I am kinda curious how many rip offs of 1984 this shit is going to inspire. Could just call it 2048 for maximum unoriginality.
Would be kind of interesting though to see the same idea done just with modern technology where everyones phone is required by law to be on them at all times to be GPS tracked with the mic always on, facial recognition surveilance cameras everywhere leaving no blind spots anywhere, everyone is expected to police everyone else so they can get some social credit points and if your score is low anyone can do anything to you and its perfectly legal, really low and its encouraged
Outlaw originally meant you were outside the protection of the law. So you're an outlaw, I can fuck you up and the state/local power will do nothing about it. As it is, with the development of protected classes and the underfunding of police and social services, we effectively already have that being the case.
Poor white girl in Rotherham, you might as well be an outlaw because you can be pimped, raped, murdered and chopped up into kebab meat with near impunity for decades.
I think we might end up in something akin to a blend of a politically correct theocracy. Sure, we can probably prevent it from becoming written law at the federal level thanks to our constitution but all of the privately owned platforms brainwashing the masses have too much money on the line and will try to make themselves more and more compliant to the CCP in order to maintain access to foreign users. Trump might get another term but what about after that? He was a fluke who got in as a FU to the establishment but there's likely not going to be a second version of him ready to pick up where he left off. It's only a matter of time before the radical progressives get businesses to require some form of mark signifying ideological submission to their doctrine in order to be a customer and they're gonna use the private business protections to say they can serve and not serve who they want. It's only a matter of time until we get our own social credit system straight out of Black Mirror. It might be delayed by war and such but it is eventually inevitable as the value of civil discussion is sacrificed in favor of online shouting matches. Good thing the Bible predicted all of this mess.
More like, economy being fucked, people reliant on welfare but the government making having the vaccine a requirement to get benefits.
Seriously, look up Australia. It's happening there already. And the thing about common law system is where precedents do not exist in a country they will look to another country with a common law system for guidance.
It's hard to say with any certainty when this started. It certainly began long before this year, but the PATRIOT act passing was definitely the death knell for any hopes of counteracting it.
As international tensions with China increase and the American left pushes for its own cultural revolution, Frank Dikotter's trilogy of books on Mao's reign of terror is essential reading.
Frank Dikotter’s People’s Trilogy is a series of books describing the horrors inflicted on everyday Chinese men, women, and children by the Chinese Communist Party during the reign of Mao Zedong. Taken together or individually, the information within the pages is as illuminating as it is sobering. While the dictatorial regimes of Adolf Hilter, and to a lesser extent Joseph Stalin, are acknowledged, as are many lessons gleaned from their history, the realities of Maoist rule are not as well-known and we often fail to learn from the experiences of those who suffered in its wake.
From the day he ascended the Tiananmen Gate in 1949 to proclaim the founding of the People’s Republic of China to the fall of 1976 when his reign of terror ended, the death toll left in Mao’s wake is utterly incomprehensible: 40 to 80 million. That is the equivalent to at least the entire current population of California, and potentially the entire populations of New York and Florida as well.
It is hard to digest such numbers, but Dikotter’s masterful narrative weaves government archives with an unflinching view of the personal suffering on display. It is not an easy read. But it is a necessary one, given America’s increasingly tense relationship with China.
When 20th-century Chinese history is discussed and analyzed, the Great Famine and the Cultural Revolution are almost uniformly treated as the unquestioned tragedies that they are. The years that preceded these twin pillars of evil, however, the time from the enshrinement of Communist Party rule and its first eight years in power, are glossed over as an era of ups-and-downs—the imperfect genesis of a new government trying to find its footing.
Dikotter’s research and prose eviscerates this idea. The People’s Republic did not have an innocent beginning. Violence and inhumanity were and are the chief tenets of the communist revolution, from the start to the present.
Dikotter’s first book in the trilogy, “The Tragedy of Liberation,” begins during the throes of the Chinese Civil War. Communist troops besieged the city of Changchun, starving to death an estimated 160,000 civilians. Zhang Zhenglong, a lieutenant in the People’s Liberation Army, summarized the experience this way: “Changchun was like Hiroshima. The causalities were about the same. Hiroshima took nine seconds; Changchun took five months.”
Tragedy lays out the 50 or so additional Changchuns that followed. The next two books, “Mao’s Great Famine ” and “The Cultural Revolution,” chronicle 100 more Changchuns to come. The study of 20th-century Chinese history is seemingly a never-ending swim downward, descending lower, and lower into the depths of human depravity.
One can ask how a series of historical books about Chinese Communist autocracy can be meaningful to everyday Americans. The People’s Republic of China is the current greatest threat to humanity, as it seeks to export its destructive Orwellian worldview as an alternative to the Western world.
By unmasking Beijing’s totalitarianism, one can better understand the scope of malfeasance inherent in PRC ideology. By reading the personal experiences suffered by those under the Maoist regime, one respects and honors the victims. Perhaps the most urgent of all, by reading how revolutionary zeal began to foment and then exploded into an orgy of violence, one can recognize revolutionary fringes within their own country — and combat the tactics they employ.
One of the great takeaways from “Tragedy is just how similar some of the specifics on the ground in China during the early days of the regime look to the current American landscape. The Cultural Revolution that followed some years later did not happen in a vacuum. It was merely an evolution from what had transpired beforehand.
Take, as an example, some excerpts from the book and see how they compare to what we are experiencing in our day and time:
“Mao achieved power by promising every disaffected group what they wanted most.”
“Everyone is learning the right answers, the right ideas, and the right slogans.”
“Some people were transformed into revolutionary zealots, ready to break the bonds of family and friendship for the cause. Drawn to an ideology that promised liberation, they relished becoming the champions of the exploited, forging a better world full of hope and light.”
“Most of the antiques had already been burned or consigned to the scrap heap, recycled as so many relics of an exploitative past. As an investigation carried out by the party revealed, ‘Everywhere old books that were considered to contain feudal ideas were thrown away or used as old paper.’”
“People lived harmoniously under the same sky in the same village for many years. Why did they act like this now? Why did they hate each other and torture each other like that? Was that what the Communist revolution was all about?”
“During the persecution, friend had been made to betray friend; family members had been forced to denounce each other. The traditional warm hospitality of the Chinese, therefore, disappeared. We learned that the more friends we had, the more insecure our position. We began to know the fear of being isolated from our own group and of standing helplessly alone before the power of the State.”
“Neighbors and friends denounced each other, often in the hope of reward, as people scrambled to prove their allegiance to the new regime.”
We all know what happened next in China. Thankfully, we can take a different path here in America. We need not give away the sacred principles of individual rights and the rule of law to the dictates of collectivization and revolutionary politics. But it will take courage to prevent it.
We will need courage to read from texts that might make us uncomfortable, courage to learn from those who have gone before, and courage to stand up for ideals that might make us unpopular in the elite circles of our nation. Dikotter’s masterful trilogy provides all Americans the opportunity to make these choices a part and parcel to citizenship. We would be remiss if we didn’t take advantage of it.
We'll have Anarcho-Tyranny from The Left. Basically that means criminals get set free or ignored while citizens defending themselves are attacked by the state. The West pioneered this and China's copying it in Hong Kong:
On the Right there will be Fake Opposition just as there has been for the past 60 or so years. Conservatives never conserve anything. Conservatives are always just Progressives were 20 years ago. Both the anti-white Anarcho-Tyrants on the Left and the Fake Opposition on the right will be dominated by two different factions of the "Culture of Critique" (Cue Syaoran Li kvetching).
We'll have Anarcho-Tyranny from The Left. Basically that means criminals get set free or ignored while citizens defending themselves are attacked by the state. The West pioneered this and China's copying it in Hong Kong:
On the Right there will be Fake Opposition just as there has been for the past 60 or so years. Conservatives never conserve anything. Conservatives are always just Progressives were 20 years ago. Both the anti-white Anarcho-Tyrants on the Left and the Fake Opposition on the right will be dominated by two different factions of the "Culture of Critique" (Cue Syaoran Li kvetching).
What? All the examples above are Jews. 90% chance a "self-hating white male" will be a Jew. 60% chance a "self-hating white female" will be a Jew. Those who aren't were taught Jews, funded by Jews, and surrounded by Jews (See: Margaret Meade and Morris Dees). The GOP Establishment that start wars, import H1B immigrants, ship jobs to China, and constantly cave to the Left on immigration and race will tend to be Jews too. The Judeo-Left and Judeo-Right just two different factions of the same tribe. The goyim know.
What? All the examples above are Jews. 90% chance a "self-hating white male" will be a Jew. 60% chance a "self-hating white female" will be a Jew. Those who aren't were taught Jews, funded by Jews, and surrounded by Jews (See: Margaret Meade and Morris Dees). The GOP Establishment that start wars, import H1B immigrants, ship jobs to China, and constantly cave to the Left on immigration and race will tend to be Jews too. The Judeo-Left and Judeo-Right just two different factions of the same tribe. The goyim know.
I actually hate Jews and Zionists, but I don't blame them for literally everything either. They're hook-nosed Yahweh worshipers and bankers, not cartoon supervillains.
I actually hate Jews and Zionists, but I don't blame them for literally everything either. They're hook-nosed Yahweh worshipers and bankers, not cartoon supervillains.
I don't blame them for everything. I just blame them for playing the crucial role in causing 90% of The West's problems. That's a factual statement, is it not? Do you dispute the idea that their funding, research, lobbying, and media coverage has given us political correctness, Open Borders, anti-whiteness, and Radical Feminism?
I don't blame them for everything. I just blame them for playing the crucial role in causing 90% of The West's problems. That's a factual statement, is it not? Do you dispute the idea that their funding, research, lobbying, and media coverage has given us political correctness, Open Borders, anti-whiteness, and Radical Feminism?
And not a "fellow White" but an American of European ancestry, chiefly Irish, Scots-Irish/Ulster Scots, and northern Italian.
I do agree the Jews and their catspaws are responsible for a massive chunk of the West's problems but I do think the problem is split between two groups, the ultra-conservative Israeli Zionists allied with Evangelical Christian and neoconservative groups for pragmatic reasons and the lefty Jews like George Soros who are ethnically Ashkenazi but culturally globalist/cosmopolitan and that latter group isn't entirely comprised of Jews but are mostly obscenely wealthy Ashkenazim and English/Anglo-Americans
I don't blame them for everything. I just blame them for playing the crucial role in causing 90% of The West's problems. That's a factual statement, is it not? Do you dispute the idea that their funding, research, lobbying, and media coverage has given us political correctness, Open Borders, anti-whiteness, and Radical Feminism?
I do agree the Jews and their catspaws are responsible for a massive chunk of the West's problems but I do think the problem is split between two groups, the ultra-conservative Israeli Zionists allied with Evangelical Christian and neoconservative groups for pragmatic reasons
1. Neoconservative is a dogwhistle for Jew. Irving Kristol and the others birthed Neoconservatism because Jewish Trotskyites were upset that Stalin kicked them out of the USSR and that Stalin later backed the Arabs against Israel. Neoconservatives are just Jews and a few "catspaws".
2. Evangelical Christians are less of an ally and more of a golem being used by the Jewish Zionists. The Evangelicals have lost on school prayer, gay marriage, abortion, transgender bathrooms, gays in the military, etc. for many decades. The only "victories" they had were on Israel's behalf. The leaders are bribed by Jewish Zionists and the followers are scammed by Jewish Zionists. In fact, Jerry Falwell Sr. got a $1.7 million private jet from Israel.
In fact Christian Zionism wouldn't have become popular without Jewish Zionism. The Scofield Bible was what made Christian Zionism in America. If it wasn't for a Jewish Zionist who ran Oxford University and published it, the Scofield Bible would be a translation long-forgotten.
You're basically just saying "Jews and a few catspaws". If that's what you meant by the alliance then I agree. The thing is this "alliance" isn't just about Jews having a state. Israel depends on The West economically, diplomatically, and militarily. Zionism involves a network of control that keeps The West in Jewish hands. That's why you have Zionists groups in Australia out working for aboriginal rights.
and the lefty Jews like George Soros who are ethnically Ashkenazi but culturally globalist/cosmopolitan and that latter group isn't entirely comprised of Jews but are mostly obscenely wealthy Ashkenazim and English/Anglo-Americans
"Globalist" and "Rootless Cosmopolitan" are dogwhistles for Jews. The Soros family are proud Jews who funnel millions to explicitly Jewish organizations. Read this NY Times article at the paragraph that starts with: "One morning in":
Would an Anglo funnel money with other Anglo donors to an explicitly Anglo organization? Plus the WASP class is dead as a cohesive unit. They've been replaced by mostly Jews , some LGBT people, and a small smattering of Irish, Italian, German, WASP, and Whatever-Bezos-Is billionaires who essentially collaborate with them. Rupert Murdoch for example is an Irish Catholic who donates huge sums to Jewish causes.
At the end of the day these two factions of Jews are part of the same tribe. They both push different poisons on us and they will both put their differences aside to work against us when the chips are down. They both our seeking Jewish interests - just in different ways. Why can Jews get away with acting on their own ethnic interest and not whites? Why do Jews who have clamored for literal war crimes and ethnic cleansing like Ben Shapiro get a slap on the wrist while Steve King gets canceled for simply questioning why white self-interest has been pathologized? Why can no Western countries have ethno-nationalism while Israel can?
Who, that woke boomer horror author who made IT and Christine, and says dumb shit all the time on Twitter? Of is there a different person I'm confusing him with?
, the ultra-conservative Israeli Zionists allied with Evangelical Christian and neoconservative groups for pragmatic reasons and the lefty Jews like George Soros who are ethnically Ashkenazi but culturally globalist/cosmopolitan and that latter group isn't entirely comprised of Jews but are mostly obscenely wealthy Ashkenazim and English/Anglo-Americans
