Thursday, June 28, 2012

Blog comments surprise with insight

Brilliant comment on SBDPL:

Van said...

The rule of law is essentially dead. Consider:

The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress can use its taxing authority for any purpose. They can even pick a behavior and levy a tax on individuals who choose NOT to engage in said behavior. By this logic, they can certainly tax anything; any act or failure to act.

The Court also ruled that a state cannot enforce federal law, even if the state stature is identical to the federal stature; that somehow the state's efforts to enforce federal law actually undermine said federal law.

Meanwhile, because the Court did allow Arizona police to check on the immigration status of suspects, the President ruled that his administration would no longer assist Arizona with suspected illegal aliens. He has simply declined to enforce the law - his primary function as head of the Executive Branch. And, of course, the Court made it clear that if Arizona appears to be enforcing its law in a way that seems to involve racial profiling, further review will be needed. Since over 75% of illegals are from Central America, enforcement will of course have a disparate impact.

Obama declared that young illegal aliens would not be deported, something he has no authority to do, as Congress is tasked with setting these laws.

And let's not forget poor George Zimmerman. Attacked by a young thug, and forced to defend himself. The police are saying Zimmerman had the opportunity to "defuse" the situation, and this is why he is charged with murder. There is no Florida law that says this, but apparently we're making it up as we along. Now, if a POS thug feels disrespected by you, its YOUR responsibility to "defuse" the situation. No matter that Martin left the scene only to double back and attack Zimmerman. Its Zimmerman's responsibility.

Welcome to fascism. We make the rules up as we go along; the central government knows best and is not held to any constraints whatsoever. At least Italian fascism was geared towards what was good for Italians, and German fascism towards what was good for Germans (however misguided both were). In the US, fascism is designed to subject the native population to serve others.

And of course, while Van got many things right, another commenter corrects him/her.

I am amazed at the quality, intelligence and knowledge of people hanging around blogs, knowing that something is very wrong here yet powerless to change it.


This isn't fascism. This is communism. Big, big difference. Don't be fooled into thinking that communism requires the presence of economic socialism, although it often uses socialism to it's advantage. Just like fascism, and any other movement on the political spectrum, ALL politically significant change occurs in the social sphere. Hence, this country began it's first large move toward communism when it adopted "The National Myth" of being 'A Land of Diverse Immigrants'. The second large step, it could be argued, was the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and the third was the civil rights movement.

For fascism to be in place, a homogenous, conservative population must be present. Actually, fascism is the mechanism by which the government assures that society retains the conservative ideals potent enough to reject liberalism.

You HAVE to pick fascism(the politics of the group) or communism(the politics of the individual). Each is the others' most potent antidote and a society is left vulnerable to the strongest political force on the other end if it doesn't adopt the opposing system. In other words, we are going to arrive at one or the other. There is no third choice that can stop the fruition of the other two.

This is why our 'liberal democracy'(although an ineffective representative democracy) has been useless to stop our slide toward communism. Nay, it has been the system required to facilitate the slide. It celebrates the individual. It praises the political power myth of 'one man, one vote'. It dispossesses people of the correct notion that only groups, people working cooperatively, have power. 'Libertarianism' (the politic of the individual), just like any liberal philosophy, leads to the same thing. Liberalism and libertarianism are the politics of the uniqueness of the individual, and the rights of the individual over the rights of the majority. Hence, they lead to racial group destroying, conservative values destroying, and majority subjugating policy. 'Community' is the ideological enemy of liberals and libertarians, whether they are aware of this fact or not. If you are a libertarian, and aren't aware, then you haven't thought about your philosophy of you politics long and hard enough.

Communism is absolutely inevitable under liberal democracy. Why do you think that we spend so much, militarily, to assure the 'spread of democracy'? What do the people of the USA care if Cameroon isn't democratic? Instead, similar to the crusades, we wage constant war to assure that our FOOBAR system of government, that dispossesses the entire majority of any meaningful political power, is installed in every country on Earth. It's not my crusade, it's not my neighbor's crusade, and it's not your crusade. It's 'their' crusade, and it's being carried out for motivations that do not truly care whether or not some tribesman in Africa gets a 'vote', other than that 'democratic' system leads the doors wide open for foreign groups to come in and grapple the country out of the hands of the people, or of the monarch/fascist ruler that, while ruling under a strict system, is doing so to keep his country's politics sovereign and strong against outside influence.

The hard truth is that you have zero experience, nor the political perspective, to call fascism "misguided". You may just be be begging for fascism should the BRA rule for another 50 years. If you were smart, you would take that option now should it free you of another 50 year learning process under the BRA.

Wow, imagine that: a conservative government that truly has the best interests of the majority at heart. What a terrible, terrible thing. Just don't discount any option, and consider the fact that if the people who hate you the most are in power, then EVERYTHING that you have been taught may be wrong. Look to the things that you have been programmed to believe are the most "evil", as the ideologies that put the most strength in your hands to save yourself. Question everything, especially what you think that you know about politics, religion (didn't Jesus command you to love everyone?) and history.


AmericanGoy said...

Wait, did I just print a comment that praises fascism?

The difference between fascism and communism is that fascism at least pretended to care about its own people FIRST, and damn the rest.

Communism cared about the ELITES, and damn its own people.


"To Kakurin, chief of staff
July 8, 1921

The defeated bandits are hiding in the forests and are taking out their impotent fury on the local population, burning bridges, wrecking dams and other property of the people.

To safeguard the bridges, the Plenipotentiary Commission of the All-Union Central Executive Committee orders:

1. Immediately take from the population of each village neighboring an important bridge no fewer than 5 hostages, who in case of damage to the bridge must be executed immediately.

2. Have the local inhabitants, under the direction of revolutionary committees, organize to defend the bridges against bandit attacks, and make the local population responsible for rebuilding any damaged bridge in no more than 24 hours.

3. Widely disseminate the present order in all villages.

Commander Tukhachevsky

Our strategist's logic is astounding: "the defeated bandits are hiding in the forests and are taking out their impotent fury on the local population," therefore Tukhachevsky orders the taking of hostages from among that same local population.

This is Tukhachevsky's entire experience: hostages, hostages, hostages. Shoot, shoot, shoot. And let the music play!

To conduct this war against his own people, Tukhachevsky needed a special kind of officer. What counted was not professional skill, but political loyalty and a willingness to carry out criminal orders. Therefore he selected his officers according not to professional, but political, criteria: "We must give commissars a wide opportunity for advancement to commanding positions, giving some of them brief theoretical training... We must announce the goal of transitioning to an all-Communist officer corps... In the 5th Army this goal was set long ago, and its officer corps now consists entirely of Communists." It is not hard to guess that this was written at a time when the 5th Army was commanded by none other than Tukhachevsky. He points to the 5th Army as an example, and along with it, his beloved self: this is how things should be done!

Such an approach was fully justified, as long as military action consisted only of shooting hostages. The important thing was for the commander to be a Marxist, and that for the sake of Marxism he not spare any blood. Hence Tukhachevsky's call: put commissars in commanding positions! Giving SOME of them BRIEF training.

All was wonderful, until Tukhachevsky and his commissars met the Polish cavalry on the battlefield. Then, those commissars with brief training turned and ran... "

Communism is occupation of its OWN population for the benefit of the elites (in the USSR case, first Jews, then after Stalin's purges the Nachalstvo).

Anonymous said...

The black flags of Khorasan are coming to free the holy land from the hands of the false jews. The murdering of Palestinian children by zionists is going to end soon. This army cannot be bribed or intimidated or co-opted so USrael/NATO is powerless to stop it.

In any war it is always those who are most morally right that are willing to fight harder and who are victorious in the end.

Is Rothschild's USrael/NATO morally right any longer? Are they not fighting wars of aggression for economic gain?

There is your answer.

And sitting out here in the Western blogosphere I can see clearly Rothschild's attempt to conquer the world is now coming to an end. The synagogue of satan is being defeated. Nothing you or I can write or say or do is going to alter that result.

Hicky HIckerson said...

Damn naggers nad spics are ruining the contry! Imma go bang my cousin now.

Anonymous said...

I'm not impressed by these comments. There are substantially greater problems than these out there, like (for instance) Israel and the US government doing 9/11. Or many other things that are less controversial. The Iraq War? That's a little more significant than the Trayvon Martin shit.

Obama sucks, but he's nothing more than another dot in a trendline that's been going on for a long time now. Anyone who thinks Obama is significantly better or worse than Bush is likely to be a complete idiot.

Anonymous said...

That final comment by 'Anonymous' was superb. Excellent points and excellent advice for all who want positive change for their country..