Reflections on Activism and Protest.
Today I experienced the great joy of going to class on a modern college campus and not only learning from my professor that Hate Speech wasn't the same thing as free speech and thus not protected by the 1st amendment, but also I got to sit through twenty minutes of "March For Our Lives" speeches.
Immediately I was transported to an almost cult-like ritual, the were tears in the classroom as we watched the camera pan as a bald-hispanic woman by the name of "Emma Gonzales" I believe stared silently at a crowd of people, countless placards lifted above the crowd with a sundry hashtags and slogans, perhaps the most disturbing being pictures of Ms. Gonzales herself, with the stereotypical "Hope" design as though she were the Dear Leader of some third world country.
Now while others seemed more brought to tears by the stereotypical mantras of "Enough" and "Common Sense Gun Control" and the professor told us to admire their bravery, I was more amazed by how slick a production the whole thing was. Honestly if you were an anti-gun politician, "March For Our Lives" was perhaps the most perfectly slick response to a mass shooting in human history; you had a brave teen who suddenly without prompting interviews his classmates about their views on gun control during a shooting (or he did it after the shooting, or he immediately rode on his bike to get to the shooting to interview people about gun control, the story's been all over the place), you had these teens surprisingly become a plucky cast of characters for the news, frequently appearing on CNN where they show off their #Wokeness by talking about how much money the NRA donated to certain politicians, then you have extra survivors visit a townhall where they had a 2 minute hate on guns, then finally--and most shocking of all--these plucky teens somehow had the resources to finance a major rally in Washington DC, with speakers and television screens, and sister-rallies all across the country!
Of course the question is never raised as to how a bunch of teens got the resources to organize a rally, where the money and the placards and banners and permits came from, almost no attention is given to the caste of "professional activists" that exist to serve the whims of the political establishment.
The fact is there hasn't been a major grassroots protest in America since maybe Occupy Wall Street--or rather, there hasn't been a major grassroots protest that's affected anything since OWS, because for all its faults at least OWS changed political discourse for a while. The Pro-Life movement attracts massive crowds to its rallies, but it goes essentially ignored by the political establishment and media, the Democrats have openly admitted to starting a riot in Chicago that injured numerous police and civilians all to disrupt a Trump Rally as well as essentially dressing up the mentally ill and homeless to be disruptive of their political opponents, a tactic they term "bird dogging" I believe and the media ignores this insane kind of Mafia Politics.
Activism, especially on the Right in modern Western Nations, is utterly useless. Not only has the establishment perfected the art of quashing protests it dislikes, they've also mastered the ability to spearhead marches and protests for causes they do support. "March For Our Lives" was elevated to its current position because there's nothing more tantalizing to the Global Political Establishment--and it is indeed a global problem, as that's the only thing that can explain the sheer arrogance of European Union ministers lambasting American Tax Policy as "unfair" and former President Obama trying to threaten Brits to stay in the Union.
Right Wing Protest is useless, because the Western Establishment is not Right Wing and in fact hostile to Right Wing interests. Right Wing Protesters can fill out all the correct forms and be as peaceful as possible, but can still expect the police to violently crack down on them whilst turning a blind eye to leftist violence, because the modern Left is nothing less than an arm of establishment politics. If The Right is violent, the police will break them up instantly, if it's peaceful, then Antifa will be there to make violent threats and throw rocks in order to trigger violence so the police can break up the protest, if neither of those things happen, the police will still break up the protest because "the risk of violence is too high, this is a state of emergency", and if that doesn't happen, one can expect the protest to have no coverage unless it's profoundly negative and built on lies more than anything.
Protests then, as the great Jacobite Magazine has explained before, are nothing less than victory parades for establishment politics. The cabal of professional activists are like minutemen of old, ready to--at a moments notice--block a street here or stoke a riot there. Protests are not a challenge to established political power, but rather a buff to it, an enhancement to it, the lie that it ever "changes" things is simply told so a few people do the professional's jobs for free.
Meanwhile in countries where the Right is in ascendance, we see the opposite of The West. Poland can have a rally to celebrate independence that The West disgustingly calls a "Nazi Rally" and when thugs break up a pride parade, it's with the police conveniently turning around and winking at the right.
Change can only ever come about through violent revolution wherein a minority party monopolizes politics via force, or through a peaceful coup of the establishment machine, more than mere populism but an active concerted network to seize the apparatus of power and use it for one's own ends.
Thus the objective of The Right shouldn't be "protests", political activism is entirely useless without power to back it up, what the Right needs is a concerted effort to not only grasp institutional power, but to wield it offensively. The Right should mimic the left in being actively discriminatory in every field it enters, because while the old saying that "any institution which is not openly conservative inevitably becomes liberal" is true, there's no reason it cannot be inverted. Conservative teachers should actively attempt to fail liberal students who express liberal ideas just as the left does to the right, wherever possible, classrooms should become indoctrination centers where the worst excesses of the left are put onto prominent display, Conservative Judges should not try to rule "fairly" but to rule Conservatively, the law should be abused in conservative states as much as possible towards partisanship--after all, California is currently attempting to prosecute a man for what amounts to hate speech, the left does not care about the law when it doesn't suit them.
Thus in all things the Right must be conspiratorial and discriminatory, as borrowing The Left's own tactics is the greatest weapon against The Left. The media will under no circumstances side with The Right Wing, and I'm being entirely literal here: the media always sides Left. The Weather Underground after multiple attempts to murder people and a bombing campaign got off scott-fucking-free and more than that, the brains behind them was given a glowing Times article. By borrowing the Left's tactics, The Right renders them irradiated to the Left, the media cannot bitch about masked goons shoving a speaker off the stage if it keeps writing "Antifa seeks peace through violence" pieces. Either the tactic goes out the window as "unacceptable" (because the right is doing it) or the media stays mum and Leftists get a taste of their own medicine.
But The Right should never protest, protesting is only something that should be done when your side actually has power, it isn't an offensive tactic but rather an internal cleansing, an attempt to saturate establishment ideas on all levels of society. The Right needs to trade the placard in for a white collared shirt, ambition, and a willingness to not be fair but to be right.
Posted Mar 28, 2018, 8:28 PM UTC · edited
Beg to differ. No one is siding with commies or even socialists. Besides, most commies and socialists don't want gun control and see this all as a liberal charade.
One must be extremely retarded to believe the media always sides left
I think people confuse liberals with left, because of the connotations the word has in the US.
Or when you're a fascist like op is
It's a charade all right. We like to call it "politics."
Look at the CNN, which went into mental gymnastics to portray Antifa as "seeking peace through violence".
Look at it again when it wonders aloud why Putin isn't celebrating the soviet takeover of Russia
Here's the simple fact of the matter, leftists will generally complain that the media isn't on "their side", but this almost always manifests in some referral to the size of FOX's audience (ignoring that it exists as essentially the only network with tangentially conservative views whilst every other network skews left) while essentially complaining that the media isn't talking about the Labor Theory of Value constantly.
The fact is that the media will do everything it can to protect anything perceived as "Left Wing", to the point of eventually resorting to caveman speak with "Fascism bad, Communism Good-ish.
The only "opposition" to leftism in the media is that the perception of "communism = the soviet union", and even then they still try to whitewash the Soviet Union's reputation, they are not actually opposed to communism, rather they'd give a vague "Oh well, it's a great idea on paper but not really feasible" kind of thing, more a waiting for the revolution to happen rather than actively stoking the flames of revolution.
The media is left, in no world would the Weather Underground be given what is essentially a love note in Time unless it were left.
I mean, that's literally what it is though. Fascists don't respond to debate.
... because they unironically think he's a commie because they're liberals.
Again the explicit goals behind them accurately make them that way. And they're still hedging on communism.
No it's not. It's a temper tantrum. "Everyone who doesn't agree with me is a fascist, therefore I get to punch everyone until everyone agrees with me."
Pick one.
Fascists literally ask for debate all the time, if only to highlight how the left is incapable of it.
...Please, explain to me how the line:
Which implies the Soviets were a "popular uprising" and insinuates Putin has his own "Empire" is somehow a liberal wondering: "Why doesn't this communist celebrate communist day."
So you'll say the media calls communism a good thing but still try to insinuate it isn't left?
That isn't the same as responding to debate. They just spout their horrific rhetoric and never change their minds. That's my point. Responding and debating are different things.
It's an op-ed. That's his opinion. Now I apologize as I didn't read the article as I didn't have time, but even he just says "for starters"
No. I'm saying they understand why communism would be a good thing, but are still liberals and so go ehhhh it's only goodish also it killed millions.
I think most can confirm this. An overwhelming amount of mainstream media leans leftward.
Not our fault that the liberals/democrats steal "Socialist" attire to gain support, many political parties have done that in the past.
They do that all the time, trick is to ask them to define Socialism, and they'll vomit about how it's when the democratic party's gobmint do dah stuff.