286 Comments
User's avatar
Jon Olsen's avatar

Precisely! We need to call out this faux accusation as DISHONEST every time it comes up, which is far too often. Put the accuser on the defensive, and refuse to take unjustified accusations seriously. How dare hey!

Expand full comment
Anthony G. Gelbert's avatar

Well said. I made the following comment in response to the following 🐍 CBN "News" video:

This entire broadcast is a precise and targeted exercise in Orwellian Happy Talk.

The legerdemain and bold faced mendacity is absolutely breathtaking. I pray that you will repent of your pusillaminous reporting.

Israel Targets Hamas Center in Raid on Hospital | CBN NewsWatch - November 15, 2023

https://youtu.be/t0LZKk1xGvw

As a Christian, I must rebuke CBN for peddling lies. The IDF is guilty of violating International Law by attacking the Al-Shifa Hospital! God is NOT mocked.

Proverbs 10:18 He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool.

Proverbs 10:9 He that walketh uprightly walketh surely: but he that perverteth his ways shall be known.

Proverbs 10:23 It is as sport to a fool to do mischief: but a man of understanding hath wisdom.

Proverbs 10:32 The lips of the righteous know what is acceptable: but the mouth of the wicked speaketh frowardness.

Expand full comment
notBob's avatar

I have that exact reaction whenever someone tries to control me through guilt.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

This kind of thinking could spread and we could all be turned upside down. It is beyond immoral. It is just plain insanity

https://hebhjamal.substack.com/p/prerequisite-to-naturalisation-israels?r=68q4

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

So they are criminalizing opinion and making it mandatory LAW to recognize ISRAELS right to exist or you are not allowed or given citizenship in DAS GERMANY!!!! or can be deported for voicing an opinion outside the official narratives of government decree!!! ...WELL whoever came up with this bit of "legislation" must have shinned up their jack boots and polished their own Nazi uniforms hidden in the closets..

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Nov 17, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Yes indeed and frighteningly so are examples all around us..

And to think i once thought NAHH they are going to do that whole fascist thing again are they???? have we not learned anything from the his-story??? at least the story if true or not should persuade them????

Funny it occurs to me the story's of fascism might be another projection to point at and divert attention from the real fascist we are sleeping with as the enemy...

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Nov 17, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Alas as far as Ukraine goes when is a Nazi a good Nazi? when the MIC can use them to fight a proxy war for ya!

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

I still hold an unfavorable viewed suspicion that Germany of the 40's was not this evil empire bent on domination and subjugation as much as has been amplified by the usual suspects... I might just get tagged with a scarlet letter A or D pinned to my own lapel if i dare stray too far into that realm...

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

Although nobody covers this topic like you, Ms. Johnstone, I am sorry that you seem to be of the belief that left-leaners are better people than others. Well, think again. That old-fashioned view not disappearing fast enough is a tragedy. Get with it already.

Those of us who are anti-governments, yes all governments, and pro-sentient beings, we are the ones leading the way toward a more peaceful world. Government is the favorite tool of the wealthiest people in the world. You don't have to like it to be able to acknowledge it. Those wealthy people make money when government wage wars of destruction, and governments lead the rebuilds, and governments propagandize the hell out of the masses. Don't take the bait. All government is always bad. When it is at its least harmful, though, still, the free market would and will always do better.

Well, all the best. Please do continue your amazing coverage and analysis of the other propaganda we currently endure. A hearty note of gratitude for that.

Expand full comment
Caitlin Johnstone's avatar

If I didn't believe the left is morally superior to the right I wouldn't be a leftist. I make no bones about believing the left is better and healthier.

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

Claiming Moral superiority for any group, is a very slippery slope, Caitlin. One approaching sounding smug- often destined to slide into confusion and humiliation. Left and Right have lost meaning meant to covey understanding absolutely. It IS difficult in the name of brevity to describe one’s thinking -bleh. Lots of us such as Chomsky claim a philosophy or desirous way of living, proselytizing, —(a good word with a bad reputation) and teaching rather than champion a governing group. e.g. I am a personal libertarian (let me do wtf I choose to do), and a societal Socialist- ( we are ALL in this human experiment together). We ARE our brothers and sisters keepers, if you will. A Christian by upbringinging and now by choice. To be clear, my complete personal freedom ends where any sentient being’s personal ecology begins. An actual happy but requiring , at times,a painful discerning process. Perhaps im confused since i just began reading your fabulous posts recently.

Expand full comment
JackSirius's avatar

Yes, the term “moral superiority” can be a slippery slope, especially in a religious/theological context. OTOH, in a philosophical context it can be perfectly accurate. Racial, ethnic, and religious superiority are based on deficient systems of morality that can be proven deficient by historical, scientific, and philosophical methods. It is irrefutable that people who believe in apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and divinely approved warfare and genocide are, frankly, morally inferior to those who believe most disputes between people or nations can be settled by peaceful, rational negotiations and diplomacy. Some individuals are more moral than others. Some people are morally superior to others (though I do agree that the term “moral superiority” is best avoided because it does connote annoying self-righteousness).

Regarding the left/right spectrum, it certainly had some validity decades ago when I was in college (though it probably always flirted with the logical fallacy of false dichotomy). Unfortunately, like all useful terms, it has since been co-opted and weaponized by politicians. Now, to someone who leans right, everyone to the left is a communist; and to someone who leans left, everyone to the right is a fascist. I was once an anarcho-capitalist, but then I noticed how many psychopaths were attracted to that economic philosophy and how many corporatists funded it. So anarcho-capitalism and libertarianism can also be a slippery slope. Chomsky calls himself a left-wing anarchist, and that seems like an accurate enough description for my own current political identity. And, yes, at the risk of seeming self-righteous, I do think leftist anarchism and action is morally superior.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

It might be better to avoid any feelings of superiority altogether and just try to figure out what works for ourselves and others. The need to feel superior seems to me to be what has led to the mess the world is in.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Yeah the double edged sword..trying to keep a moral high ground without seeming to be a supremacist is quite the acrobatic tight rope i suppose.

That's the interesting thing,,, is figuring out INTENT of whoever is posturing their "moral superiority" or are just actually being morally cohesive and having high standards of their own behaviors thoughts and actions...its easy to spot people who peacock and don't act in accordance with their crowing ..

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

Agree completely. A moral argument for discerning human behavior is essential. Its what we DO ABOUT IT, that matters. After all humans are nothing but beings that have behaviors called thinking feeling & doing. Having claimed the moral high ground often enough or at least being accused of it I often say “yes I will claim to be a moral high grounder! and I will continue to stand on the moral high ground. It’s pretty rarified air up here. Why don’t you join us?“ lol

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Well said both of you...

I have often been accused of taking a moral high ground too, (like that's a bad thing) and by people i would retort "why do you want to drag me down to your gutter level so you feel some sort of equal instead of rising yourself up in better thinking and behavior so we can meet on the same ground?" Of course this gets you side eyed as smug and giving airs of morally superior in their mind.. But trying to achieve a level of integrity decency and honesty should not be looked down on by people who don't have the intellectual courage to raise themselves up or bother to achieve better.... And that brings me to this whole hierarchy fallacy idea that everything is stacked in levels of "worth" this vertical thinking where gods above and devils bellow and where does the individual fit in the stack ,, this fallacy of Darwinism where its dog eat dog and much religion has taken on the same fallacy.. authority is to be worshiped and kick the leasers down the rung of some ladder to climb. Same predatory capitalist corporate abusive model of kill or be killed psycology, as i said elsewhere the John Nash F you buddy idea embraced by the captains of industry (and politics ) today.

The parallels with it all reinforce each other and people come to believe these things are writ in stone and therefore an unmovable norm, like the cutesy phrase "death and tax's" where they couple a natural thing to an unnatural thing to make you think its inevitable and never to be challenged and just accepted as a given..Thus how language is used for telling a lie as a given with added great emotive convictions to better sell it by whatever evangelical agenda someone in positions of (stolen and held through violence and abuse) power desires.

Expand full comment
Too much work's avatar

Someone might find this open letter interesting, concerning beliefs etcetera;

The Dignity of Human Beings and Their Personality: Neurotechnology and The Manipulation of The Human Nervous System. “Saving Freedom and Democracy”

Open Letter to the European Union and Governments around the World

By Mojmir Babacek

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Seems hes talking about Electromagnetic radiation effects... and trying to get some sort of ban on that... as a technologist i think its interesting but not a big concern of mine.. although i feel the interference in the natural migration of animals sensitive to these disruptions may have detrimental effects on the health of us and the planet.. I have not delved deeper here as i have so much i'm sidetracked on already..

Expand full comment
russian_bot's avatar

Why do people need labels? Why so many rush to identifying themselves upfront?

Oftentimes such self-identification can be destroyed quite easily during careful examination and a person starts looking like a fool. Most realize it and resort to hapless defending their initial posture. At which point it's just pathetic.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

You really cant see yourself in your own finger pointing can you?

Expand full comment
russian_bot's avatar

What have I ever identified myself as?

If you can't answer this and keep your obsession going then I have another one for you - what can I do to get you off my back?

Expand full comment
gypsy33's avatar

I Am exactly where you are on the political scale, Bernadene.

I was a democrat until I grew up.

Expand full comment
notBob's avatar

The unfortunate truth is that your care and concern for the rest of humanity is used to control you. Not saying its a bad thing just that bad people will manipulate you through those very ethical beliefs.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

people who are caring and concerned and ethical are not necessarily easily manipulated or controlled.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

I would like to believe that but i see too much evidence to the contrary due to a levels of mind control propaganda and cultural and social engineering that has turned the average human into a mindless commodity laborer who go along to get along and dare not challenge conventional norms... they are NICE....

Its like the serial killer that pretends to have an injured leg to lure their victims into the van, playing on natural sympathy and the willingness to help... thus the perpetual victims status of the Zionist diaspora...

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

maybe I should have said people who are caring, concerned and ethical are not any more easily manipulated than anyone else.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

If someone is using the best parts of you to manipulate you that's worse than bad .. that's despicable!

If convincing you the better ways to a higher consciousness level of decent behaviors and thinking is healthy for the individual and thus the whole is a positive use of "convincing" but i get the cringe feeling of the evangelical sneaking up on my for just saying that..

Expand full comment
Too much work's avatar

“Today the Gentile Christians who claim of holy right have been led in the wrong path. We, of the Jewish Faith have tried for centuries to teach the Gentiles a Christ never existed, and that the story of the Virgin and of Christ is, and always has been, a fictitious lie. In the near future, when the Jewish people take over the rule of the United States, legally under our god, we will create a new education system, providing that our god is the only one to follow, and proving that the Christ story is a fake…Christianity will be abolished.” (M.A. Levy, Secretary of the World League of Liberal Jews, in a speech in Los Angeles, California, August, 1949

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Well that's the perfect very description of a self anointed demigod.. *cringe*

Expand full comment
Anthony G. Gelbert's avatar

This ain't hard to figure out. I am a Christian that firmly believes , unlike too many "Evangelical" Mammon worshipping and war loving "Christians", that Matthew 7:12 is NOT optional.

As a rule, Leftists in general, and Christian Socialists in particular, advocate that 'Doing unto other as you whould them Do unto you' is a MORALLY SUPERIOR position to the Right's 'DO (i.e exploit for profit) unto others BEFORE They DO IT UNTO YOU' Greedballs 'R' US morally BANKRUPT position.

Consequently, am quite certain that Caitlin Johnstone is completely justified in making no bones about believing the left is better and healthier.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

the problem with the "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is that others might prefer something different than you

Expand full comment
Demonhype's avatar

That's why I prefer the negative wording used prior to the Christian version--if its hurting someone, cut it out. Hillel was my favorite: That which causes pain when done to you, refrain from doing to others. That is the law, all the rest is commentary.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

As Bassem Youssef said to Piers ..if someone is sick you give them rest and ease not hit them with a hammer and say you WILL stop being sick

Expand full comment
Anthony G. Gelbert's avatar

True. That said, even morally bankrupt people will hesitate to advocate being cheated, lied, enslaved. murdered, etc., just because they think that is "appropriate" behavior for "Apex Predators" = Social Darwinists.

Furthermore, the obvious exceptions to those who walk the Matthew 7:12 talk, such as masochists, anorexics, etc, (you get the idea) do not, in a reality based discussion, invalidate the Golden Rule.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

I think the golden rule needs a rewrite. Do unto others as they ask or need

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Not only that,, manipulators use this to have you do nice to them while they do dirty to you and then say "well why are you not living by your rules for me"....see the problem?

Expand full comment
Indu Abeysekara's avatar

Hear! Hear! Caitlin!

Expand full comment
notBob's avatar

True you make no bones about your belief in the left but Jinc is pointing out that you are as delusional about that belief as a conservative is about their beliefs. No collective is mentally, morally or ethically superior to any other group but politicians and governments will sell that message to you all day long to make you hate your neighbor for their benefit.

Perhaps you can extend your grace to embrace all humanity without ideologically driven hatred and divisions ?

Expand full comment
Caitlin Johnstone's avatar

That's ridiculous. Some groups are absolutely morally or ethically superior to other groups. Nazis are morally and ethically inferior to non-Nazis, for example.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

Killing thousands of people is wrong. It is a morally inferior behaviour. That is my opinion. If you consider those people to be just as moral as you are, then maybe you should work on yourself.

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

Yes. It is this view of yours and others that is so problematic. I don't know what more evidence you need.

Expand full comment
Mary Wildfire's avatar

You are a bit mixed up, I think, with the notion that because much harm can be attributed to governments, the alternative is "the free market." In fact, capitalism has humanity threatened with extinction in several ways. But it's hard to distinguish between governments and corporations these days. Leftists worry more about corporations and rightists more about government, but as they have essentially merged, does it really matter which entity viewed separately is worse? It's the merger--which Mussolini called the essence of fascism--that is so destructive.

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

Attributing today's troubles to capitalism, not crony capitalism, is part of the problem.

Expand full comment
Mary Wildfire's avatar

If you want to claim that there was a time and place when capitalism was a healthy thing that didn't exploit workers, the land, other living things, that didn't increase inequality, point us to it. Sure it's worse now--that's probably an inevitable eventuality because of the way capitalism enhances inequality and selects for the success of sociopaths. I think a healthy Someone said society would be mostly communistic, though if it's a large society it might use money to facilitate trade. A model I liked was the markets I saw in B rail and Ecuador, where every little town has at least a weekly market, bigger cities have multiple markets, some held every day--and farmers could bring in their crops, there would be sometimes a whole roasted pig from which slices would be sold all day--or people could sell anything, like one time I saw booth selling blender parts. No health department in sight, which I think in that context buyer beware works fine--it's in the anonymity of western supermarkets that regulations make sense (or did until the agencies were all captured).

Someone said the difference between right and left is whether you embrace or reject hierarchy. But I think it's where you are on the spectrum of individual rights and freedom at one (right) pole, and the needs of the community on the other. I think the US has gone to the extreme of valuing the freedom of the individual over what's good for the whole--but of course, in practice the freedoms of the rich, well-connected and ruthless end up coming at the expense of the freedoms of the rest.

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

It is not imperative that you understand this. It is imperative that all do. What we have in the USA is NOWHERE NEAR capitalism. It is crony capitalism, and the game is won by the ultra-wealthy by manipulating the government. If there is no government, we have a fighter's chance. But governments ALWAYS cede to the people who bribe them. Always.

"So then we need to fight corruption in government." Rinse. Repeat. Never-ending cycle.

The answer, much as it hurts your ears to hear this, is zero government. Or non-coercive government. Or non-binding, anyway. Yes it is.

Expand full comment
notBob's avatar

Capitalism is the farmers market, cronyism/fascism is wall street.

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

And your mistaken pride is exactly what holds you back...

Expand full comment
Too much work's avatar

With all do respect to you Caitlin, and I very much do respect your viewpoints, including your last sentence, above mentioned; slightly off today's predominant theme, on matters that you'll probably touch on in the weeks ahead, Gaza is just the tip of the iceberg of what all is wrong with the West, and I sympathize with Gates, Soros, the Rothschild, etcetera; the forces at play that created them; I don't enjoy death, and don't look forward to another French Revolution or centuries of assassinations as happened with a dying Roman Empire; but, I see it clear as day, and obviously your clients are still delusional if they think they can get away from a complete change of mindset without getting swept away from a tsunami of events that are about to befall them.

Expand full comment
Starry Gordon's avatar

But then you have to define _left_ and _right_ because a great deal of work has been done to obscure and even reverse their meaning. For instance, in my vocabulary the Right is the party of power, authority, private wealth, social status, tribal or racial identification, and the military virtues, whereas the Left is the party of peace, freedom, equality, and autonomy; but a good many of readers here and elsewhere would think my definitions or associations were about 180 degrees out of line. I would have to write paragraphs of definitions, and by then I'd have lost my audience. Hence a long time ago someone I used to argue with on USENET suggested, "Don't let people say what your are or call you names. Just tell people what you want to do, and let them do the name-calling."

Expand full comment
JennyStokes's avatar

Yes. Me too.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Nov 16, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

Subservience to American hegemony was the price of power for the German Greens, and they now fellate their American Masters with great enthusiasm.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Nov 16, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

The Finster aims to please.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

You do well with your prose

Expand full comment
Gnuneo's avatar

Environmentalism covers the gamut of politics, always has. The left/right schism, invented in France pretty recently, is about private hierarchy v communitarianism v individualism.

Concern for the environment does not and cannot fit in that box, its a side-step to different priorities.

I've been saddened watching the Green parties becoming more establishment, although Baerbock is frankly insanely unhinged and an outlier (She doesn't seem 'Green' at all, beyond electoral soundbites. A warning to us all, Blairism/Clintonism in green clothing.

Expand full comment
Starry Gordon's avatar

Actually, the left/right dichotomy was invented in the ancient world. When armies fought in close formation (like phalanxes) the strongest soldiers had to be on the right (sword or spear hand), with the shield on the left. The right side then became the side of honor and loyalty, identifying with the commander, prince, etc. Even centuries later, when the legislators in the French _parlement_ took their seats, the friends of the King of France were on the right, and their opponents were on the left.

The peculiar transition of the Greens from the left to the right makes sense in that environmentalism, that is, an effort to preserve the environment so we can go on living in it, is basically conservative or even reactionary. When I was a child conservationists were often conservatives. Capitalism, on the other hand, is revolutionary and dynamic and tends to eat up and destroy whatever in the environment (world) can be turned into money and power. Marx writes about this rather lyrically in _The Communist Manifesto_: "... Constant revolutionising of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind." Or as the awful Zuckerberg said, "Move fast and break things."

Alas, Marx was wrong about "man" possessing "sober senses", but otherwise it's pretty good -- "on the money" one might say.

Expand full comment
Anthony G. Gelbert's avatar

I am convinced by empirical evidence and objective observation that the American Experiment with democracy has failed.

I am convinced by empirical evidence and objective observation the 🐍 worm in that Constitutional 🌟 Apple promising a Golden Age of ✨ Egalitarian Democracy that caused the failure was the NATIONAL EMBRACE of Social Darwinism. 100's of millions of Americans, most who cannot define Social Darwinism without looking it up on their cell phone, have, for all practical purposes, embraced this socially destructive ideology spawned by Darwin's Capitalist followers.

Thomas Jefferson is not my hero, but I agree 100% with this quote of his, which is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what Social Darwinian 🦍 Ideology Pushes:

"I consider our relations with others as constituting the boundaries of morality... Nature [has] implanted in our breasts a love of others, a sense of duty to them, a moral instinct, in short, which prompts us irresistibly to feel and to succor their distresses... The Creator would indeed have been a bungling artist had he intended man for a social animal without planting in him social dispositions. It is true they are not planted in every man, because there is no rule without exceptions; but it is false reasoning which converts exceptions into the general rule." --Thomas Jefferson to T. Law, 1814.

FAST FORWARD TO 1945:

https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-080223144815.png

https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240422195409-10071046.png

🦍 BETTER TO REIGN IN HELL THAN TO SERVE IN HEAVEN

https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240422195053-952287.gif

DOWNHILL ALL THE WAY TO 2001:

https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-260823144756-2521718.jpeg

https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-260823153410.png

https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-080223161340-22062214.png

https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-240422194946-9332199.png

Expand full comment
Starry Gordon's avatar

The problem with abandoning democracy is deciding what we're going to replace it with. If by social Darwinism you are referring to the present class system or the effects of capitalism, it is true that important differences of wealth, power, and connections vitiate democratic intentions, but the primary question remains unanswered.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Like i wrote recently someplace else ..Darwin as well as others like John Nash are quickly used by the predatory capitalist to justify their means and ends and yet as you pointed out no one has read the entire works and uses Darwin as this example of dog eat dog is right and true and yet he demonstrated cooperation was the better long term and healthy strategy and warned for civilization not to organised itself around survival of the fittest...

Expand full comment
Gnuneo's avatar

Interesting. Of course, also historically the left hand was the one used to wipe the arse clean, giving it a bad rep. Somehow, Western culture in explaining its own history, manages to miss important vital yet earthy information. Needless to say, either there was a time before trees were turned into packaged loo roll, or much more realistically our ancestors simply never needed to shit.

The UK Green Party was historically on the right, and seemed to move leftwards after Icke had left it a laughing stock - perhaps the Establishment lost interest in it for a generation, allowing the dissidents to populate it.

On Marx & Capitalism - well, even a broken clock can be right, if you look at it at just the right time. And on this he is - Capitalism SHOULD be seen, as Adam Smith argued, Revolutionary Liberalism. Instead, most, including the educated who could know better, see it as a force of Reactionary Feudalism. The very social inertia it was intended to replace.

Sadly, the true revolutionary potential was blunted when wage-slavery was adopted rather than worker-ownership, and tossed into the bin when the overly Class-war mechanism the 'Stock Market' was invented.

I don't think these people who scream blue murder about "Capitalism" have the slightest idea what Feudalism is like, they truly seem to imagine that "Everyone lived in harmony with shared possessions and no exploitation, and then someone invents "Capitalism" and ruins it!". Granted, History isn't taught as it should be either, but FFS even the thickest should have heard of Rome!!

I guess its in someone's interests to obfuscate these points, and frankly I don't think it's "The Lefts".

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

My suspicions is that the old familiar pattern has metastasized itself yet again into a full blown symptom of CIAish style infiltration by pushing into the upper power hierarchy of that party the very operators to poison the well and render it toothless against the Establishment status quo...a pattern i have seen repeated in any movement that gets the slightest foothold gets infiltrated and destroyed from within,,,IE occupy BLM etc... and many minor ones i took part in ...They are very cleverly commandeered before they even get started now...

One i witnessed people joining on the ideas of like minded only for some to turn around and cause so much disruptions personal vendettas and infighting that the entire thing falls apart...

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Nov 16, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Gnuneo's avatar

TBH, Ernesto, I think she is an outlier to the whole human race, not just the Environmental movement.

BTW, conservatives can be progressive, if they are genuinely conserving progressive ideas such as free speech, democratic accountability, freedom of religion, equality of access to law, individual and human rights, to name but a few things.

It is important to differentiate between conservatism and reactionary thought.

I have heard nothing genuine and truthful from her to indicate she is anything but a deranged warmonger and Orientalist. "Conservative" is far too mild. I have never hear her claim she wishes to conserve anything.

Lindsay Graham greenwashed, and as stupid and evil to match.

Expand full comment
Starry Gordon's avatar

The problem with the term "progressive" is that it does not specify in which direction we are supposed to be progressing. In that, it assumes, I think, good old 19th-century optimism, "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice” sort of thing.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Nov 16, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Great article Susan!

I keep telling the ziopaths i run into on youtube who post WHAT ABOUT HAMAS HAMAS HAMAS AHHHHH why don't you CONDEMN HAMAAAAAAS.... like that creep piers Morgan drones on every chance he can...

If anything comes of this Hamas "attack" (fighting back) it just stripped off the Zionists and its supporters mask of their phony ideas of democracy and exposed them to the world as ethnic cleansing genocidal maniacs...

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

That one had me cringe and imagine the nastalga of jack boots and those snappy uniforms of Karl Diebitsch (artist) and Walter Heck (graphic designer) of the fashion house of Hugo boss!

Bet shes got one in her closet!

Expand full comment
JB's avatar

The Greens were always compromised by the deep state, going back to their very beginning. Just look up Joschka Fischer's career and what happened to Petra Kelly So were/are the European socialists but being bigger parties with stronger leadership at one point, they took longer to compromise and totally control. It's the same in the right, Meloni played ball immediately with USA/EU and so will Marine Le Pen. AfD is currently being put through the wringer to force it to sell out and it will.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

AfD will either sell out or be banned.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

In the stats we had Jill Stein being detained and blocked from attending political rallies... What to make of that? more shadow state shenanigans?....

I have come to a place now where i have lost trust in everyone and everything

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

Not Jill Stien, running for USA prez as a Green. She's solid in every way.

Expand full comment
russian_bot's avatar

To her solidity: https://rumble.com/v3vmzwe-dr.-jill-stein-pretended-she-knew-nothing-about-peter-daou.html

We need a comedian - Jimmy Dore - to uncover and illuminate stuff about idols. Such is "freedom" and "liberty" in the west.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

To be fair, Stein brought lawsuits after the 2016 election in support of the Russiagate conspiracy theory.

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

Not my understanding.,She wanted RECOUNTS and investigations, period. She’s reality based and a truth seeker; once Russia gate turned out to be a nothing burger and a bunch of bullshit political hummyrot, I’m sure she understood. Nobody’s perfect but when they are imperfect, they can admit it. That’s the difference.

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

Don't kid yourself or make excuses.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Nov 16, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

She ( Jill Stein) was maligned in the press to discredit her. She had every position the same as Bernie Sanders, who was HUGELY popular in the USA - but was cut down by the deep state and then eventually capitulated to keep from “becoming Ralph Nader“ [Chris Hedges confronted him] but she is even MORE SOCIALIST. I met her and volunteered/worked for her in 2016. Solid as Gibralter.

Expand full comment
gypsy33's avatar

Thank you Bernadine.

I voted for her in ‘18. Loved her.

Expand full comment
JB's avatar

She's far better than Bernie Sanders but she did support Russia-gate, probably to avoid getting Nader-ized. Didn't do her or the Greens any good. American Greens seem better because they're such a weak and poorly led party (quite likely sabotaged by government agents) that it's not worth the PTB's effort to fully compromise and steer, as is done in Europe.

The dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is not gonna go down through the ballot box, especially when they control the counting of those ballot boxes.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

At least Jill steins positions had been authentic from her, but Sanders? not so much... he folded like a wet dish rag as soon as Obama (the con artist ) patted him on the back and said your stepping down...

Expand full comment
Andrew Thomas's avatar

The free market? You had me going until then. What you made a case for is anarcho-syndicalism. The ‘free market’ has never existed, but capitalism leads straight to exactly where we are now. And ‘free market’ advocates are fine with that, because they like where we are.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

The free for them market...and the rules based for us market...Buy low sell high and screw you...the systems rigged the system so that no one wins on their own merit, its always about tripping someone else up , or hobbling them or pulling some corporate trickery to ruin competition....funny if we see a runner trip his opponent we are appalled at the cheating but when a corporation or government does it people seem to worship the idea of their "prowess" in the market.. a "good" business man is the excuse i see used... or John Nash's mathematical probability of profit off "if i don't do it they will" or as he called it "F you buddy" The phenomenon is celebrated in the culture of predatory capitalism...

Expand full comment
gypsy33's avatar

Hi Chaz

I am doing my part to fuck with Amerikkkan capitalism by purchasing directly from the manufacturers in China, thus bypassing the middleman (Macy’s, Target, wherever) and their 300% markups.

The website is called TEMU. The clothing and housewares are of impeccable quality and the prices have to be seen to be believed. Anything over $10 ships free. I can dress like a rock star for very little money.

If there is one disadvantage—-and it’s a very small one—-one has to wait 10 days or so for your package to arrive from China.

Expand full comment
notBob's avatar

Temu is backed by Nasdaq-listed Chinese tech giant PDD Holdings - still part of wall street, still part of the elite bankers.

Expand full comment
gypsy33's avatar

China has a multitude of Amerikkkan holdings. That’s up to the Chinese.

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

Holy moly, my mind is being blown! I don’t know which erudite fabulous thinker here to reply to Next! I kind of just want to get in a promo for the ideas in a book called “Human Scale ” by Kirkpatrick Sale. he claims thru research that communities of 500 people are what will save us, and that human beings have ability to recognize as family about 500 people.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

but doesn't TEMU make a lot of money? A bit like Amazon?

Expand full comment
gypsy33's avatar

TEMU is CHINESE. I have no problem with them making money, as I have nothing against CHINA.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

so Chinese capitalism is OK for some reason?

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

The "left" as you have been conditioned to believe automatically from your own (as i suspect ) right leanings is NOT the left ,,its stolen that from the real leftists (like Corbyn ) ..its been "colonized" by the neocon Zionist and neoliberals.. even people calling themselves "progressives" like the squad are pseudo leftists.. That's the real trick going on here..commandeering movements is a very establishment tactic.. I remember when Obama tried to saddle up with the occupy movement and was quickly rejected and he backpedaled right out of there for fear people would realize he was a con artist that tried to ride on the coat tails and images of greater men..His Hope poster was stolen from JFK of the 60's (go check a comparison, its pretty obvious) yet he won awards from PR institutes for it along with his phony peace prize...

All i'm saying is the real leftists has a lot in common with the salt of the earth conservatives when they pull their heads out of the neocons ass and also realize we all want the same thing and the left right pick a team and fight paradigm is another con job..

Expand full comment
Indu Abeysekara's avatar

We lefties know a real lefty when we see one. And sniff a pseudo lefty a mile away - not only intellectually but with care and empathy. It is hard to see what we have in common with a conservative who by nature is averse to change and innovation and holds traditional values, intoning pompously, 'our values'; 'our way of life'.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

I'm a blue collar guy and can resonate with hard working people but I have never gotten along well with the staunch conservatives my way or the highway types.. Striping that away I resonate with certain values within their ideology..self reliance man up, work hard and achieve.. Help your neighbor, have community,,, I like the ideas I just don't always feel the need myself..

What I don't like is some of the bigoted ignorance and easily manipulation by their ideology and then this arrogant posturing might make a right part...not all of course they are just as diverse a bunch as any other.. But wanting peace prosperity and not to be abused by corporations and government we can all agree on.. The great divide is fostered by the establishment to keep us from making an eminent front together.

The people do have the power they have just been trained to be docile and obedient to authority figures by public education obedience training centers.

I would love to see a coordinated tax revolt or threat bring the status quo political parties to their knees.

Don't want another useless proxy war? Stop funding it.. Stop signing and dating those checks... Pull the plug on Israel too..

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

Yep!

Expand full comment
Too much work's avatar

Australia Is ‘Deeply Complicit’ in Gaza Genocide

By Peter Boyle

Expand full comment
gypsy33's avatar

Not paying our taxes this year. We’re “conscientious objectors”.

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

There’s a lot to be said for Luddite-ism, -ish actually

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Funny to be almost called a Luddite! because i'm also a technologist and builder and designer of equipment instruments and computers as well as musical instruments used in film etc..

I have my brain in many skills and disciplines from welding to mechanics to microprocessor coding..(not to be a braggard) but i'm most fond of camping under the stars with a cup of some hot beverage made on a wood fire...

Expand full comment
Garrett Smith's avatar

I suspect you are already familiar with Larkin Rose, author of "parasites on parade" and the "most dangerous superstition," as well as the film Jones Plantation. If not check him out, he's right up your alley. Also check out this episode of solutions watch from the Corbett report featuring Keith Knight author of The Voluntaryist Handbook and Larkin Rose.

https://rumble.com/v3vnol7-freedoms-the-answer-whats-the-question-solutionswatch.html

Having no ideology and simply trying to assess what is true, epistemic humility as I recently heard Chris Martinson coin it while talking with Brett Weinstein, I'm finding the voluntaryist perspective to be the only feasible one.

The idea that I can give someone the right to do something I don't have the right to do is just too stupid to keep playing along. And what I just described is government.

Expand full comment
David S's avatar

That was a great discussion, Martinson/Weinstein.

Expand full comment
Gnuneo's avatar

Hi Jinc, maybe this will help.

The right is about hierarchy, liberalism is about the individual, and the left is about community. In truth, we all have a bit of each in us, no matter what we call ourselves.

And you can also find good, and good people, in all categories.

And, we have to be honest, you can also find bad.

You find "Govt" to be the source of all ills, and as a left-leaning radical-liberal anarchist I have lot of sympathy for that POV.

But it isn't the WHOLE story, is it?

For one, community organisation - politics, govt - CAN be beneficial, if not indeed essential. If 20 hardcore Libertarians stranded on a desert island discovered one of their members was shitting in the sole drinking well, you'd soon have the dreaded "politics", and rules, and a govt of sorts. It would, hopefully, be one very strongly in favour of liberal individual rights, but it would indisputably also have elements of community and hierarchy.

For another, private hierarchy can be just as big a threat to the Individual. This is where anarchism and libertarianism split. Anarchists comprehend that workers in fx Amazon are not in some Libertarian Paradise, and that private wealth and hierarchy CAN be just as abusive as any old state. Yes, you can get good govt, and you can get genuinely good Oligarchic philanthropy. You can also allegedly find hen's teeth. ;)

Both right and left disappear off into Authoritarianism, where they meet and party like it's mid-Poland in 1939.

Sadly, many amoral people now claim to be "liberal", when really they are all about self-aggrandisement but want a fig-leaf for that. NOTHING is 'perfect' in this world, and everything eventually gets gamed. :/

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

Eloquent indeed, and thanks for your opinion! But so long as government plays by different rules than individuals, and has more rights than individuals, "The Law" is not equal for all of us. Frederic Bastiat insists it must be, and I am of the same opinion. Although I don't necessarily believe that "All men are created equally," (please stop and think before being triggered, but if you choose to be triggered, so be it) but if one does, "Some people are more equal than others" should irk the heck out of you.

Expand full comment
Gnuneo's avatar

I heartily recommend a read of Graebers 'History of Everything', for the most comprehensive list of the different forms that social politics has taken in recorded human history. You will find, it was not uncommon around the World before post-Rome Euros trucked up, that in many cases Governing institutions had LESS rights than the individuals under it. Unsurprisingly, they tended to be the happier societies.

As for "created equally", it is a religious phrase meant to include the section "Before God" - in other words, we are equally low before infinite power. It is pretty obviously not meant to cover secular elements such as ability to run, to ponder, to climb, to care, to communicate, to accumulate, to explore, to be brave, to name but a few variations, whether the cause is genetics, environment, astrology, or parental wealth.

While some secular Idealists have taken that and run arguably too far with it - although in most instances it is actually a strawman created by those who wish to hide their social privileges behind "Naturalistic" false arguments and refuse to debate fairly - it was never intended to mean that everyone is born as an identical twin to everyone else. SW Clone Wars is not what your average maternity unit, or school looks like.

"Some animals are more equal than others" Orwell wrote, in a novel where quite explicitly there was a range of abilities among the animals, and where even the stupidest animals could feel something was wrong about that phrase as they could feel the same wrongness slowly infecting their entire experiment, is a deliberate oxymoron to highlight the clever misuse of language, and is a phrase that buries itself into anyone who reads it.

It does not, however, and Orwell would have been horrified at this interpretation, mean that the solution is to accept the permanent privileged system of 'Farmer Jones' [I may have forgotten the original name].

It means that to create a nice and pleasant, non-abusive, not-tyrannical, NON-EXPLOITATIVE system, requires constant vigilance against the growth of privilege, privileged classes, and inevitable claims that these are natural, and to maintain that, secular differences notwithstanding, we are all equal before X.

Whether you call that your sense of morality, fair play, desire for a decent society, Goddess or Gawd, the point is those differences pale before it.

If your best friend became disabled, would you demand they accept your superiority every time, before wheeling them somewhere? Or would you manage to contain your feelings of superiority because the bonds of friendship were more important than havving your ego flattered?

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

Thanks for that. "Some animals are more equal than others" was used to justify the pigs running the government getting better food and accommodations. That is the point.

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

I have always understood free market thinking to be a part of libertarianism which I have always seen as capitalism with no restraints i.e. "Disaster Capitalism"

Expand full comment
Just sayn's avatar

Absolutely beautiful explaination.

Expand full comment
bill wolfe's avatar

The "free market" rewards corporations for dumping cancer causing chemicals into your air, water, food, and workplace. It allows and rewards corporations for clear cutting forests and dumping billions of tons of toxic mining wastes in wetlands, streams, and rivers. It allows oil and gas wells and pipelines through forests and farms and carbon pollution that threatens agriculture and the ability of humans to survive on the planet. It rewards corporations for building malls and warehouses in public parks.

You good with all that?

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

Crony capitalism, only possible through having coercive government, rewards corporations for bribing government officials to ignore their dumping of "cancer-causing chemicals into your air, water, food, and workplace. It allows and rewards corporations for clear-cutting forests and dumping billions of tons of toxic mining wastes in wetlands, streams, and rivers. It allows oil and gas wells and pipelines through forests and farms and carbon pollution that threatens agriculture and the ability of humans to survive on the planet. It rewards corporations for building malls and warehouses in public parks."

And I am not good with all that.

Expand full comment
bill wolfe's avatar

You need to understand what capitalism actually is. Start by Googling "market failure", "externalities" and "public goods". Then try "social discount rate".

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

Capitalism is absence of government.

Expand full comment
bill wolfe's avatar

No, capitalism is an economic system that rewards exploitation of humans, labor, and the natural environment until exhaustion or collapse. It is anti-democratic, placing control of society and nature in the hands of private individuals seeking to maximize profits and growth, regardless of consequences to others.

You failed to do the homework I previously assigned. When you finish that, Google "rent", "profit", "monopoly" and "market power".

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

It is precisely as if you are not reading what I reply to you.

Anarcho-capitalism is true capitalism.

You can think what you want about it. Like I do. The sooner more people realize it is a savior of an economic system, the better off humanity will be. But you look like you will not be convinced of this anytime soon.

At least we can agree writes well on Palestine. Can't we?

Expand full comment
Ohio Barbarian's avatar

No, capitalism is a very small group of people, eg employers, telling a large group of people what to do and how to live.

It's just another inherently authoritarian form of power. I happen to think we should have democracy in the workplace, which makes me an old-school Marxist.

Your first reply to Caitlin made me think you were an anarchist and therefore an ally, but this comment sounds like simplistic Libertarianism.

Expand full comment
Jinc's avatar

I am an anarcho-capitalist, an anarchist who believes all coercive government can be is evil.

Expand full comment
Freepie's avatar

That is Chomsky's position. All governments are bad. This the core principle of the anarcho-syndicalist movement. Now are you going to claim that Chomsky is a rightwinger?

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

I hate to keep saying these things over again, but “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely” and “I may disagree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it,“ [and do it] Whatever the question, spiritual - true loving action, is the answer. Kindness, loving example, encouraging non-judgemental discourse ( exchanges of heart and mind)- these are contagious, when allowed to “escape“- haha. For real.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

As I love the concept of love and understanding I'm far too practical and aware to think the sociopathic who run society give a rat's ass about any of those peskey humanity traits and or concepts.. So what then?

I wish we could have a "purge" of all the self serving greed filled power mad assholes who are causing 90 percent of the world's suffering.

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

Understood. Its been said Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it just hasn’t really been tried. sociopaths do reach the pinnacles of power because that’s their driving need- power over others but there’s more of us than them and once we realize our power to get rid of them, we will. Perhaps, as with many addictions people have got to reach bottom. I’m not sure what the bottom, for the USA is maybe financial and environmental collapse maybe nuclear devastation but some thing will happen for us to reach the bottom- then we have to decide to try something different than war and domination. when we do it will be something that equstes to or resembles the 12 traditions and the 12 steps of AA which do work.

Expand full comment
Bernadene Zennie's avatar

The one true and largest anarchist organization that works is Alcoholics Anonymous. Those of us who have been members for decades, and have studied and lived by the actual “suggestions“ through thr 12 Traditions know this. Just sayin’

Expand full comment
Quincy OrHai's avatar

Hear him, hear him!

Expand full comment
Feral Finster's avatar

I would say that just about any political and economic system can be made to work tolerably well under certain circumstances, one of which being that it is governed by non-sociopaths.

This is why, after 5,000 or so years of written human history, one can find examples of all sorts of systems flourishing and declining, as circumstances change and sociopaths take over.

Expand full comment
David S's avatar

Brilliant analysis. This has been obvious for a long time but it's so glaring, now that "MOST" people are awakening.......I hope!

Expand full comment
The Revolution Continues's avatar

You reminded me of the old tale of "The Boy Who Cried Wolf!" If you continually lie and use the same accusation over and over again, soon nobody will believe you. Your credibility is shot. Corbyn's detractors repeatedly accused him of being "antisemitic," and yet Corbyn's actions never gave any indication this was true. Their smear backfired spectacularly. No one will believe it anymore.

The same is currently happening with the Israeli propaganda push trying to draw a picture that all Gazans are "Hamas"--including their children and infants. It's yet another cry of "Wolf!" that's being ignored by the public and rightfully so. Israel has hit the wall. The propaganda isn't working.

We won't be falsely accused and shamed. We turn the tables and shame those who would lie to cover their war crimes. We know who the real "antisemites" are--the Israelis and their racist hatred of a true Semitic people--the Palestinians.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

DO remember that Zionist propaganda has a two fold effect..fool fools and give the moral and intellectual cowards and con artist all the talking points they seek..

Expand full comment
gypsy33's avatar

Hi Chaz

Like the weapons “discovered” under Al Shifa hospital?

The fact that they were obviously PLANTED there by the IDF is so clear as to defy description that any one actually buys that crap.

If Hamas had “tunnels underneath the hospital”, wouldn’t they have emerged to fight the IDF murderers?!

Expand full comment
Toma's avatar

Wish I could give you 100 likes for your comment. The IDF needs better training in BS ing and media relations. The 1 pair of boots in the photo really got to me. Looks to me like the IDF has only killed about a dozen of Hamas terrorists so far by the number of guns they picked up and planted for the photo shoot. Behind an MRI machine? Please!

BBC had a reporter on this morning who was escorted in under guard who was not allowed to interview doctors or civilians due to military concerns. She was clearly unhappy. At least BBC made the statement that the weapons we're unverified as belonging to Hamas. I wonder if the IDF stripped out the gold fillings of the Hamas terrorists they managed to kill for the photo shoot?

Still can't find the entrance for the tunnel system? I'm still trying to figure out how Hamas managed to hide what had to have been a major construction project to dig the miles (hundreds I think) with tunneling equipment,dump trucks and excavators? Where did they hide the sand? With the number of tunnels every building should have sunk 10 ft into the ground. It's an ANT COLONY!

Tell a big enough lie long enough and eventually people take it for truth.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Yeah I knew that was all bull shit..I have watched shitsreal lie about everything they do for my entire 60 plus years of life so it's like the boy who cried wolf to me at this point too..

I am hopeful as watching the protests shuting down the San Fran bridge for a sease fire..

But then I remember everyone will go home and still sign and date those tax checks.

Expand full comment
russian_bot's avatar

"Have you ever noticed that it’s never the actual anti-semites who get attacked as anti-semites?" - because those ones are good to have at hand, to be used as needed.

Expand full comment
Jeff Hudson's avatar

I would argue that the Zionists are using the Jews and Judaism as human shields!

Expand full comment
Ohio Barbarian's avatar

Watch Due Dissidence much? Keaton Weiss recently said the exact same thing.

Expand full comment
John Pretty's avatar

Except that most Zionists are Jews.

Expand full comment
Lynne Dempsey's avatar

The ridiculous thing about all criticism of Israel being anti-Semitic is that everyone on a Palestinian support March or rally or calling for a Ceasefire is by Israel’s definition anti-Semitic! The term is devoid of meaning now.

Expand full comment
Kojo's avatar

Well what’s most ironic is that it is some jews at the forefront of making this term meaningless. But Jews as a whole have a lot to lose by doing so. It’s dangerous for them in the long run if this gets banalized.

Expand full comment
George Cornell's avatar

Has there ever been a major league Jewish criminal who did not invoke anti-semitism when they were being held to account? Even Mandela and Tutu wee accused by the Jewish lobby of being anti-Semitic because they dared sympathize with the plight of the Palestinians.

Expand full comment
Kojo's avatar

It’s actually the right wing reactionaries of the west that weaponised antisemitism post WW II. Having persecuted the Jews they then used this as a story to dispossess Palestinians of their land and use that land as a place to move the Jews out of Europe and deposit them there. This was done in an unholy alliance with Jewish reactionaries.

Then within Europe they carved out antisemitism as a special form of cloaking for Jews elevated above all others. So today in Europe it is for example illegal to deny the existence of a Nazi holocaust on Jews but it is perfectly legal to deny the existence of the European holocaust and genocide on Africans in Belgian Congo and perfectly ok to deny the holocaust of transatlantic slave trade.

Once you do that then it’s a short step to allowing Jews to persecute others free of consequences. And Jewish reactionaries have taken full advantage of that.

Today across Europe the vast majority of the nasty xenophobic neo nazi political parties all kneel to Israel, while beating up on Europes new minorities: those of African, Arab and asian descent. They even have alliances with and support Israel. Bear in mind these we are talking about here are neo nazis whose fathers and grandfathers and philosophical leaders were behind Auschwitz and everything. And the israelis and zionists partner with them and give them political cover - while TOGTHER battering European liberals who dare to point out apartheid in palestine, as “antisemitic”.

So the left was guilty of sleeping there. ALL form of discrimination should be battled and none of them, such as with antisemitism, should be elevated or carry any more consequences than discrimination against other peoples.

Expand full comment
John Pretty's avatar

The Labour Party that expelled Jeremy Corbyn regards itself as part of the Left.

Expand full comment
Kojo's avatar

The ones that remain no. Their entire mission is to eliminate the Left. They know they are libdems in disguise.

Expand full comment
Ohio Barbarian's avatar

It doesn't matter what they call themselves. They're bloody Fascists, just like American Democrats are, and quite a few Republicans.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

It's an angle I never really looked at before but that's quite fascinating that they they are in essence the "players" being played by the players. They have become the pariahs as a means of power grab and in reality been subjected willingly to the new version of a Warsaw ghetto, they even built their own walls. They have embodied the story of their own trauma. The walls don't keep people out, they hem themselves in. And now they are perpetual victimes or using that as the backdrop to justify every psycopath move they make.

The sadest part is they have reached into the depth of the western governments to control their spine from the inside out.

To serve the interest of the psycopath military industrial complex.

Expand full comment
Randal Marlin's avatar

Very perceptive. Something that has needed to be said for a long time. Well-expressed

Expand full comment
Susan T's avatar

when Trudeau said something that offended Netanyahu (I think it was that he criticized the killing of children and called for a "humanitarian pause") this was Netanyahu's reply: https://twitter.com/netanyahu/status/1724588372994216010?s=48&t=xcbZuIsL8eZhmSzbpUQxlg

His first comment "It is not Israel that is deliberately targeting civilians but Hamas that beheaded, burned and massacred civilians in the worst horrors perpetrated on Jews since the Holocaust. "is, in my view, insulting to holocaust survivors and is in itself anti-Semitic.

Expand full comment
ChazLB's avatar

Netanhyue helped facilitate the funding of Hamas through Iran and qutar to make sure the the PLO and the Gaza Palestinians dint unite with the west bank...he effectively used Israelis as human shields .

And lets also remember the natural gas discovered off the coast of Gaza,, and coincidentally all the other shipping ports not under Israels control have been destroyed..USA has a clandestine hand in all that too.. This is why i now call it The USrAel

Expand full comment
Paulo Kirk's avatar

Ahh, when you point out that Israel, or Occupied Palestine (that's anti-semitic) is mostly Jewish, well, you are anti-semite. When you say that most of Israel is backing the bombing, you are anti-semite. When you say that Zionists are Jewish, and Jewish people who call themselves Zionists are Jewish, you are anti-semite. When you say that Israel never had a right to exist, you are more than anti-semitic. You are a monster.

This fucking game has been gonig on and on for the past Edward Bernays late period.

I'm getting cancelled and emails from one of my employers for these:

https://paulokirk.substack.com/p/tik-tokking-palestinian-abuse-10000

https://paulokirk.substack.com/p/they-attack-bulldozers-digging-a

https://paulokirk.substack.com/p/when-you-say-america-is-the-most

+--+

Jeremy? Well, tough, but try being a slave laborer, working for $22 an hour, and see how easy it is to weather these monsters, in and out of public office.

+--+

Again, facts are anti-semitic: Jews make up the majority at 73.5% (about 7.145 million individuals). The Arab community, spanning various religions excluding Judaism, accounts for 21% (around 2.048 million). An additional 5.5% (roughly 534,000 individuals) are classified as "others".

Facts, anti Jewish: Nearly all Israeli Jews identify with one of four categories: Haredi (commonly translated as “ultra-Orthodox”), Dati (“religious”), Masorti (“traditional”) or Hiloni (“secular”).

+--+

Only Jews can talk about Judaism or Jews or Zionism:

Most Jews across the religious spectrum agree in principle that Israel can be both a democracy and a Jewish state. But they are at odds about what should happen, in practice, if democratic decision-making collides with Jewish law (halakha). The vast majority of secular Jews say democratic principles should take precedence over religious law, while a similarly large share of ultra-Orthodox Jews say religious law should take priority.

Even more fundamentally, these groups disagree on what Jewish identity is mainly about: Most of the ultra-Orthodox say “being Jewish” is mainly a matter of religion, while secular Jews tend to say it is mainly a matter of ancestry and/or culture.

+--+

Seesaw? Anti-semitic: Roughly eight-in-ten Israeli Arabs (79%) say there is a lot of discrimination in Israeli society against Muslims, who are by far the biggest of the religious minorities. On this issue, Jews take the opposite view; the vast majority (74%) say they do not see much discrimination against Muslims in Israel.

+--+

Settlers with uniforms and guns and mob rule and Racist Slave ideology?

Right, so the right to exist, and for all Jews having the "right" to go to Occupied Palestine, how does that work for those illegal settlements?

Israel is no longer a predominantly immigrant society; at present, roughly three-quarters of Israeli adults are natives, and just one-quarter were born abroad. Yet with virtual unanimity, Israeli Jews of every kind – native-born and immigrant, young and old, secular and highly religious – agree that all Jews everywhere should have the right to make “aliyah,” or move to Israel and receive immediate citizenship.

+--+

Only Jews and Jewish Israelis can talk about Isra-Hell.

The rest of us are anti-Semites!

Expand full comment
Dr.Who's avatar

Nothing is more antisemitic than Zionism:

https://youtu.be/RvQmoPjH4dA?si=ae7_tsCe-0sN68b1

Expand full comment
Nabil's avatar

Amen! As a Palestinian-American I've watched the fear instilled in the hearts of many left-liberals of being labeled anti-semitic; watched them look over their shoulders lest Jewish colleagues hear them talk about Israel/Palestine; watched them defer to those colleagues as "experts" and then slink back into their offices as the conversation turned heated as I challenged the colleague whose "expertise" amounted to MSM talking points larded with worn-out Zionist tropes.

Expand full comment
Jo Waller's avatar

The leveraging of the past has to stop. The Nakba is happening right now. The holocaust not only doesn't belong to the Jews, it started with leftists and gays, it has been far far superseded in atrocity by over 50 years of factory farming billions of sentient beings as the worst crime in human history. Also happening right now.

I also object to antisemitism being even worse than racism. Even hating Jews is more special?

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Nov 16, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
John Pretty's avatar

I think the term "bigot" is far better and encompasses all forms of discrimination without referencing crude identitarianism

Expand full comment
Jo Waller's avatar

They tried to smear Sucharit Bhakdi ' a proponent of covid misinformation' calling him antisemitic for pointing out how Nazi Israel is.

The right has become the woke police calling for arrests of people carrying pictures of coconuts. Although of course saying things about Moslims is not racist

Expand full comment