General

Trust the Science: DEI Is Dangerous

/3 Comments/in /by
National Review – 11/29/24
We were told over and over again by leading institutions, high-profile figures, and the mainstream media that DEI fosters an “inclusive environment” and advances “equity” by eliminating biases and counteracting discrimination.
A booming industry emerged: About $8 billion is spent each year on diversity trainings in the United States, and more than half of Americans report that their workplace has DEI trainings or meetings. Of course, DEI is not merely limited to programming at organizations, businesses, and universities. Now, it is entrenched in our laws. President Biden has issued executive orders to promote social justice, beginning on his very first day in the Oval Office.
While DEI was celebrated, its opponents realized that it is a dangerous ideology. Some supposedly “equitable” policies have been clear examples of illegal discrimination, while the efforts to be “inclusive” have had disastrous consequences, particularly for single-sex spaces. Yet some of DEI’s terrible effects have more subtly eroded our social fabric: Most, if not all, DEI-themed trainings promote a victimhood mentality by organizing society into a hierarchy of “oppressor” and “oppressed” on the basis of immutable traits, then demonize anyone who is supposedly sitting comfortably atop the totem pole.
Regrettably, anyone who expressed even mild objections to DEI could be branded as a reprehensible bigot who needed immediate reeducation, thereby creating a demand for even more progressive-indoctrination sessions.
Now, a compelling new study confirms that DEI fosters racial and group animosity, not tolerance.
The study released on Monday by Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI) and Rutgers University Social Perception Lab has devastating but unsurprising results: Across the three experiments, the researchers found that participants exposed to DEI materials were more likely to perceive prejudice where none existed and were more willing to punish the perceived perpetrators.
Even worse, the participants who read DEI materials focused on caste were more likely to agree with Hitler quotes that substituted “Jew” with “Brahmin,” the top of the hierarchy group in the Indian caste system. The study found that “participants exposed to the DEI content were markedly more likely to endorse Hitler’s demonization statements, agreeing that Brahmins are ‘parasites’ (+35.4%), ‘viruses’ (+33.8%), and ‘the devil personified’ (+27.1%).”
Since DEI programming is so widespread, the study’s findings are obviously newsworthy. Yet our own Abigail Anthony reported that both the New York Times and Bloomberg had prepared articles on the study, then axed the stories just before publication.
Why? When asked for an explanation by the study’s authors, the editor of the Bloomberg “Equality” subsection simply cited editorial discretion.
At the New York Times, the reporter admitted that he did not have “any concerns about the methodology,” and that someone on the publication’s “data-driven reporting team” had “no problems” with the study. Yet the journalist insisted that the study should undergo peer review before getting coverage, even though he had previously reported on NCRI’s reports that hadn’t been peer-reviewed.
That journalist also stipulated, “I told my editor I thought if we were going to write a story casting serious doubts on the efficacy of the work of two of the country’s most prominent DEI scholars, the case against them has to be as strong as possible.”
As it happens, the study is strong, and the truth about DEI is getting out, no matter how uncomfortable it makes its reflexive supporters.

Josh Blackman at Reason.com: Comparing Trump’s Pardon of Arpaio and Biden’s Pardon of Biden

/2 Comments/in /by

This is the best article I have seen on Biden’s pardon. Who could be surprised that Biden would lie about pardoning Hunter? He’s lied his whole life. Successfully. Just another sociopathic American politician. But the good news is that it completely opens the door to freeing the J6 people. If Trump doesn’t free them, I would lose whatever confidence I have that he will ever do the right thing.

Comparing Trump’s Pardon of Arpaio and Biden’s Pardon of Biden

The more things change, the more things stay the same.

By Josh Blackman

Today, President Biden issued a pardon to his son, Hunter Biden. In many regards, President Biden’s pardon of his son resembles President Trump’s pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The headline from the New York Times says it all: “In Pardoning His Son, Biden Echoes Some of Trump’s Complaints.”

First, President Biden issued this pardon after Hunter was convicted, but before he was sentenced. Biden has short-circuited the judicial process, taken the case out of the hand of the district court judge, and foreclosed any opportunity for appellate review. It is worth noting that both Roger Clinton and Charles Kushner were pardoned long after they had served their sentences. Back in August 2017, President Trump pardoned Joe Arpaio after he was convicted before he was sentenced. At the time, I wrote that the pardon was “premature,” as the “preemptive pardon short-circuited the judicial process.” There was outrage at the time to Trump’s actions. It is enough to copy a paragraph from the Wikipedia page on the pardon:

In response to the pardon, The Washington Post said it was “a controversial decision, one that Trump critics labeled as an example of the president’s illiberal, rule-of-law violating, authoritarian impulses.” Harvard Law School professor Charles Fried, the former solicitor general for Ronald Reagan, said Trump’s use of authority was specifically “to undermine the only weapon that a judge has in this kind of ultimate confrontation.” Another Harvard Law School professor, Noah Feldman, said the pardon “would express presidential contempt for the Constitution.” According to The New York Times, legal experts found the fact that Trump “used his constitutional power to block a federal judge’s effort to enforce the Constitution” to be the “most troubling aspect of the pardon”

Hunter should hope that the District Courts in Delaware and California promptly dismiss the case, and the Trump DOJ does not have an opportunity to continue litigating the matter. But there is adverse precedent. After the pardon of Arpaio, the district judge actually held proceedings about how to deal with the pardon. Lawyers even argued that the court should not accept the pardon! Ultimately, the district court accepted the pardon, thus preventing the sentencing, but did not vacate the conviction. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. Thus, at least in the California case, though Hunter was pardoned, under the Arpaio precedent, the conviction will stand. He will remain a convicted felon in the legal sense, even if he is pardoned.

Second, Trump’s pardon of Arpaio was criticized because he bypassed the DOJ Pardon Attorney. He unilaterally decided to issue the pardon. Hunter would have never qualified for a pardon set forth by the DOJ Pardon Attorney.

Chalk up another victory for the unitary executive.

Third, Trump was widely criticized for issuing a pardon to advance his personal interests. Arpaio was a big supporter of candidate and President Trump. The pardon was largely viewed as payback for a loyal supporter. Biden is in a similar position, though it is in many regards worse. This is not merely a political ally. It is his flesh and blood. Biden wrote, “I hope Americans will understand why a father and a President would come to this decision.” Oh yes, we understand this decision quite well. Biden assured the public many times that he would not pardon his son. This promise was no doubt part of his appeal for the 2024 election. Biden ran for President (briefly) on the platform that he was honest, could be trusted, and would not put his personal concerns before the country. Historians can now judge whether Biden kept these promises.

Fourth, President Trump lobbied Attorney General Sessions to drop the Arpaio prosecution. These communications were viewed by critics as a breach of the “independence” between the Department of Justice and the President. Sessions declined to accede to Trump’s requests. In 2024, Politico reported that Biden told “confidants that Garland should not have eventually empowered a special counsel to look into his son, believing that he again was caving to outside pressure.” Sounds familiar? Biden said much the same in his pardon statement: “The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election.” It was Merrick Garland, Biden’s Attorney General, who appointed the special counsel, not Republicans in Congress.

I don’t see how Garland continues to serve. The President publicly declared that he has lost faith in his Attorney General. I would not be surprised to see Garland resign shortly. What a tragic figure, Garland is. He was nominated for the Supreme Court, never received a hearing, stepped down from the D.C. Circuit to become Attorney General, pledged to restore the rule of law, spent his entire administration enmeshed with special counsels and January 6 prosecutions, and all of those convictions have been, or will be pardoned. If Attorney General Meese was the most influential Attorney General in American history, where would Garland rank?

Fifth, Trump’s pardon was viewed as an attack of Judge Susan Bolton. Adam Liptak wrote in the Times, “It was the first act of outright defiance against the judiciary by a president who has not been shy about criticizing federal judges who ruled against his businesses and policies.” President Biden’s statement managed to criticize the federal judge in Delaware who presided over Hunter’s trial: “a carefully negotiated plea deal, agreed to by the Department of Justice, unraveled in the court room – with a number of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process. ” This statement is flat-out false. The plea deal unraveled after it became clear the prosecution and defense did not agree how the plea agreement would be interpreted. Biden has no basis to insinuate that the District Court judge, who was supported by both Delaware senators, was politicized. Would Biden call Judge Norieka, who was appointed by President Trump, a “Trump Judge”? Cue Chief Justice Roberts.

Sixth, Trump’s pardon of Arpaio concerned his conviction, and “any other offenses under Chapter 21 of Title 18, United States Code that might arise, or be charged, in connection with Melendres v. Arpaio . . . in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.” In other words, this pardon would prevent a prosecutor from bringing future charges related to that case. Biden’s pardon of his son was far, far broader:

For those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014 through December 1, 2024, including but not limited to all offenses charged or prosecuted (including any that have resulted in convictions) by Special Counsel David C. Weiss in Docket No. 1:23-cr-00061-MN in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and Docket No. 2:23-CR-00599-MCS-1 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

This pardon immunizes Hunter from prosecution for any conduct he committed between January 1, 2014. If Hunter shot someone on Fifth Avenue during that period, he could not be tried for murder in federal court. I haven’t studied pardons closely, but I am skeptical there has ever been such a broad, prophylactic pardon over the course of a decade. Even President Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon was limited to offenses “committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.”

And President Andrew Johnson’s 1868 pardon and amnesty of former confederates was limited to the offenses of insurrection, rebellion, and treason, during the four-year long Civil War. (Johnson’s pardon had the effect of cutting short the pending appeal to the Supreme Court of the criminal prosecution of Jefferson Davis.) Finally, there is a longstanding debate about whether a pardon can be issued without enumerating a specific offense. Professor Phillip Kurland raised this issue after Ford pardoned Nixon. He said, “It is certainly not clear that the power to pardon an individual may properly, i.e. constitutionally, be invoked prior to indictment and conviction.”‘

Seventh, Trump’s pardon was part of a long-term campaign to charge that the DOJ was politicized. Here, Biden said “I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice.” Again, this is Biden’s Attorney General. Biden’s remarks about the politicization of his own DOJ provide more credence to what Trump has said, and what he will do after January 20.

***

The more things change, the more things stay the same. For what it’s worth, this pardon does not prevent Hunter from facing charges in state court. Nor does it prevent the Department of Justice from prosecuting Joe Biden over his documents case. Remember, Ron Hur only declined to prosecute Biden for his “poor memory.” If Biden had continued to serve as President, I think that is an admission that he is competent to stand trial. I also think that the statute of limitations would be waived while Trump is in office. (The proceedings in New York with Justice Merchan will speak to this issue.)

The post Comparing Trump’s Pardon of Arpaio and Biden’s Pardon of Biden appeared first on Reason.com.

How can America survive if people like this leave?

/18 Comments/in /by
I’m not leaving my America. I’m leaving Trump’s.
We’re teetering on the edge of a free fall into rock bottom, pulling anyone with a shred of decency down with us.
Atlanta Journal-Constitution – By Todd Copilevitz
Editor’s note: This is the first in an occasional series exploring the author’s decision to move abroad.
America, we need a time out.
Growing up in the Midwest, I couldn’t fathom how a nation could embrace someone like Hitler or how America justified locking up 120,000 Japanese Americans in detention camps. I was raised to believe most people had a breaking point — a moral red line that, once crossed, would stop them.
Now I know better. Fear weaponized, simple scapegoats offered — this toxic cocktail blinds people. It happened in Germany. Bosnia. Myanmar. Cambodia. Stalin’s Russia.
Less than a month ago, my heart dropped like a lead weight. The nightmare came home.
Fury and fear have been spinning in my head ever since. Donald Trump will soon be president again — this time with a MAGA-led Republican Congress and a rubber-stamp Supreme Court ready to green light whatever hateful agenda he couldn’t finish the first time.
He’s armed and ready to bulldoze decency. For a horrifying number of Americans, the misogyny, racism and antisemitism [!!] didn’t matter — or, worse, they liked it. That’s not just alarming; it’s sickening.
Back in the “good old days,” we were taught that the early stages of fascist regimes often began with the subtle normalization of hatred and the systematic erosion of rights — all disguised as efforts to protect security or preserve tradition. We learned that shameful episodes like Operation Wetback in the 1950s served as clear warnings of what not to do, just as the Nazi ghettoization of Jews was a stark reminder of the depths to which humanity could sink when fear and prejudice take the wheel.
Now? We’re banning books. Arresting librarians. Threatening teachers. Demonizing education itself.
It’s hard to even fathom what they’re teaching today — if teaching is still a priority at all [indeed, it’s mostly LGBTQ+ ideology now]. It feels as if the ugliest chapters of history are being exhumed and replayed, no matter the price society pays.
Look, we’re not in Kansas anymore. This is Nazi Germany territory [just a tad overreacting].
The past few months have left me shaken. My family — the people I live for — represents every group MAGA has decided to target. So I’m leaving. I’m packing my family and moving abroad.
But I’m not leaving my America; I’m leaving Trump’s.
This isn’t a decision made lightly. In our house, we’ve seen too much of the inhumanity humans are capable of. My wife spent years in combat zones as a TV photojournalist and video editor.
In 2020, as journalists in the United States were beaten on live TV during the George Floyd protests, it was like a portal opening to her past. The chaotic scenes on screen mirrored the brutality she had endured in Panama, Argentina and Iraq — where right-wing regimes didn’t just suppress dissent but actively targeted journalists like her [that would include Israel most of all, but of course being a right-thinking person he would never say that]. Until then it was easy to wrap ourselves in the belief this could never happen here.
Now, however, every night the news feels like a barrage of emotional land mines. The parallels between other hellscapes and what’s happening here are coming too fast and too frequently for comfort. I’ve stopped lobbing in the occasional “It won’t happen here” because I no longer know that for sure.
My own history might not be as harrowing, but I’ve spent more than a decade as a crime reporter, followed by another decade helping the Marine Corps recruit young men and women. Those experiences taught me how vast populations look to their leaders for stability — and what happens when that trust is betrayed.
I’ve seen too many terrified faces — people losing their homes, their loved ones. I’ve witnessed the cruelty strangers inflict on those they deem “lesser.”
Ironically, the military, which many fear Trump will turn against fellow Americans [when the left riots over mass deportations?], gives me hope. I know it includes decent men and women who take very seriously the Constitution they vow to defend and who will stand up for what’s right.
But I can’t sit idly by, praying authorities don’t come for my immigrant neighbors. I won’t watch them try to erase my son, strip away my daughter’s rights or escalate antisemitic rhetoric into action [somehow I missed the anti-Semitic rhetoric; Israel couldn’t hope for a better president. With a name like Copilevitz he could probably immigrate to Israel without any problem and bask in the warm glow of Israeli democracy]. I can’t gamble on this ending well.
This isn’t about losing an election. I’ve lived under more Republican presidents than Democratic ones — loyal opposition is practically a reflex. But this? This time it is different.
We’re watching the fabric of our society, our culture, get shredded in front of us. In Texas, they offer bounties for turning in women seeking abortions. Across red states, cruelty is being legislated with zeal — banning water breaks for road crews, criminalizing compassion, targeting LGBTQ+ people as public enemies. Decency is a crime; hate is a virtue.
This is not my America.
It’s not just the policies. I fear the swarms of emboldened bigots letting their hatred rage even more than I fear our government. Nazis marching in Ohio? Anonymous text messages telling LGBTQ+ citizens to report to reeducation camps. You see the angry entitlement, and the vicious disparaging rhetoric daily now.
Neighbors turning on neighbors. Cultural differences being criminalized. Children weaponized as pawns in deportation schemes. We’re teetering on the edge of a free fall into rock bottom, pulling anyone with a shred of decency down with us.
I know the trolls will come for me now that I’ve spoken up. But I’ll take the marketplace of ideas over fear any day. And hey, if any of you can explain — rationally — why I should stay, I’m all ears. Go ahead, convince me. I’d love to hear it. [PLEASE GO AND TAKE SIMILAR-MINDED OTHERS WITH YOU!]
Yes, I could shut my eyes and wait it out for four years. As a 62-year-old white man, I have the privilege of insulation. But turning a blind eye has never been the answer, and it won’t start being one now.
I believe I have an obligation to make the world better for those around me. Until now, that meant leaning into the fight: donations, phone banks, petitions, protests. But now, the risk is too close for comfort.
After too many sleepless nights and endless spirals of “what if,” we’ve chosen a future in Northern Ireland. It’s a place with its own scars, but those scars tell a story of hard-fought peace and dialogue — two things we’re starving for here. And, bonus, over there, removing guns from society was an obvious part of the solution, not part of the chaos.
In Northern Ireland, my family will be able to finally breathe, thrive and focus on building something meaningful — instead of just surviving. Plus, they supposedly speak the same language as us. Well, sort of.
Yes, family and friends have asked if we’re sure — and if it must be now.
The answer to both is a resounding yes. History has shown us that the window for making a secure environment can close all too rapidly. I want my family and friends to know they can always hop a flight to safety and sanity. We plan to help anyone who follows. Humanity is a collective effort.
Leaving is hard. Uprooting our lives adds an entirely new layer of complexity. Selling our home isn’t just about finding a buyer — it’s about walking away from the first house my wife and I bought, the one where we designed our dream yard and filled every room with memories.
For my mother, who’s in her 80s, the challenge is even greater. She’s leaving her grandchildren and the life she’s built. Yet, her resilience warms my heart — she’s already picturing herself living in a real village.
The pets, blissfully unaware, bring their own challenges: paperwork, travel restrictions, ensuring their safety.
We have just spent a week in Northern Ireland, sorting out logistics, meeting with immigration solicitor (gotta admit, that sounds better than lawyer), looking for a car, learning to drive on the “wrong” side of the road and sorting out the new currency.
The house we’re moving to in Portballintrae has views of the North Atlantic, but it also comes with adjustments: smaller spaces, new systems, a different way of living.
[Looks like a very homogeneous (even religiously), small White town. From Wiki:On Census day (29 April 2001) there were 734 people living in Portballintrae. Of these:

  • 12.0% were aged under 16 years and 33.4% were aged 60 and over
  • 48.9% of the population were male and 51.1% were female
  • 1.0% were from a Catholic background and 96.5% were from a Protestant background.
  • 2.1% of people aged 16–74 were unemployed]
It’s overwhelming at times, but every sleepless night reminds me why we’re doing this. This isn’t just relocation; it’s preservation. We’re packing hope, resilience and determination.
We’re not giving up our citizenship. We’ll keep paying our U.S. taxes. I’ll still keep an eye on what’s happening. America is still home. But when I turn off the news, I hope to breathe a little easier.
I know I’ll be homesick. My memories, identity and roots are American. Trading a wooded lot in Atlanta for a semidetached house in a village of 754 will be a culture shock.
I hope we can return someday, that all of this turns out to be a false alarm. But I can’t take that chance.
This isn’t retreat; it’s strategy. When the rules are rigged, the boldest move is to stop playing. It’s not fear; it’s purpose. I’m building a life where compassion, justice and democracy aren’t theoretical. They’re real, lived values.
To those staying: I’m rooting for you. Keep fighting for the better America we know is possible. I’ll cheer and donate from across the Atlantic, my heart always carrying a piece of this country.
For me, the most radical act of hope is pivoting. Reclaiming agency. Living aligned with my principles. Sometimes, the smartest move isn’t fighting in a broken system from within — but working on building a new world and thriving outside it.
This isn’t goodbye. This is a hello to a new unknown. But it’s also a declaration: I refuse to accept the terms set by others. I’m choosing a life where dignity, compassion and justice can win. Though my heart might have dropped like a lead weight last month, it feels lighter knowing we’re moving toward a place where hope still flickers.
As Tom Bodett said in so many Motel 6 commercials, “We’ll leave the light on for you.”

Todd Copilevitz, a marketing consultant, is a former reporter and columnist for The Dallas Morning News.

Interview (unshaved) with Emil Cosmin

/4 Comments/in /by

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS: Will Washington Destroy the World? 

/6 Comments/in /by

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Americans who think themselves informed because they watch CNN, read the NY Times, and listen to NPR, regard my warnings about nuclear war as disinformation, even hysteria. They say that U.S. government officials, such as Secretary of State Blinken and National Security advisor Jake Sullivan, are not stupid or insane.

NOTE TO READERS: This article and dozens of others were in this week’s Trends Journal. We are 100 percent funded by subscribers. Please support our mission.

Dear readers, you tell me how you can give permission for the U.S. and NATO to fire missiles into Russia, especially when the Russian President has clearly stated it means the U.S. and NATO are at war with Russia, and not be stupid and insane. That Blinken and Sullivan gave this permission in the face of Russia revising her war doctrine and permitting nuclear weapons to be used at a lower threshold indicates that the United States has a Secretary of State and National Security Advisor who are disconnected from reality.

All Americans, and perhaps the human population as a whole, might die as a result of these two utterly stupid men. Both of the fools represent the military/security complex and Israel. Neither is capable of thinking beyond the interest of the power and profit of the U.S. military/security complex and Israel’s interest. The military/security complex and Israel are their only constituencies. The rest of the world is sacrificed to these two interests.

The utter stupidity of Blinken and Sullivan is matched by the American whore media, a brothel that sells itself for money. Yesterday one of the principle whores, The Washington Post, published what is without doubt the most ignorant and stupid editorial in recorded history. The utter fools who wrote it said that it is not worth stopping the march to Armageddon if Trump makes a bad deal: “If Trump leaves Ukraine dismembered, America will look weak and dictators will be emboldened.”

Share

Examine this loaded language from the editors of the Washington Post and wonder how America can possibly survive. For the dumbshit Washington Post editors, it is more important to keep the war going on the road to Armageddon than to “look weak.”

What dictators will be emboldened? Putin, elected overwhelmingly for a quarter of a century by margins that not even Trump can achieve? For the dumbshit Washington Post editors, “dictators” are those who will not subject their sovereignty to Washington’s hegemony. Who are these “dictators”? They are the leaders of Russia, China, and Iran, the favorite manufactured enemies of the Israel Lobby and the American military/security complex.

Dear readers, yesterday I informed you that the new intermediate-range Russian missile—created only because President Trump in his first term voided the INF Treaty that President Reagan and President Gorbachev signed, a treaty that greatly reduced the chances of nuclear war—can be used to destroy in a very few minutes all U.S. and NATO military assets in Europe and the Middle East without the use of nuclear warheads.

Why did President Trump make this incomprehensible mistake that shows a dangerous lack of judgment? Because he was advised either by totally evil people or totally stupid people. How do we know it will be any different this time? This is what the Russian government wonders.

It is not enough that the Washington Post, whose stupidity is a danger to life on earth, regards understanding the Russian point of view as weakness, but also the Wall Street Journal joins in the push toward Armageddon.

Holman Jenkins, once a semi-intelligent person, has fed the war impulse with his acceptance on November 23 of the Biden regime’s propaganda that North Korean troops are fighting Ukrainians side-by-side with Russians.

There is no evidence that I can find that North Koreans are participating in the conflict. They are in Russia for demonstrative reasons to show that the Russian/North Korean defense pact is real. The purpose of the pact is to show the dumbshits in Washington that American pressure on China with regard to Taiwan can be countered with pressure on South Korea. The low grade morons who comprise the U.S. government are far too stupid to understand that the threat produced by their provocation of China is South Korea being overrun.

Look at America’s leaders and tremble. Senator Lindsey Graham, a man without a brain, is ready to go to war with Russia, China, and Iran. What does the fool think the consequences will be? American victory? Yes. That is how stupid he is.

The United States is incapable of going to war. All of the services are demoralized by the Biden regime’s DEI policies that promoted not on ability and merit, but on the basis of dark skin, female gender, and sexual perversion.

American weapon systems are so inferior to Russian ones that America vs. Russia is like Stone Age people fighting a modern army. The majority of America’s extraordinarily expensive F-35s are so defective that they are not operational. All America has is nuclear armed ICBMs. The question is whether Russia’s hypersonic missiles wipe them out before they can lift off.

What America and the world need is peace. Washington must repudiate the Zionist neoconservatives, give up its goal of world hegemony, accept the sovereignty of other countries, and stop sanctioning them for not submitting to Washington’s hegemony. If Washington doesn’t stop doing this, America will cease to exist. It is that simple.

Take a minute and think. Where are there any intelligent, moral people anywhere in the American Establishment? There are none. That is why a leader–Donald Trump–had to be brought in from the outside.

But what can he do? His movement is immature. Most of his supporters think the battle is over with his election. The American Establishment remains in place. It is institutionalized everywhere, state, local, and federal government, in the media, the corporations, Wall Street, the banking system, the universities and law schools, the public school systems, the judiciary, and in the generations of Americans taught in universities that America as presently constituted is an evil, exploitative, racist, sexist country, and that Trump is in the way of moral progress.

Where are the resources with which Trump can renew America? The journalism schools turn out Woke journalists. The education departments turn out Woke teachers. The law schools turn out Woke lawyers. We have an educational system that produces anti-Americans who are opposed to MAGA America.

Trump has already lost his nominee for attorney general. He might lose Bobby Kennedy and Tulsi Gabbard as well. His picks for Secretary of State, National Security Advisor, UN Ambassador, ambassador to Israel, and Middle East envoy are all Zionists allied with Israel, everyone of which is willing to go to war with Iran, whose government they define as evil.

Can Trump and his warmonger appointees accept Russia’s reincorporation of former territories of Russia back into Russia and zero possibility of any U.S./NATO missile sites on Russia’s borders, including the ones in Poland and Romania? If not, Trump has no prospect of ending the West’s participation in a conflict that the West initiated.

Will Putin accept more missiles fired into Russia while he awaits Trump’s presidency to see if Washington comes to its senses? That is Putin’s inclination given his humanitarian character, but the idiot West is working to shut down this restraint. The West is doubling down on its missile attacks on Russia. France has joined Washington and the U.K. in green-lighting the use of its long-range missiles against Russia. The French foreign minister said no constraints should be placed on the use of the missiles. The foolish French minister added that France is open to extending an invitation to Ukraine to join NATO. What is it, if not stupidity, to ignore Russia’s warning that enough is enough and to poison the situation in order to prevent the possibility that Trump can work to defuse the dangerous situation?

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that the French minister’s comments are “not support for Ukraine, but rather a death knell for Ukraine.” Indeed, the death knell is being sounded for the world if nuclear war breaks out.

Such a war is possible, because Western leaders are completely lost in their own propaganda. The French foreign minister thinks that Europe’s security is at stake in Ukraine. “Each time the Russian army progresses by one square kilometer, the threat gets one square kilometer closer to Europe.” How can the French foreign minister not know that Russia has no plans for an army sufficiently large to occupy Europe? How can he not know that Russia intended its intervention in Ukraine to be confined to the Russian area of Donbas and that it is the West that is widening the war? How can the French minister not know that Russia is focused on Russia, the BRICS, the silk road and wants no distractions in Europe. A person has to be completely stupid to see in the Donbas intervention the unfolding of a plan to conquer Europe.

The situation that confronts us is that Western leaders have been made stupidly ignorant by their own propaganda and are incapable of realizing the real threat they have created–nuclear war.The New York Timesreports that some U.S. and European officials have discussed providing Ukraine with nuclear weapons. Could anything more stupidly irresponsible be done? How is it possible that people this dangerously stupid can be Western leaders?

How is it possible not to be alarmed when the fate of humanity is in the hands of such utterly stupid people?

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author[s] and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Trends Journal.

Horus quotes Millennial Woes on racial attitudes in the West from the 1930s

/3 Comments/in /by

Horus quotes Millennial Woes:

“Eventually the ability of the Right to refute the allegations was out-paced by the Left’s ability to produce them and, in the cultural sphere, make them seem credible. This watershed occurred in the late 1990s, probably because around that time the Left’s stranglehold on culture became so overwhelming that it could make anything it wanted seem credible, and because enough of the old generations had died off that nobody could shoot down the Left’s more insane ways of thinking.

This was the moment when the Right had no choice but to “become” the Left. To use Britain as the example, this was the moment when the Conservative Party concluded it had to become a clone of its opposition, New Labour… From now on, the Right would compete with the Left to be more left-wing. On cultural issues, to be even weakly right-wing was now seen as unacceptable.”

[The entire quote is from Millennial Woes is here. along with a link to a show where he makes the point that ” in terms of racism, white supremacism and belief in eugenics, Britain in the 1930s was ‘just as bad’ as Germany in the 1930s.”]

Cartoons and a primal scream

/8 Comments/in /by