s “Evolutionary Hymn”:

            Lead us, evolution, lead us
            Up the future’s endless stair.
            Chop us, change us, prod us, weed us,
            For stagnation is despair.
            Groping, guessing, yet progressing,
            Lead us nobody knows where. . . .

            On then! Value means survival-
            Value. If our progeny
            Spreads and spawns and licks each rival,
            That will prove its deity
            (Far from pleasant, by our present
            Standards, though it well may be).

            Like

        2. On the micro level which exploits innate genetic plasticity (like the Siberian fixed “evolved” into dogs”), humans evolve.

          Local, yes. And recent. Pace the dogs, I am seeing a lot of neoteny in modern America. Biden’s press muppet* is 50, for example.

          *I googled that exact phrase and her wiki bio popped right up 😂

          Like

    2. Probably. And again, the way the industry was going, centralization being profitable, etc, this was perhaps inevitable. But it’s different now, and the model is falling apart, and this is not something to mourn.

      Like

    3. He was a True Progressive (as was McKinley – can you say Spanish-American War?), impatient with Taft’s me-too-but-slower brand.

      But he wasn’t as mean-spirited AND self-righteous as Wilson; and he didn’t have the Bolshevik interference in EVERYTHING after 1917 Wison encouraged (statists gotta state)

      So yes, Teddy laid the foundation after McKinley dug the hole; then Wilson installed the barbed wire and gun ports.

      Like

    4. What US President first imposed an income tax, unbacked paper money, the policy of arresting political opponents, and the draft? Hint: it wasn’t Wilson or Teddy Roosevelt.

      Like

  4. Leftists be like: When prosecuting your political opponent, hire your paramour, screw up the process, and quite possibly commit some embezzlement.

    Liked by 1 person

    2. I think “conservatives” (if that is the right word) have the most potent weapon if only they would use it. The foundation should be “leave me the hell alone!” Every time one of these schemers tries to run our lives we should reply “Leave me the hell alone!” Yes, we need some organization – like roads. We also need a police force and defense on our borders – so criminals and communists will leave us the hell alone. The impulse to tell everyone else how to live is the root of all evil – including when those on the “right” want push their will on us!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The problem with “leave me the hell alone” is that the number of us in this country who are 100% self-sufficient approaches zero. You have to get your food from somewhere. You have to get your shelter from somewhere. You have to get your clothing from somewhere. All of those require resources that very few own enough properties to have it all. And even those that do can’t make everything they need themselves.

        That comes back to the concept of a nation of trust that Sarah has mentioned various times in the past. We have to be able to trust that people will leave us alone unless we have a mutual need for interaction and exchange. Ideally, that exchange will be to our equal benefit. (That encourages future exchanges of benefit to both.)

        A significant problem in America today is so few people understand what is required to produce value. And they don’t understand how much that value is. In many cases they don’t even understand WHAT value is. Some days I just wish I could take some of these college-educated idiots with a PhD in Afro-Feminist-Gender-Identity Studies and plunk them naked 500 miles from everywhere and say, go build your better civilization starting from the ground up.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I would only add to your admonition regarding going and building your “better” civilization: “And don’t “appropriate” any Western Culture while you’re doing it!”

          Like

        3. “Leave me the hell alone” is not an argument for the right to be a hermit, or not only that. It includes the right for two people to be left the hell alone when they cooperate, or for a group to be, and that generalizes to the right for a market economy to be left the hell alone.

          Like

          1. Yes! For more than a century the government in this country stayed basically within the constitutional lane and so established order without telling how to live every facet of our lives. Not anarchy but a vast reduction closer to the essentials.

            Liked by 1 person

        4. “Leave Me The Hell Alone” doesn’t mean living in a cave in the wilderness. It means get rid of 100,000 rules and regulations and focus on the essentials necessary for a free country. I wanted to start a new political party (The Leave Me The “F” Alone Party) but too few people would sign the “mind your own business” pledge. Mike, your comment is an example of the basic problem. You assume that the majority of people are too stupid to run their own lives. This is the justification for every dictatorship – people are stupid and need someone to tell them how to live. Well, I think most of the people would get along just fine without a wise and benevolent government agent making sure they brush their teeth every morning.

          PS sorry for the late reply as I was busy remodeling my bathroom and searching for a toilet that actually works despite government regulations!

          Liked by 1 person

          1. There’s a difference between being stupid, and lacking understanding. Our public education system has been corrupted to inhibit the ability to think and understand for most children and young adults.

            Actually, all people are too ignorant to run anyone else’s lives. The old adage about walking a mile in another man’s shoes. (And I damn sure ain’t crazy enough to try walking a mile in women’s shoes.) Too many of us make bad enough choices for ourselves or our families. Making choices for other people is just, ludicrous. Unfortunately, there are people deluded enough to think they can, and greedy enough to want to do so for their own benefit, who are those ones you rightly note justify their own dictatorships.

            Like

            1. I agree – ignorant is different from stupid. It’s not that I don’t care about fools, its that I don’t think the world should be manager for fools by fools. The leviathan has not diminished the number of fools but has increased it. Leave people alone and most will be OK, at least more will be OK than the current system…. on the bright side, we are headed for $37-38 trillion debt by the end of this year so leviathan will starve by necessity….

              Like

            2. Only idiots believe they know how other people should live their lives. The stupider they are, the more blindly they believe it.
              ———————————
              “Yes, our intelligence is cybernetically enhanced. That means we’re smart enough to know we can’t micro-manage the lives of three hundred and twenty million people. You are stupid enough to believe you can.”

              Like

            1. Smart man.
              And I think Trump is a lot closer to his mold than Ms. Haley. Reagan probably had even more spine that Trump, but because he tended to speak more ‘softly’, people seem to over look that.

              Like

              1. Mr. Reagan had loads more class. Tons. But! And! We are not now a classy people.

                Also, Mr. Trump, despite re-inflicting Fauci on us, did nothing as thoroughly civilization-destroying as granting us no-fault divorce.

                Even Operation Warp Speed exposed the pharmaceutical and medical and Academe corruption that was… Inconceivable.

                So there’s that.

                Like

                1. I’m pretty sure the exposure was an unintended side effect. What really is unfathomable is the number of people who still don’t see that the Jab is and has caused massive, long-term harm to everyone who got it. But it’s like those other things mentioned yesterday, for many people, they won’t see the damage until far later.

                  Like

                  1. Yes. And they are emotionally, socially, and economically invested in the harms not existing. As in the benefits.

                    It’s a shame. Vaccine technology is fascinating stuff. Probably could have made something useful with it.

                    Like

                    1. They probably will, in 20 to 50 years after they know what most of the long term effects are. Assuming the don’t try to hide or fudge the data along the way for their own profit. I think an additional cynical switch got flipped on my 65th birthday.

                      Liked by 2 people

                    2. “Assuming the don’t try to hide or fudge the data along the way for their own profit.”

                      Or so they aren’t hung.

                      Like

          3. The ideal government, to me, would be like a well-fitting and sturdy pair of shoes that you could put on in the morning and then forget about the rest of the day while you go about your business. Good government would perform the functions necessary for you, Joe or Jane Citizen, to go about your business without constantly getting injured or ripped off (e.g., law enforcement, infrastructure maintenance); but it would not constantly “chafe” you with unnecessary regulations, burdensome taxes, and hostile policies, nor would it just stand by while the foundations of society fell apart. A “set it and forget it” government that didn’t call attention to itself and that the average citizen only had to think about at election time would be fine by me.

            Like

            1. No government is going to be perfect. Hell, if you believe the myths, 1/3rd of the angels were dissatisfied enough with God’s governance over them that they rebelled and got tossed out.

              The easiest way for a government to piss off the fewest people is to interfere the least in their lives. Which argues for the smallest government with the least rules.

              Like

  5. And even in the 1930s and before, we were fighting the Commie take over. From incubators (https://carolinefurlong.wordpress.com/2023/05/19/review-the-strange-case-of-dr-couney-by-dawn-raffel/) to plays (https://carolinefurlong.wordpress.com/2022/09/02/review-the-joyous-season-a-play-by-philip-barry/) we didn’t roll over. We kept fighting.

    It’s never hopeless. They will never win. They can’t. All they can do is make a mess.

    Let’s stock up on cleaning supplies.

    Like

  6. The communists gave it their best shot in 2020, by flipping the switch on the fake pandemic and then stealing the election. And they won, and installed their puppet, and had us all in masks and locked down. People were being beaten in the streets for not wearing a mask, and state goons were raiding restaurants that were trying to stay open. It was glorious communism, ascendant!

    And then it all went wrong. Nothing has worked out. Their puppet is a laughingstock. The lockdowns failed, the masks came off, and their science cult is breaking. Americans don’t even believe in global warming any more, and point and laugh at the Bond villains of Davos. We need to keep this up. I think we will.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. I’ve been watching some “cop shows” lately and found it very interesting that the FBI is portrayed as well dressed Gestapo types and always trying to entrap someone. They are also shown to be less then competent and are made to look foolish by the plot line.
    This is stuff done in 2022-2024 and the shows have a bunch of “liberal” elements (a gay women, poor homeless folks, etc.) but it keeps them subtle. When the powers that be have lost the entertainment sector the message is failing

    In real life – I see a very tiny segment of local society wearing a mask, having the BLM type signs up or publicly supporting the current administration or its policies. Iowa just finished up the whole caucus thing and most folks are glad that is over – no more poll calls, robo support “me” calls, and a huge decrease in politics overall. There is a very solid and extensive segment of the population that ain’t buying the story and are living in reality where they know the idiots now in charge are the real problem.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. In Flyover County, Oregon, those masked seem to fall into two groups: a) The elderly and in poor health. b) Young (20s) women working at places like Fred Meyer as checkers or pickup order fillers.

      Note: Flyover County is the kind if a place where Subarus are bought because they can handle the snow and ice, and not for virtue signalling. Leftist bumper stickers are rare on any vehicles, with no affinity for Subies. (OTOH, conservative stickers gravitate to pickup trucks, a very common species here.) On the gripping hand, I can drive an unstickered Forester to the Blue Westside metro area and not be hassled.

      Liked by 2 people

  8. its like playing football where one side (ours) is not allowed to throw the ball (rule change because they think Trump is a quarterback) … and while the refs aren’t openly rooting for the dems they call holding on our lineman if a block is not perfect … so we have to grind it out … and Trump is a big, nasty trash talking running back … he’s happy to take the ball and run over a few defenders and taunt them once they manage to bring him down … and the Dems always have 12-13-14 players on the field … the extras being dead/fake voters …

    Liked by 1 person

  9. The thing about Wilson was that a huge chunk of what he did got rolled back in the early 20’s. Not a majority, maybe, but a lot. Very little of FDR’s harm has been undone.

    Like

    1. Wilson – 1913-1921.
      16th & 17th Amendments – 1913

      I’m not claiming causation, but these two amendments arguably did more damage to the Republic than anything before or since (and between them they enabled much of the succeeding damage), and they have not been “rolled back”. :-x

      Like

      1. I agree with you on the damage those amendments have caused, but please look closer at dates involved. The passage of 16th Amendment occurred in February 1913, in the waning days of the Taft Administration, not the Wilson Administration. Congress proposed it in 1909 and enough states finally ratified it in early 1913 for it to go into effect before Wilson took office on March 4, 1913. Similarly, the 17th Amendment was proposed by Congress in 1912 and hit the ratification threshold in April 1913, about six weeks into Wilson’s first term.

        The 16th was proposed by the 61st Congress, with a Republican majority in both chambers, the 17th by the 62nd Congress, with divided control.

        Like

        1. You are correct; I only looked as far as the years. But although Wilson almost certainly had nothing to do with pushing the 16th, he could have been involved in cheerleading for the 17th, since he would probably have been deep in politics during 1912. Doesn’t seem likely (the 16th, given Wilson’s taste for power and the knowledge that money enables power, seems more likely than the 17th), but still possible.

          I suspect neither would make it past the three-fourths rule today, give the number of states with legislatures not exactly sympathetic to the Federal government. Actually, it seems amazing to me that (WRT the 17th), three-fourths of the legislatures were willing to cede their power to select Senators to popular vote. (I’m assuming ratification was by the legislatures rather than by conventions; both are allowed, and I haven’t found any info on that with a cursory search.)

          Like

            1. This is why I really DO NOT understand the conservative anti-nostalgia for the 17th Amendment. Does anyone REALLY believe that returning Senate election to legislatures is going to make them more concerned about the good of their states and less concerned about national party politics? I know it wouldn’t work that way in Illinois, and probably not in a lot of other states as well. We also do well to remember Chesterton’s Fence and the reason why the 17th Amendment was passed — due to a series of scandals in which wealthy men literally bought their seats by bribing legislators. A return to legislatively elected Senators also wouldn’t work as long as all legislative districts have to be population-based — you end up with the big city political machines still running the show.

              Like

              1. Those were “stated reasons”. The real reason was to advantage large state political machines, over small states. This is why the Senate was not popularly elected as orignally framed.

                It was a -con-. Popular vote of Senators wound up much worse than having the Legislature appoint them. Because now the Senators and Senate are loyal to -National- Party/Machine, Not their -State-. The system is designed to counterbalance, and that was the equivalent of taping down the governor valve “because now we can go faster!”.

                The States lost their senators and the Parties gained them.

                Subtle but essential difference.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. “now the Senators and Senate are loyal to -National- Party/Machine, Not their -State-.”

                  That argument doesn’t hold water anymore because SCOTUS ruled back in the 1960s that ALL state legislatures have to be elected on a “one man, one vote” population basis — you can no longer have an upper chamber with a fixed number of representatives per county or per township, etc., analogous to the U.S. Senate with 2 senators per state regardless of size. There is no longer any counterbalance to ensure that the rural/small town areas aren’t outvoted by the large cities. Senators elected by their legislatures under the current system will just end up being tools of the big city politicial machines and the national parties the same as they are now being elected by popular vote.

                  Like

                  1. If that was the gist of that ruling, then as is true of Roe Vs. Wade, it has no support in the Constitution, which only requires that the states have a “republican form of government” (which the original process, like the current one, is), and is another product of an activist Court. And like Roe vs. Wade it’s subject to reversal. The trick would be to get a party with “standing” to make the slog through the courts; I don’t see any prospects.

                    Liked by 1 person

                  2. There is no longer any counterbalance to ensure that the rural/small town areas aren’t outvoted by the large cities.
                    ………………………

                    Which is wrong. Period.

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. Yep. Which is why “2 Senators from each state, regardless of size” was specified in the Constitution. Amazing that the Court (Earl Warren? Sounds like his crap) decided it wasn’t acceptable for the states… :-x

                      Like

      2. I am seeing an increasing number of online complaints about the 19th Amendment having done more damage to the Republic than anything before or since. Way to go feminazis.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Eh, that’s mostly folks being asses because beating up on women is easy, and looking at more likely causes might suggest things like “personal responsibility” and “traditional morality may be lame, but it’s functional.” Or even, “hey, stuff that I thought was great, wasn’t, and that was my bad.”

          But hey, why not hijack yet another playbook from the progs and go after women to make themselves feel better.

          Don’t we know the poo widdle boys are just utterly without agency if girlsies can votesies?

          Like

          1. Nope. It tracks. Women get the vote, social justic-y baloney, safetyism, and gummint-as-mommy goes on overdrive. Whenever any previously male-specific organization becomes feminized, it goes to the dogs.

            Women and men are different, with different spheres of responsibility. Moreover, a limited franchise is proper to a republic, which we are (or were). Women were a wedge.

            Thus I am open to the argument that it is the men, playing Samson, to their generation’s whiny tarts (or nagging harridens. Or both) were in fact the problem, with the 19th ammendment merely the natural symptom of their failure.

            For us human beans, dysfunction is a team effort. That goes double for any hope of mending the breaks.

            The utility of the “repeal the 19th” is a test of republican female virtue (like Solomon’s test). Would you, a woman, renounce the franchise to save your nation?

            It is a no-brainer. In a hearbeat.

            Like

                  1. Yes. And single women vote left more than single men.

                    Among married couples: Women voting = no or very little change vs only men voting. Exactly double the votes, same distribution.
                    Among singles: Women voting = a lot more leftist votes. Slightly more than double the votes (there are more women than men).

                    Overall, that shifts the balance in favor of lefties in direct proportion to the ratio of singles/marrieds in society. As fewer people marry, women voting has more and more of a leftist impact. As women vote, welfare increases. As welfare increases, fewer women marry. It’s one of those small, private tragedies – it took a long while to really see the damage.

                    I’m not one to think the toothpaste can go back in the tube, or certain that it should, but I am logical enough to understand statistics vs individuals, and not judge what’s best for society by my own outlier behavior.

                    Liked by 1 person

                    2. Don’t know why it won’t let me reply to the correct thing.

                      Obviously there aren’t twice as many men as women; as stated “among married couples” the number of votes doubles – one for the man prior to women’s suffrage, one for both spouses after. That’s double.

                      I agree that women don’t care about politics as much, but I’m not sure whether they vote less; young women are over-represented in college, and professors have encouraged young women to vote left for my entire lifetime. Some even tie things like leftist protesting to grades.

                      Like

              2. The Reader thinks that Bernie is a danger to the Republic. You, on the other hand, are a danger to ‘muh Democracy’ (as are most here).

                Liked by 1 person

            2. Being contrary, I would argue that before women had the franchise, women “talked” a good portion of their men folk (husbands, sons, and brothers) into voting the best interest of the family, which is how the woman wants the vote to go. And the men would have followed through. By giving women the vote, the majority of those men are now not being convinced to vote against their own inclinations. Yes, not 100% true. Must admit hubby and I discuss the result we want and prevent us from canceling each other’s vote out. Since son has achieved voting age, we do the same with him. Ultimately it is up to each of us to cast our votes as we choose, even if not in alignment of what our group of 3 wants.

              Good news. The more liberal members of the extended family are starting to see the light. Younger members now are over 30, married, have infants and toddlers, and have listened to “Not dating the guy. Yes, he is a loud crude American (won’t insult his mother/children’s grandmother). But he is America’s loud crude American. How many conflicts is Biden trying to smoother? How is that going?” like a broken record. Even gotten a few snickers out of nephew-in-laws (two engineers, and one retired navy seaman, all know the cost of failures), and BIL. Nieces and sister are coming around. Never will go as far right as they should, but still on this one point, maybe?

              Liked by 2 people

              1. For the record, my mom always said a woman worth her salt doesn’t need the vote. Her man will vote the way she would have. And women who can’t do that, don’t deserve the vote.
                Considering she only got the right to vote in her forties….

                Like

            3. The utility of the “repeal the 19th” is a test of republican female virtue (like Solomon’s test). Would you, a woman, renounce the franchise to save your nation?

              Oh bull feces.

              If the nation is so broken that it MUST go backwards into injustice in order to survive, then it deserves to fall. It’s not even “my mother, drunk or sober.”

              In addition, like all “choose injustice because the thought experiment requires it,” that’s a God complex.

              Just as true when it’s targeting women as when it’s targeting blacks, or men, or what have you.

              Whenever any previously male-specific organization becomes feminized, it goes to the dogs.

              That’s because you’re DEFINING “feminized” as the extremely toxic twits.
              My grandmothers were in quite a few “exclusively male” groups, because they weren’t toxic as frick and didn’t have fits when the ladies came along and mostly did their own things. That’s before the issues where the groups become quite a bit more exclusive before they get opened up, or the ones that had fallen because nobody did the work.

              That is how groups tend to fall; people want the rewards, without doing the work. Someone starts to do the work, and the folks who couldn’t be bothered don’t notice until too late that they wanted the power, not the responsibility.

              And all of this is besides that your initial stated theory can’t even hold up to the order of amendments to the constitution. 18th, Prohibition; 19th, Women Vote. 20th, Prohibition repealed.
              Things that take any more attention to detail? Ha! Assuming the conclusion, all the way down. Is this law against spitting “social justic-y baloney, safetyism, and gummint-as-mommy” type law? Gosh, let’s check the year, if it’s too early then it’s a common sense health protection measure!

              Like

              2. In light of the previous post, and Mrs. Hoyt’s extension of it, the foolish idea that will fix Injustice (TM) takes a generation or two to break the system.

                There are spheres of work, places and institutions that need to belong primarily to men or to women. The ones that maintain healthy boundaries, can tolerate the occasional outliers.

                “But it’s not faaaaaaaairrr!”. Yes, I know. It’s hard to both observe a problem and have an action that ameliorate it. Maybe that’s the clue to Marxist, Feminist, even libertarian rot: the need for a quick fix right now. Though there’s also envy and spite involved every time too. So. Maybe.

                As I wrote, what is observed, is observed, and you will not argue people out of something they saw with their lying eyes.

                However, I am also agnostic as to the counter-argument that what is observed has generated a “wet pavement causes rain”

                And again, if I did not make myself clear. The genie is out of the bottle. I find it hard to imagine any scenario repealing it that does not involve Mrs. Hoyt’s nightmare.

                So, if you will pardon the vulgarity, to reiterate, the only value of “repeal the 19th” is as a shit test.

                Like

                1. What we actually need to do is raise the voting age. 18 was insane even when people were starting to earn their own money. Now it’s like giving the vote to 12 yer olds 50 years ago. 21 at least, and it should be 26, when we NOW know the brain stops developing.

                  Like

                  1. I don’t disagree with the premise. I know of kids who were eligible to vote before they were out of HS. Even the armed services requires that their recruits be out of HS with a diploma, even if they are 18. The only argument for the vote at 18 was “if I’m old enough to go to war, then I am old enough to vote.” (And then, it was more “forced to go to war, at 18”. After all this was toward the end of the Vietnam War). Thus I propose this. Raise the enlistment and voting ages to 26. Problem solved.

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. ““if I’m old enough to go to war, then I am old enough to vote.”

                      Or drink, or…

                      Hmm. I am beginning to think that is a nonsequiter.

                      Foolish consistency, hobgoblins etc.

                      Like

                  2. Oh yes, I agree. And that one is doable. We need to return to being a republic if America has a chance of surviving. As America.

                    Raising the voting age and returning to one day paper ballots at local polling stations gets the ratchet going. Limit the franchise to skin in the game. Citizenship is a duty. Etc.

                    Though “doable” is not the same as easy. I think it was 2021? That Washington state lowered the age of consent for invasive surgery tosomething like 13 or 15. Which kicks in HIPAA so parents can’t access the information.

                    Like

                    1. “That Washington state lowered the age of consent for invasive surgery tosomething like 13 or 15.”

                      Prevents parents from having a say in abortion, trans surgery, etc.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    2. Yes, I’m sure sexual access to young bodies + epater la bourgeoisie transgressive thrills were a part 9f it.

                      But also … A bad car accident. Imagine calling the hospital about your 14 year old who was biking home from a friend’s house and didn’t make it in. All kinds of medical emergencies and HIP*AA cuts parents right out.

                      Like


                2. So, if you will pardon the vulgarity, to reiterate, the only value of “repeal the 19th” is as a shit test.

                  Nah, it’s a great integrity test.

                  It lets you know who is all for founding Omelas.

                  Liked by 1 person

              3. Okay, so: The problem is that American women CURRENTLY aren’t raised to function in the public sphere, but only as “Daddy’s little princess”. Until we start demanding that women function as adults and take their punches in society, they’ll be a liability. BUT that’s like men being raised to be depressive recluses. It’s not their sex, it’s the current insanity.

                Like

                1. Can’t agree, Sarah.

                  The problem is that most kids these days are flat out not raised.

                  And then get blamed for it.

                  But yes, it is the current insanity.

                  Like

    2. Coolidge (I think Harding may have started it, but Coolidge continued it) had contests when he was in office to see which of the bureaucracies could cut their budget the most. They didn’t get down to pre-WWI levels. But they knocked a bunch off of the 1920 budgets.

      Coolidge appears to have been popular and well-liked by the country – the right man in the right place at the right time.

      Like

  10. The thing I laughed about at the time, and frankly ever since albeit a bit more harshly, is in 2020, when they knew the steamroller was in gear and ready, Brandon is who they ran.

    If they had run someone like Tulsi they could have made a generational argument, but she was not from the rich kids table, and instead they picked someone who was older than everyone.

    It actually goes to the fact that the actual power people are really at the end of their rope. No matter how many they propped up for the debates they have no team on the field, no bench at all (Gavin?! Hah!!), and nothing in the way of ideas past “not the other guy”. The basement campaign could have been run with any muppet doing the zoom speeches, and they still picked Brandon.

    He’s it. Their last best hope. Just give him ice cream and lots of drugs (remember his eye bleeding in the debate?) and he’ll make the speeches you put on the prompter, mostly. Well, sometimes. And they have the proof his whole family is on the take so Frau Doctor Jill will make sure he won’t really go off script.

    But as Sara notes, it’s not working, no unicorns and rainbows have broken out, and everyone has noticed. And, maskless, we’re still standing.

    Yeah ,yeah, yeah.

    Like

    1. Gabbard wasn’t as hard-core of a lefty as most of the candidates. So they had to block her from winning.

      Harris appears to have been the preferred candidate. But Gabbard utterly (and effortlessly) destroyed her in the debates.

      Like

      1. Hardly a surprise, given the respective levels of intelligence:
        “In this corner, Mike Tyson. And over there, in a coma and weighing 67 pounds…”

        Like

      2. Hell, Gabbard didn’t even really need to do much to torpedo Heels-up Harris.

        I mean, Marianne Williamson the hippie crystal chick was polling better than KH, before the latter withdrew from the race.

        Like

      1. Yeah; that could have been a dirty bomb all over Arkansas (yeah for solid fuels—didn’t catch it was an eight pound socket when I saw The History Guy’s video); but 1961 was eastern NC.

        Like

        1. The airman who was lifting the Big Honking Ratchet Wrench when that Big Honking Socket fell off of it was apparently up for NJP because he brought a ratchet instead of a torque wrench, since the tech order had just recently changed to specify only using a torque wrench where before it said use either, and he thought he grabbed the torque wrench but realized after he and the senior tech sgt leading the detail were already suited up in their self contained pressure suits and down past the pressure doors.

          They had to do all that spacesuit stuff because the Titan II was powered by really nasty hypergolic props – nitrogen tetroxide (oxidizer) and unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine (fuel) – which was stable for long periods but would ignite spontaneously when mixed, so they could spin up a cold missile and launch it in 60 sec.

          Apparently the Big Honking Socket often fell off both wrenches, but he was in violation bringing the wrong wrench that day, and then unlucky when it fell through the rubber gasket on their work platform.

          The story I found says at that point he was asking for a Court Martial instead of accepting NJP – but that’s the last I found on him until he was interviewed decades later for a book with no notes how it turned out for him.

          I wonder if the “accepting NJP is always a better idea” maps to an event with so many stars looking over the shoulders of the kid’s direct CO.

          Like

          1. NJP, Article-15, is vastly limited in available punishments. They are also not Federal convictions. Some go away with a lack of repeat offense. Some COs will suspend them, pending goes behavior. Stay in line and it goes away. Bust the rules again and the old comes along with the new, sequentially.

            Courts Martial are Federal felony convictions. They can not only kick you out, but incarcerate you for up to life, or execute you. (Varies by Article violated, and by the level of the Court.)

            So, yes, most of the time, accepting NJP/Art-15 is the prudent move.

            Like

      2. Actually rockets/missiles tend to have VERY thin skins. Why? Because weight matters a whole hell of a lot in anything that flies. Every gram you shave off is a gram more fuel you can carry and a little more delta V that gets you a bit more range. As for how far I think it was most of the length of a Titan II, 80 or 90 feet. Eight pounds of steel from that height will have PLENTY of energy.

        Like

        1. 1980 icident? Punctured the fuel tank of the first stage, not the oxidizer tank. Fuel is on the lower half of the stages. So the socket fell at least 3/4 of the way down. That was enough to crack the metal and leak the rather energetic fuel.

          FOD never sleeps…

          Like

        2. Also saving weight: use the tanks as the airframe. That means much of the skin of the bird is the outside of a fuel or oxidizer tank.

          Play nice with the spanners….

          Like

          1. And all this together means once the tank got (seriously) punctured, the big BOOM was just about inevitable.

            Think of a typical rocket tank like a beer or soda can… stiff and sturdy under pressure, but limp and crinkly once the tab is pulled. And since it seems there wasn’t anything to re-pressurize the tanks even in a sort of emergency (big tanks of helium??), once the pressure fell enough from the leak — the fuel tank just folded up and dropped the oxidizer tank and the whole second stage-warhead/RV assembly onto the floor, so it split open too and (hypergolic propellants again) — WHOOSH-BOOM!

            Solid fuels came in for later ICBMs, for a reason.

            Meanwhile, fast-forward to the 2020s, and Mainland China is still using the same propellants as that Titan II (UDMH and NTO) in many of their operational “Long March” orbital launch vehicles. Often flying from well inside China, with lower stages dropping… wherever they land.

            Including near towns, cities, mega-apartment-complexes.

            There are pictures of the wrecked stages, taken by cell-phone and showing curious crowds of onlookers. Gawking at ripped-up tanks. Yet the chemicals inside are just as toxic and dangerous as ever.

            “In today’s Red China, it’s not just the rockets that are expendable…”

            Liked by 1 person

      3. Wiki(bloody)pedia says the socket dropped about 80 feet. At a weight of eight pounds, that could pack quite a wallop.

        Like

  13. I think the actual beginning was when the serpent told Eve, “Eat this and you will know good and evil”.

    The serpent has had some victories over the millennia, however, just when it seems to be winning it’s final victory, Aslan pulls out the Deep Magic and snek gets stepped on again.

    I don’t think things will go how the snek enthusiasts believe it will. They hear a rumbling in the distance and are becoming restless. As well they should, the stampede of boots is getting closer.

    Keep your boots where you can find them in the dark.

    Like

    1. The first part of that temptation is the more relevant. “Ye shall be as God.”
      Someone who defines sin as “out of alignment with my values” isn’t seeking the True.
      Someone calling for the depopulation of Earth isn’t questing for the Good.

      Like

  14. Don’t be discouraged by the necessary slow and steady gains. Remember what Hemingway wrote in The Sun Also Rises:

    “How did you go bankrupt?”
    Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”

    Harvard? Boeing? Bueller?

    Liked by 1 person

  15. I’m less worried about the coming 1000 year Reich, or rather Glorious Communist Future, and far more concerned with limiting the damage as the wheels inevitably come off.

    The long march through the institutions cannot succeed: Consider a colony of termites bragging, “We have more bore holes than ever! The house is ours!”

    Like

    1. We’re all worried about the damage. And it’s a legitimate problem. SERIOUS problem. It’s what I’m trying to work on. A) by not letting people fall for the lie that the other side will inevitably win b) pointing out, when I see it, places that need shoring up. (Our young men. We all need to help young men. The world is profoundly against them. Particularly the US)

      Like

      1. On the flip side, the older we get, the more we worry to excess. It can become dysfunctional.

        “Anything you do can get you killed, including doing nothing.”

        Age-old military saying, quite true.

        Fortune still favors the bold. But she is rather fickle….

        Liked by 1 person

  16. Some are calling for Haley to drop out. Nah, let her and all the TDS deranged Rhino’s waste all those millions, so they don’t have millions to spend later on. Besides it is their money to waste, Trumps not going to see any of that money anyway. Let their hatred bankrupt them financially as well as morally. It is fun to watch them spend 31 million so that Haley can get 70% of the Democrats voting for her. We all know as soon as she was made the nominee, and as soon as
    Trump was gone, the press and all those Democrat voters would attack her just like they have done in the past. An interesting side note MSNBC and others refuse to show Trumps victory speeches. Now you see who really is for free speech and who are the real F***ing Nazi’s are.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Dear TDS Rhinos, we are more embarrassed at losing than we are at Trump’s behavior.

        Eat my Shorts!

        Like

    2. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Haley staying in to split the Republican vote. There’s a sizable minority of boomer Republicans who believe things were just fine in the old pre-Trump days and just want a candidate with what they consider traditional decorum and gravitas; maybe even enough that Haley could delude herself into thinking she could win.

      The Republican is almost surely going to lose anyway, due to fraud — but this way, when both candidates lose big, the GOPe (spit!) gets to blame it on Trump/populism splitting the party. They regain their accustomed place at the trough as the left’s loyal opposition, and in return for that signal service, their masters might…maybe…allow a milquetoast RINO to “win” in 2028 so the old ways can continue.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. but those boomers wouldn’t vote for Trump anyway. It will split BIDEN’S vote. The people who can’t stand him will vote for anyone, but not Trump. There you have it.

        Like

        1. And to the people complaining about Nimarata staying in “wasting all that donor money” – I’d bet the donor money shes spending now is not Republican donor money.
          There might be a little country-club R money coming in, but I’d bet most of the money, like per exit polling most of her NH votes, comes from the D side, so wasting that is fine.

          Liked by 1 person

            1. Note the Br’er Hair saying he wanted to win the “old fashioned way”, not by her quitting or the party declaring it “over”.

              Sounds like he rather likes the current briar patch.

              Liked by 1 person

      2. My bet is we’re going to see a big push for Haley to be Trump’s VP. She’s getting bipartisan support! She attracts independents! She can balance the ticket! She’s a woman, and she tans! She’ll reassure hesitant voters, and later, if something happens to Trump…

        Like

          1. That’s the way the “consultant class,” thinks, though. She’ll stay in if they make it appealing enough to her, and the cynics (those who don’t think Trump is conning his supporters into paying his legal fees) are suggesting he might get big-money campaign contributions if he took her on.
            Meanwhile, the Republican state chairman in AZ has resigned suddenly. So,etching about Kari Lake producing a recording of him from last year saying the folks back east would pay her very well not to run for Senate this year.

            Liked by 1 person

            2. She is running for next time, even she knows she doesn’t have a chance this time, or if the FBI does assassinate Trump she’s there to pick up the pieces as the Republican Savior. It is simply a Globalist push, they want an Immigrant of color so they can virtue signal like the British did with Sunnak. See how inclusive the Republicans are, we ran an immigrant of color against an old white guy.

              Like

    3. It wastes the time and energy of the Republicans, thus the Donks will sustain the fratricide as long as they can.

      Just about -any- damage or friction hinders Trump, thus helps Biden. Of course, Trump does often seriously warp what constitutes damage….

      Liked by 1 person

  17. If I remember my dive into history correctly, the modern American “socialist” state came around due to Wilson and many of its big characteristics (the love of “experts,” the “Lost Cause” revisionist history, the cries of “we planned during/in wartime”, casual racism and eugenic theory, etc, etc, etc) were held by mostly upper-class Southern and Northeastern people and their enablers.
    It really took off during FDR and I suspect why the current Democratic Party (that knows it’s history) is so devoted to keeping control of the Supreme Court is that the Court of the time struck down a lot of the New Deal’s provisions. (That, and an activist court could “invent” new rights.)
    This is going to be a very rough year and I’m already asking all the right people for…party favors. Yea, that’s it…party favors…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The Supreme Court struck down a lot of the New Deal stuff, until they didn’t. FDR was rolling after his 1936 election win, and given all the defeats he’d had before the Supreme Court was pushing his court-packing plan through Congress to add justices until he was able to get the decisions he wanted. In 1937 they basically flipped Associate Justice Owen Roberts to vote with the minority and start approving New Deal cases 5-4. This is known as “The Constitutional Revolution of 1937”. No more court packing bill, but no more decisions blocking the New Deal either. Nor did the court give FDR any trouble with his west coast concentration camps nor his other legal funny business.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. “No more court packing bill, but no more decisions blocking the New Deal either.”

        I’ve often thought that this is what Roberts thinks he’s done since Dobbs.

        Liked by 1 person

  18. While FDR was certainly pro-socialist, he was also pro-English. He was supporting Churchill and England through lend-lease in 1940, when Germany and the Soviet Union were still buddies. The German-Soviet non-aggression pact lasted until mid-1941, and we were spending money and providing military aid (despite our official neutrality) to England for many months before Hitler invaded the USSR. So it’s fair to say that even though FDR was pro-socialist and maybe even pro-Communist, he was even more anti-Nazi.

    Like

    2. FDR was demonstrably pro-British, but the price he got for the old four-stacker WWI DEs was a whole bunch of bases in perpetuity, and he was instrumental in pushing the Brits to dissolve their Empire.

      There is a bit of a split in opinion of FDR over there.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The Reader notes that FDR and the people around him intended as a war aim to dissolve the British Empire. They were pretty open about it.

        The bases were not given to the US in perpetuity. They are on a 99 year zero dollar lease, and revert to Britain in 2039 or thereabouts.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. OK, thanks for the correction.

          I would note that even though the British get them back, as far as the sun-never-sets British Empire as things turned out, the difference between 99 years and forever is null.

          The list includes Diego Garcia, right? That one will be interesting once 2039 rolls around.

          Like

  19. One of the little things we can do to undermine the Narrative is to celebrate my new holiday, Good Commie Day. Although every day is actually Good Commie Day, because there’s nothing commies do as well as k!lling other commies…it is good to note those special dates when the more prominent commies ceased their oxygen thievery.

    This week’s crop is particularly prominent:

    January 21st. Lenin graced the world by leaving it, fifty years too late to do any good.

     LBJ, not *officially* a Commie, buuuut...

     Paul Robeson

     Howard Zinn

    Happy Good Commie Day, wherever and whenever you are!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. LBJ assumed room temperature the same day Roe vs. Wade was decided. In fact the news of his death took some of the attention of the news media away from the SCOTUS decision.

      Like

      1. Easier to use the typical field pipes.

        4″-6″ PVC pipe, 8+ feet long. Cut one end at a 45 degree angle. Drive into ground (or dig it in) at 45 degree angle. Add an easily lifted hinged cover that has to be held up.

        Best done in sets of several, at somewhat different “waist” heights.

        Like

  21. Gov. Abbot for one is refusing to back down. He issued a statement today, partially quoted on the gov dot texas dot gov website:

    “The Executive Branch of the United States has a constitutional duty to enforce federal laws protecting States, including immigration laws on the books right now,” reads the statement. “President Biden has instructed his agencies to ignore federal statutes that mandate the detention of illegal immigrants. The failure of the Biden Administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4 has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this State the right of self-defense. For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under Article I, § 10, Clause 3 to invoke Texas’s constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary.”

    The full text of his statement is available as a PDF on the governor’s website. Some Democrat Congressmen are calling for Biden to federalize the Texas National Guard to prevent them from being used by Gov. Abbot.

    It’s going to be interesting to see where this goes.

    Like

      1. Yes, and it’s not clear from the reporting whether Gov. Abbot has been using the State Guard or the National Guard on the border. I suspect most reporters aren’t aware of the State Guard and/or don’t know how it is different from the National Guard.

        Like

        2. He’s used every agency with any sort of enforcement arm: DPS, National Guard, TX Rangers, and game wardens. I can’t imagine he’s left State Guard out, but National Guard has the press attention.

          Liked by 1 person

        1. Which is a plus, since hopefully he won’t / can’t pull the “federalization” trick on so many at once.

          I seem to remember that FL also has a State Guard, but I haven’t researched the others, and I don’t know when I’ll get to that.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Biden can Federalize any/all national Guard.

            Example: Eisenhower nationalized the Guard, and ordered them to stand down, -then- sent in the US Army to enforce Brown. Avoided a potential violent engagement between the Guard and the Army.

            Like

            1. But so many at once may carry a political cost that he won’t care to pay. We can hope.

              And they might just have or form State Guards of their own.

              Like

              3. They won’t own much gear. The federalized Guard will be ordered to secure it.

                Also note, the Guard are the combat troops. The Army Reserve are the support/logistics.

                Modern Mech Infantry needs a great deal of support to sustain operations.

                Like

              1. Not if he orders them to stack arms, stand down, and return home to their civilian lives. A token/loyal bunch then guard the armories.

                The “Brown v Board” events under Eisenhower are example.

                Like

                1. Once they are no longer in Federal service, is there anything to stop Gov Abbott from recruiting them into the TX State Guard? And if Biden orders them not to, can that order stay in effect unless Biden KEEPS them in Federal service, for which he must pay?

                  Like

      3. Of course, if this bill goes through, it will become an illegal militia.

        https://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2024/01/25/is-anti-militia-bill-worse-than-we-thought-n79759

        “This bill would give them license to investigate anyone who trains with a gun in order to determine whether they’re a militia member — and don’t think for a second that they won’t.

        The FBI recently investigated law-abiding Americans whose sole transgression was shopping at a Cabela’s or a DICK’s Sporting Goods. Evidently, the FBI, the country’s so-called premier law enforcement agency, wasn’t aware DICK’s stopped selling guns and ammunition eons ago. Nowadays, the most dangerous thing on their shelves is a pickleball paddle.”

        Like

  22. “This is why FDR’s administration was filled with communists and…”

    And, the (few? ish?) exceptions to this were mostly on the fascist side. The mutual transatlantic love-fest between early Nazis and (actual) Fascists, and the early-stage New Dealers, is pretty well ‘outed’ (even) by popularizers like Dinesh D’Souza.

    Of course, once Hitler and Mussolini started building their own little conquistador empires full of Room To Live (for them and theirs), the romance went pretty bad pretty fast; and it seems FDR himself was never much on it either.

    But here ‘the exceptions prove the rule’ rather well, just about all of ’em merry full-monty authoritarian statists from beginning to end; it’s only that some liked ‘nothing without the State’ a bit better than ‘from each according to his means’ for a while.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. The left here in the USA believes the wrong side won the Cold War and they want the USSR back as well. I note that CCP’s communism is not only nationalistic, but specifically racially Han Chinese nationalistic.

    Indeed the modern left, both in the USA and CCP run China, are very much as akin to the Nazis as they are the old Soviets, in that it is very much a race/ethnic based national socialist system that allows nominally private businesses to exist, as long as they act to fulfill and implement the power of The State and The Party as tools thereof.

    Leftist ideologies are also of course a fundamentally antisemitic ideology, even when the leftists are nominally Jews, like Karl Marx, whose self-hatred and loathing of being Jewish is readily evident in his writing. The left views Jews as being the “ultimate capitalist oppressor”, and leftist governments and parties have always peddled vicious Jew-hatred. Leftist ideology is why Team ObamaBiden is so hostile to Jews and Israel, as well as the EU, commie South Africa, the CCP, etc.

    One reason Team ObamaBiden and the left hate Trump so much is precisely because he is such a strong supporter of Israel as a Jewish state and of Jews as Jews. They also hate that he proved the left wrong by facilitating the Abraham Accords which proved that Israel and Arab nations could reach peace agreements without kowtowing to the genocidal Jihadists of Hamas and Fatah. This of course is why as soon as it was installed,. Team ObamaBiden has done everything in their power to undermine and destroy the accords and Israel itself.

    What the modern left lacks in intelligence and competence is matched by their great ambition for power over others and their willingness to pursue those ambitions “by any means necessary”. Those ambitions inherently result in mass deaths and graves if they are not thwarted by those who understand that the left must be defeated and constant vigilance is needed against their quest for power.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Commies are awesome at pointing out real problems.

    Take Big Pharma (TM) Real deal, as we know to our pain. Or the tying of medical care to “insurance” bureaucracies and insurance to jobs. Or air and water pollution. Or, or, or…

    Aaaaaand somehow team non-commie opposes even the problem being identified itself. Or fails spectacularly to come up with a solution. Or comes up with one, but never, ever implements it once in power. Or, or, or.

    And any solution commies come up with is guaranteed to be an epic disaster. Or worse, the solution works (think the wossname ibis and the Sierra club) and the organization looks for new problems to “solve”.

    I report the observed phenomenon. I do not have a good explaination for it. (And yes, simplifying. Loads of the problems they accurately ID: they caused by some other solution from hell.)

    As for solutions, non-binary thinking is required (not to mention Christ), but that’s a bit too “big picture” to be useful.

    And micro-solutions… For example, pollution: End the fixation on climate stasis, and turn all the accumulated bureaucracy and monies toward clean air and water programs as a start… are too micro. How in the blazes do you get even to that point?

    IDK.

    Not giving up mind you. Just.. IDK.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Concerning pollution … Most states in the US had started anti-pollution programs and rules in the 1950s, and were well on the way to reducing problems by 1970. Interstate pollution was more challenging, since it meant that stuff from one state was blowing/flowing into another state. That’s where some federal rules would have been useful. Instead we got the modern environmental movement, the EPA, and so on, which took state ideas, made them national, then after the mid-1980s dialed everything up. (See Karl Boyd Brooks Before Earth Day: The Origins of American Environmental Law)

      It wasn’t the communists so much as “I don’t like the stream behind my house flowing colors,” and “My kids need clean air.” Yes, some old-school Progressives were also involved in the late 1890s-1910s, but market pressure (can we trap that stuff and use it for something else to make money with?) and local concerns also played a large role.

      Most air and water is clean in the western world, because companies as well as governments decided that dumping gunk didn’t make economic or social sense. (The communist governments … Ugh. Soviet pollution was the stuff of nightmares, ditto the Warsaw Pact nations.) If western companies and consumers paid more attention to keeping waste here, recycling and re-processing it for other things where viable, we could stop shipping it overseas. Now, getting other cultures to look favorably on cleaning up the environment and not just tossing stuff into ditches and waterways, or fouling the air, that’s a different story, and one that requires culture-by-culture solutions.

      Like

      1. I was in the middle of the slash and field burning controversies, well into the ’90s. The 1988 I-5 pile up due to wind shifting thick black smoke onto the freeway was the beginning of the end. Before then environmentalist were getting nowhere. Now there are many products that come out of the grass field straw and leftover logging debris (for values of logging happening). Now, until the last few years with the wildfire smoke intrusions from both other states, and in state wildfires. I’d forgotten how bad it could be, every summer. Smoke and all pollution gets trapped in the southern end of the Willamette valley. 2020 was particularly horrible. OTOH a legit reason to wear a mask. There was a lot of ash in the air.

        https://www.oregonlive.com/data/2015/02/smoky_21-vehicle_pileup_kills.html

        Like

Comments are closed.