Michel Chossudovsky of GlobalResearch.ca makes a presentation to the 20 Years Journey in Criminalizing War: What Next? conference in Kuala Lumpur commemorating the 20th anniversary of the signing of the 2005 Kuala Lumpur Initiative to Criminalize War. He reflects on the lack of progress toward the vision of the criminalization of war and the unfortunate move toward the criminalization of justice that has instead taken place over the last two decades.
Video player not working? Use these links to watch it somewhere else!
WATCH ON: 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
or DOWNLOAD THE MP4
SHOW NOTES
20 Years Journey in Criminalizing War: What Next?
2005 Kuala Lumpur Initiative to Criminalize War
Interview 1973 – Former Malaysian Prime Minister on The Quest to Criminalize War
Interview 1879 – Michel Chossudovsky on the Hiroshima Nagasaki Dress Rehearsal
The justice system is criminalized because it is controlled by Judeo-Freemasonry, which is the diabolical matrix of Communism and many other evil “isms.”
Statist solutions to statist problems…trivial?
I agree with that astute observation.
Imagine whirled peas!
The future of humanity depends on which of the two fundamental political paradigms wins, the presently used one, worldwide, initiation of deadly threats, or the taboo one, violence only as defense against the first.
Political paradigm failure starts with two decisions: 1. A few should control all using deadly force routinely. 2. Dissenters don’t stop it.
Once rights are not put first, none are safe, creating political chaos. Allowing the initiation of deadly force cannot be mitigated with written restrictions, e.g., constitutions do not enforce themselves or restrict conduct. Political institutions created that control by deadly threat will not control themselves. This leaves the majority to control them. Does this sound logical?
Will permission trump rights, in practice, against the original goal to protect rights? Is this shown in practice? Of course. Is it often, or rarely? This political system ALWAYS destroys itself, e.g., all empires died. Then, it begins again, at first mostly free from controls, with no fundamental change, repeating over and over.
The Founding Fathers observed this, warned the citizens they would ultimately be victimized, and therefore should stop the vicious cycle.
Why not change the political paradigm?
There is only one alternative, the opposite of initiation of deadly force is force only in defense to stop initiation, otherwise, non-violence from the outset. This is voluntarism, which requires reason, rights, respect for all non-violent politics.
Why hasn’t it been tried? Those who advocate violence use violence to stop non-violent politics. They claim non-violence is chaos, but will allow no comparison. Why won’t they let us find out? Perhaps we should insist on finding out for ourselves if reason trumps force/fraud.
Volunteryist
“….political paradigms wins, the presently used one, worldwide, initiation of deadly threats, or the taboo one, violence only as defense against the firs…..”
As you point out those who use violence dominate those who don’t.
That is why when you say
“…but will allow no comparison. Why won’t they let us find out? …”
you are asking a silly question. They don’t NEED to let you find out because you choosing to follow a rule they do not follow gives them the whip hand over you.
“…Perhaps we should insist on finding out for ourselves if reason trumps force/fraud….”
How can you do that?
Unless you can control those who use violence and stop them using it (which would basically be you taking their place at the top of the hierarchy ) there is no way to try your experiment.
Even if you did do the experiment then the second you don’t have a monopoly on violence the experiment ends in failure
@Duck
Holding a single acorn in one’s hand without vision, hope, courage and faith makes it hard to imagine that a single acorn can become a thousand forests. Yet, this potential exists within the humble acorn.
Perhaps many acorns (after being planted and growing as oak trees for some time) will be chopped down by short sighted, violent and hubristic individuals that seek to dominate others for short term gain, but some of the many acorns planted and tended may become mighty elder oaks, kings of the forest, progenitors of countless kin, fountains of abundance, truth, inspiration and regeneration.
Those few elder oaks that survive (by the grace of God, or some fluke or by the relentless persistence and gumption of some peaceful forest defender) give birth to ten thousand more and so it goes forward.
The seed of Voluntaryism is like the acorn in that all expressions and attempts to plant it in communities and various situations may not work out well, but for those few that do, they can become exemplars that send out powerful regenerative ripple effects for our human family.
Thus, I appreciate when the seeds are planted and I seek to plant them myself in my own way. The act of planting the seed with that vision, in and of itself is worth it to me, even if an apocalyptic band of multi-national corporate/statist thugs were to bulldoze everything (with automated elon musk killer robots) in the end, it would still have been worth living in that way, with that vision, and giving my time on this earth towards those ends.
The choices we make here leave marks on the soul, we take those with us, and when we do, “failure”, or “losing” against the bad guys (while choosing an honorable path) is a mark that enriches and galvanizes, like a kintsugi pottery piece, scars highlighted in gold making it more beautiful than before.
G
“….. The seed of Voluntaryism is like the acorn …….”
That is a poor metaphor IMO since an acorn CAN ACTUALLY GROW INTO A TREE , there are while forests of them, where as there is not even been one voluntaryist society that sustains itself.
“….. The act of planting the seed with that vision, in and of itself is worth it to me, even if an apocalyptic band of multi-national corporate/statist thugs were to bulldoze everything ….”
That’s fine, I’m religious too.
I just don’t see why anyone would belong to a religion that glorifies ultimate defeat.
It’s some very fking dark “Thanatos” thinking that sees beauty in its own destruction. Humans are not crockery, we are a good deal more precious and a lot harder to glue together.
But anyway, have a pleasant day.
@Duck
Thank you for the metaphor critique, though there would have been a time before oak forests became prevalent, when that first acorn (so vulnerable yet so full of potential) went for it and rooted in despite over whelming odds, and became that acorn that unlocked the potential for a thousand forests.
But since you like the Bible, lets use Boswellia sacra seeds in the metaphor instead (they are now endangered due to exploitative human activities, so fits your argument about “ultimate defeat”, yet some people still have hope they can be preserved and regenerate). The trees can live over a thousand years if tended reverently, or they can live a mere 30 years if they are farmed industrially (as humans are in statist regimes).
I will stand by the pottery analogy however, as humans are both made of the stuff of the earth, and we can be shattered, yet we can also be mended and heal more beautifully than before the injury occurred.
I love how dramatic your prognostications and dastardly hypotheticals are, evoking a Disney Movie villain that erases half of the beings in the universe and summoning terms like “ultimate defeat”.. it is like you look at the world through glasses stained with death, blood and pain 24/7… like some kind of tarantino movie tinted goggles.
I am not interested in joining a club of bullies to feel like I have a safety blanket Duck, I am okay with taking risks in the pursuit of a goal I feel is in service of life.
Well, while you imagine worst case scenarios as inevitable, i`ll be planting those seeds and enjoying pleasant days, as I have had dramatic predictions thrown at me before, yet here I am, still standing, still planting seeds and enjoying every minute.
Take care man.
G
I truly think you be happier planting seeds, even if that effort turns out to be making timber that others clear cut.
I, on the other hand, was disappointed at my wasted effort when the damn dogs ate the fig bushes because they were for my kids to eat.
Different strokes and all that I guess but I’d rather my effort help my progeny rather than thieves who steal it. The horror of the modern world is that we may do anything we wish as long as it bears no fruit that actually threatens the status quo
The thing about the Acorn metaphor is that the acorn YOU describe is IN a forest environment- a place where trees can actually grow and thrive. Does it hold up if you’re planting that oak tree in the sands of a desert? Does it hold up when you plant it on a glacier?
I’d argue that “the acorn “ referenced here refers to a system of organizing human life THAT EXISTS NOWHERE and probably never existed outside the imagination of rich Enlightenment perverts.
Where has Voluntaryist “reason” ever trumped “force”???? There is much wrong with the current system but trying to improve it via ideas that have always failed is a recipe to…well, FAIL. If your OK with failing what is the point of doing except as a mastabatoy excercise for your own fruitless pleasure? Dont get me wrong- I enjoy plenty of fruitless pursuits for their own sake but making such a main focus of my life would be rather sad IMO.
But anyway you should check out the Hirnberger block debate in the links of the news letter, it’s pretty amusing (though fruitless)
Anna VonReitz at https://annavonreitz.com/ has been working on restoring Common Law for decades.
She is a retired Judge Up in Alaska. she has done most of the hard work and just needs educated people to join in.
Yes, the so called “Justice System” has been co-opted by criminals but it wasn’t always that way.
In the beginning, after throwing off the grips of British Rule, a Natural Law Justice system was established where all indited crimes were subject to review by 12 Jurors who could be considered Pears of the accused (no taking cases outside the area where the crime was committed). Anyway, it worked for real people that could be punished, but not for Corporations. It was for this reason that the British Accredited Registrar (BAR) Legal System was allowed to function along side the Natural Law Justice System. Corporations could be fined for doing really bad things, however the CEO could not be sent to jail without charges being filed in the Natural Law Court.
The problem we have is that the Natural Law Courts failed to be fund and where there should be two separate Judges we only see one. This Judge pretends to be both a Natural Law Judge and a Corporate Judge. They do a good job of covering this scam by placing corporate Cases on the Docket on different Dates than Criminal Cases.
Anyway, there is a lot to learn here and the lies and deceit of those who have learned to use this system makes it all the more difficult.
Heres that link to Anna Von Reitz
https://annavonreitz.com/
Re reading worth the effort.
The comments are interesting too…
From the show notes above:
Interview 1879 – Michel Chossudovsky on the Hiroshima Nagasaki Dress Rehearsal
Managers of the bank that manage wars for profits. Are they managing this, the cry for peace?
The Professor is a great Statesman and for me , more needs to be known about Malaysia. Could Lybia have been a part of this?
Imagine , a world of peace in trade. Trade for the necessities for existence. You got to wonder if there are more realities and universes and other times out there. The Head Doctors had a theory about the schizophrenic patient was of two minds of or in two different times at one time. How we can see the thing before us yet ignore the horrifying reality of it. That could explain why we do nothing to form a better outcome. Love is an almighty power and it has proven to me it can alter the outcomes of sin, sickness and death. I made the choice and make the choice as to the elements of my creation. The idea is change without violence to action. The Professor is describing the schizophrenic. It can be done, I have dreamed it. Imagine.
The waking life. Film by Richard Linklater
https://youtu.be/4hmSELTAKZQ
“The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.”
– James Madison
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“A state of war only serves as an excuse for domestic tyranny.”
-Alexander Solzhenitsyn
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth in defense of our great nation.”
– George W. Bush
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
There are two supporting groups comprising all sorts of institutions and organizations.
The group supporting the supply of war goods and services.
And the group supporting the creation of demand for war goods and services.
In the U.S. 40 major war corporations have annual sales of almost $600 billion.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-perpetual-war-six-questions/5822008
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
“Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear…in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency.
Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it.”
– General Douglas Macarthur, 1957
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
DEMONS AND REDEMPTION (song)
https://old.bitchute.com/video/KpjG7MeRUc9z/
Imagine whirled peas!
Hanky you a regular elocutionist.
Do your principles change with the hour, minute or second… Or a new pack a cigarettes? The Texas fairs coming soon this way …
Dear General,
I apologize for offending you with my puns. I am just marking it down to a difference in taste. Apparently treating this issue with a higher degree of solemnity is desired by some. I do admit to having an aversion to sacred cows that runs deep. And I can giggle at gallows humor, as well. However I don’t accept your personal attack on me as valid.
Being serious for a moment, your questioning of my adherence to any principles caused a bit of self-reflection. I am having trouble identifying where I am especially weak, or flip flopping on principles. Perhaps you can help me with that. I surely understand that my idea of humor can be offensive, but I still think I am on your side on many issues. Does that make me a moral weakling?
PS I don’t smoke. Do you?
Hanky
Thank you for participating . No offense at all. Your elocution was pure Midwest and typically Texan. It was a test. Results have varied.
To the end and to the solemnity and higher degrees, for some… free speech, I’m convinced that it is a principal requiring little more than more speech . There is no hate speech , for any adjectives’ application before speech has but one and only one. That would be ” Free” . Without a doubt it has to be a moral or correct principle. Universal. Glad you don’t smoke outside a ceremonial setting. As I do , like ” I pencil” I only smoke “I cigar” and only those from Cuba. It’s a principal. It takes thousands of connections to arrive at my ceremony needing a cigar. It defies all laws of physics and as tasty as it is implausible.
Let me ask you, are principles as complicated as a hand rolled cigar from a black balled land any different from principles that create illusions in 2 or 3 dimensional art?.. Art is as nourishing to the soul as food is nourishing to the stomach. I’m sure you ask yourself what principles make art so. Beauty? Morality ? You are helping me as you help your self.
Must be philosophical thursday. Think I’ll have a ceremony for the return of the sun after three days of rain and dark overcast skies.
It is sunny, here in Dallas,Texas. May I ask where you are, with the dark skies? Although I used to be a total hippie, I don’t smoke anything. I stopped all of that in 1974. I also don’t drink alcohol. Or eat meat. Or even dairy, fish, or eggs… Also my sense of humor is not Texan, as my roots are elsewhere.
Art? It seems you have seen some of my stuff. Are you an artist, too? Art is a slippery word; it means really different things to different people. I am old school, and rank beauty at the top of the list of definitive priorities. But beauty, that is another word, even harder to pin down. That doesn’t mean that it is unimportant. The same goes for words like love, hope, etc. They actually are very important, just hard to nail down, and impossible to get widespread agreement on. (I’ll let you write the fat book on that topic).
Art vs sales and other propaganda. It reminds me of the distinction between science and technology. The science is our endeavor to expose truth in the physical world. It is somewhat of a beneficial natural longing. It is very laudable when adhering to the democratic pure principles of the scientific method, and strict objectivity. Science pushes frontiers of novelty. It brings ecstasy to the scientist and those who comprehend its breakthroughs and revelations. Technology, on the other hand, is the leveraging of the science, often creating more problems, rather than progress. Technology conflates itself with the obvious virtues of real science. This is largely sales and propaganda driven. It pushes mindless repetition and conformity, not novelty and innovation, outside of ways to speed up and leverage more conformity and repetition.
Similarly art, when adhering to the principles of discovering and creating beauty (impossible to universally define), refines our humanity and expands our consciousness. It, again,thrives on novelty and curiosity. Commercial, and other propagandistic art, hijack and leverage art’s laudable reputation, while making us more base and coarse and limited. It thrives on repetition and brainwashing. Its purpose is manipulative, rather than educational and inspirational. But increasingly, in my lifetime, people are taught that the value of art is in its propagandistic persuasiveness. This has to do with their priorities being shifted away from beauty to political and moralistic ends, and financial rewards, as well. (These are ego problems, another book for you to write). With the illusory power of video, and now AI, being included in the arts as well as the propaganda sphere, the technology currently has the upper hand over art and the people’s souls.
Hanky
Wish I had more time to massage this discussion on art. You said a few things only artists would know.
The last paragraph : you got the jist out of order but it dings the word center in my brain. [ Creating, then discovering beauty… Refines our humanity and expands our conciseness. ]
The real kicker is the whole framework of Art is brought to life
[ When Adhering To The Principles ]
That’s why I have a burning desire to create a replica of Picasso’s Guernica. I would call It. Gazica. It’s damn well past time more visual artists saturate this county with activist art. But , I’m old and in the way and in Indian county corner of Oklahoma. 20 miles from Arkansas, 35 miles from Kansas and Missouri World events have bull dozed them a couple a generations back but most are ambivalent to the World goings on. Art is part of all the different Nations around here but the U.S. has killed it in their culture. It’s dark and old and dead.
Just need to think something up. Gazica on every box car from here to Nebraska. Yeah.
Not my cup of tea.
Good luck!
Not your cup of tea?
Hanky,
Maybe it was AI working for Google.
Pablo Picasso, Guernica mural. Seem it’s misspelled up above.
How about this. Up and comer. He is resonating.
Is it the resonating or the clash with principles of the tea leaves in the cup of life?
Tylenol https://search.app/dnbMt
This is a Gazaca on a hundred car train bound for New Orleans. This resonance of art as life is on 1,000,000 + hand held devices . A million views should spark something more than a cup a tea.
On the subject of principles, even my personal principles, that is interesting.
On reflection, I have flip-flopped on something that I recall, and that was recently. I doubt that this rises to the level of principle, but I had sworn off ever posting on Facebook a few years ago. I broke that policy when Charlie Kirk died. I entered the fray (temporarily). Not left or right, but admonishing my combating friends to take on my perspective, that we are being played when we cling to and parrot talking points and echo chambers. It is very similar to James’ posts on this subject, which make so much sense to me.
On further reflection, your insult of me not keeping to any principle, just because I am a performer and a humorist, is contradicted by the following facts. I decided to see what my natural mind and body had to offer, over 50 years ago, quitting all drugs, legal or not. No wavering has occurred. I have remained with my only wife for the same amount of time. I have held the line against pressure to vaccinate my three kids. I stopped eating meat around the same time. Fifteen years later, I became 100% vegan, now 36 years, no wavering. When I learned about 9/11, in 2006, I immediately became an activist, even destroying my lucrative Public Art career. When Coronavirus lockdowns hit our town, I immediately called a meeting of activists to defy those rules. They gingerly overcame their fears and crowded into a stuffy room.(None of us consequently suffered the advertised infections). I called everyone to come to the monthly Harmonica club meeting. In this case, only my wife and I braved the propaganda, and showed up. When Q was becoming the rage with my activist friends, I was adamant that this was an obvious hoax. When they formed a large group, focusing on Trump as hero, I declined, and have been ostracized. When they forget who the proud ‘Father of Warp Speed’ and the vaccines is, I always reminded them of their hypocrisy. I don’t mind standing alone, just me and my principles.
PS Not to be too boring, but now that you got me recalling times I have stood up for principle, I recall these other instances.
When the local library announced Drag Queen Story Hour, I told my activist friends, but I was the only one who showed up to oppose these scores of fools (mostly naive young moms with toddlers).
When COVID hit, I wrote 40 songs, ridiculing the whole thing. I also performed at an anti GMO meeting and at the State Capitol on the anniversary of the Waco massacre. On the anniversary of the Barry Jennings murder, I and only one other fellow, made a protest scene at the local downtown newspaper headquarters; everyone else chickened out.
The subject was principles, which we have not really defined. Even so, championing truth and being honest, is a big thing for me. It really is a guiding principle, that hasn’t changed that much since I was a teenager, and became more clear and strong in 2006, when I had a brief conversation with William Rodriguez of Twin Towers fame.
Michel mentioned about the Ukranian government being Neo-Nazis….any good literature/evidence to back that up (a work colleague is asking me for proof)? Cheers for any help.
Johnny
“Everyone” knows that Nazi states are ALWAYS :
1) headed by a Jew, and his musical penis
2) backed by the Jewish state
3) prior to the Russian invasion gets colonized by Jewish people who want to settle there and buy up the infrastructure like it’s Palestine in the 1920s
What more proof do you need?
😉 Totally Nazi….lol.
It’s possible the chap was talking about the milita types who (somehow….??) are the successors to the guys who (70 years ago) sided with the Nazis because they didn’t like getting starved and murdered by (Jewish ) Bolsheviks- though why our greatest ally, the Jewish state chooses to Aid Nazis with money and supplies is also a weeeee bit uncertain. But I’m sure their really Nazis….because Nazis love taking gifts from Jews…..
Duck!
The IDENTITY POLITICS you push are lame. It reminds me of rhetoric coming from BLM and trans fanatics. The need to simplify issues is real, but it can easily be overdone and misapplied.
Johnny Newlands asked for help with proof that he could use in a discussion about Ukraine for his work colleagues. I don’t think you provided him with that. If he repeats your answer, he will only prove how idiotic and bereft of detail some positions are.
PS I am not a Zionist fanatic. I think that the trigger in Israel, this time around, was a false flag. I think Israel’s forces had something to do with 9/11. But I am even more sure that Rumsfeld and Cheney had even more to do with it. So, the Zionists (not the Jooz) are involved with some mendacious messes, but it is not that clear that they are the primary source of war and misdirection for everything. They are actually the junior partner in many ways.
Perhaps you thought you were displaying your superior intellect and depth of knowledge with your ‘proof’ of Ukrainian Nazism. But it just displayed your extreme bias and need to vent those ideas, despite being quite irrelevant to the original question you replied to.
Hankey
Wait…..you think Israel will support a Nazi state???? And that a Nazi state is run by a Jew?????
Sorry if the humor flew over your head, if you actually think Ukraine is a Nazi state I should probably avoid humor and sarcasm when typing to you.
“….The IDENTITY POLITICS you push are lame. It reminds me of rhetoric coming from BLM and trans fanatics…..”
Uhhhh…..JEWS and NAZIs both have mutually exclusive identity politics. How is pointing that out pushing ID politics?
If I say “gay dudes like ti have sex with men” or “Jews dont like Nazis” am I pushing sodomy or Judaism or naziism???? Or stay sing a fact ?
As to “the jooos” , yeah, Jews have an identity and LIKE ALL PEOPLE (except the most retarded) they will push what is good for them and fight over politics later- left wing Jews and right wing Jews both have pretty much the same agenda of doing what’s good for Jews like themselves- and that’s perfectly normal and sensible on their part.
While you may be one of those people whi dont have a strong group identity you will find that thise who DO have such an identity will generally pee all over your interests and do what’s good for them.
I am sorry for you if dont see that, not very sorry since I don’t know you personally ,but a little. It’s kinda hard to act in the world effectively when you have blinders on as to what’s actually happening and I’m sure it’s frustrating
Hankey
There are group interests, and Jews are quite good at taking care of those across ideological barriers.
Here, if you want a pretty good historical over view “Culture of Critique “ by Kevin Macdonald is pure historical data….you don’t even need to read his Evolutionary Psychology stuff in the other books of his series.
I even linked the Wikipedia article and you can read the famous (Jewish) names complaining about him but no one can refute historical facts stated in Culture Of Critique
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture_of_Critique_series
I think your original sarcasm went over my head.
If I responded, based on that misinterpretation, I apologize.
But you have been posting a lot of stuff lately that seemed vitriolically anti-Jew.
Was that all sarcasm, too?
If not, maybe my accusation of having strong ‘identity politics’ needs to be addressed squarely.
Hankey
No worries- I guess it’s my fault for not writing better, TBH if I don’t write clearly thats on me.
“….But you have been posting a lot of stuff lately that seemed vitriolically anti-Jew…”
Well, the Jews ARE a big power bloc are they not? They are in no way the only power bloc but you do tend to find one at the bottom of most stuff.
They are not always the masters, sometimes they are the servants, but their always there. They are not all powerful but they DO have a lot of clout.
They have also been pretty open about their desires most of the time….from the social engineering Jews who desired that the west would become safer for them by the destruction of ethnic homogeneity, the ones who opened up immigration back in the day and the ones who run “Catholic “ charities to import more non compatible folks from the 3rd world….the ones who find and push trans and gay stuff (see “trans industrial complex, Scott Howard) or the ones who run left wing politics and the ones who run much of right wing politics.
Let’s not forget what ethnic group kept Palestinian horrors off the media before the net, either.
So you don’t need to be “anti-Jew” to say what I say , because the Jews just pop up whenever you look into conspiracy or nasty politics or gross social movements….honestly those Jews are probably worse then the money Jews …..AND much as they all fight and argue you can’t expect a population of Jews who are essentially cousins genetically (not even kidding) to care about non Jews as much as their own welfare.
So , like I said you cant hate Jews for jewing just as you cant hate blacks for doing what’s good for blacks or Hispanics to act in a way thats good for them…..but if you don’t take GROUP INTERESTS into account as a factor you really can’t understand what’s happening and history makes no sense.
Try these books
Culture of critique, Macdonald
Degenerate moderns , EM Jones
Jewish history, Jewish religion, shahak (one of the few Jews who cared more about ideas then blood)
If you have the money and time you could even tackle EM Jones “Jewish revolutionary spirit “ (the contents are organized by time so you can skip to modern times for political stuff)
Duck,
So, you are not extremely biased, prejudiced, and in the thrall of a common internet rabbit hole? You could have fooled me.
You don’t need to apologize to me for using misunderstood sarcasm; I, of all people, am often guilty of that. It is no big deal.
In this context, the thing that gets me is not that. I just happen to think that you are relying too heavily on logical fallacies to make your points. That may just be my personal idiosyncrasy. But if I am right, that indicates to me that your confirmation bias is too strong. Somewhat related, is the way you just had to gratuitously tell us about all the bad Jew stuff, even though the original question you replied to was not directly about that. In your mind it really was about that, but everyone else is too stupid to see the patterns that you think override everything. I still maintain that you are engaging in blatant identity politics, which is very bad by my definition. Maybe you don’t think it is so bad. I think it is a primary seed of the divide and conquer agenda, which is our greatest danger.
As you may recall, I also see the Zionists as complicit in some of our worst double crosses and betrayals, yet I still object to your take on it. You even seem to agree, at some superficial level, that sometimes they are the manipulated, and sometimes vice-verse. If you really believe that, then our disagreement could boil down to my agnosticism on this subject, versus your certainty that you have identified the heart of darkness. What I mean by that is this. I see it as looking down into a spiral of wrestling powers, going through time, where events seem controlled by one group, then sometimes by the other. The spiral goes long and deep, and I can’t see the absolute origin of it. You think that you have found it. I am not convinced. I have already looked into it deeper than you may have guessed. So, I am not going to view any more EM Jones stuff, or buy books on the subject. I don’t think that I can change your mind, or have mine changed, the way we are going. My beef is with heavy reliance on sketchy logical constructs.
I know almost nothing from direct experience, yet it is what all that I really trust.
Hankey
“….I still maintain that you are engaging in blatant identity politics, which is very bad by my definition…..”
“Bad” in what way?
If other people do ID pol why is it bad to do so yourself? That even meets the (silly) Non Aggression Principle in that it’s defensive.
As to “bias” Damn RIGHT I am biased against people that wish me harm, Jewish and otherwise.
But You are engaging in a fallacy or two of your own – first you are making the assumption that REPORTING A FACT is the same as DOING what you report.
So…..if you would like to tell a MASSIVE lie and say something like “Jews dont engage in ethnic politics” go ahead and do so.
If you would like you could tell another Massive LIE like “Jews dont punch massively above their weight in power politics “
But your biggest LIE is already told – that you have “looked into” this issue.
The historical facts are all pretty clear and laid out and no in dispute- EM Jones literally quotes from Jewish writers and historians for much of his work.
Culture of critique, Macdonald
Degenerate moderns , EM Jones
Jewish history, Jewish religion, shahak (one of the few Jews who cared more about ideas then blood)
WELL WORTH THE MONEY is EM Jones “Jewish revolutionary spirit “ which is fully sourced and full of Jewish writers saying exactly what they did or thought and it’s VERY COMPREHENSIVE
Duck,
I repeat, identity politics is a prime tool for those who wish to control things through divide and conquer schemes. It appeals to base and reflexive emotions, often arising in hypocritical actions and thoughts. I associate it with ‘reverse segregation, slavery reparations, affirmative action, gender pronouns, taking away rights from ‘whites’ for sins of the ancestors, destroying European cultures with two tier laws, holidays for every kind of oxymoronic pride, etc., etc.
‘Bad’ is subjective, so arguing about that would be a bottomless can of worms. I knew, pretty quickly, that I wasn’t going to change your position, and vice verse. Maybe some fellow commenters were entertained or learned something if they followed this discussion. I have to get back to my life now; thanks for the debate.
Hankey
I do NOT disagree that ID Pol are
“….prime tool for those who wish to control things through divide and conquer schemes. It appeals to base and reflexive emotions, often arising in hypocritical actions and thoughts….”
I DO however argue that
A) They are the NORMAL OPERATING PROCEDURE for most groups, tiday and in the past
B) The reason this is the case is because THEY WORK WELL and generally give benefit the members of a group that uses them
C) Those who practice them will win in any conflict vs those who try to compete as individuals
Do you disagree with any of those claims? Or do you just not LIKE ID Pol?
I don’t like them either and would prefer not to have to deal with them practiced against me.
My preference does not alter reality.
I further claim that
A) Jews (spec. Ashkanazi Jews ) have been major (not the only) players in all 20th century political and social movements
B) that Jews are practicing ID Politics because ,even if said movements are ideologically opposed , they tend to work to the benefit the group in general.
That’s not a big leap into conspiracy eiether- for example did whites in the Jim Crow south all agree on every political question? NO, but did they tend to act in ways that benefited white people over blacks? YES.
So I hate to say it but you appear to be operating under the illusion that you live in a system where ideas matter more then group identity….that stopped being true a good ways back IF itbwas ever true.
Consider that America was founded by people who thought living in the same country as Catholics and Germans was going to be difficult
Again-
Kevin Macdonalds book “culture of Critique “
is a literal history book showing show Jewish interests shaped every movement of the 20th century
Israel Shahak (a Jew whi was against ID Politics) wrote “Jewish History , Jewish religion “ about this.
And the magnum opus is still “The Jewish revolutionary spirit “ by EM Jones
All those books are literal HISTORY of events that actually happened. If you read them history will make a lot more sense