The First Thing to Understand:
You don’t, and cannot, understand women. Their mental operations is complex, multilayered, and – to men, and to many other women – quite baffling.
Kipling said it well, in The Female of the Species is Deadlier Than the Male.
The part of that poem that explains Today’s Woman (not that dissimilar from Yesterday’s Woman):
She is wedded to convictions—in default of grosser ties;
Her contentions are her children, Heaven help him who denies!—
He will meet no suave discussion, but the instant, white-hot, wild,
Wakened female of the species warring as for spouse and child.
Unprovoked and awful charges—even so the she-bear fights,
Speech that drips, corrodes, and poisons—even so the cobra bites,
Scientific vivisection of one nerve till it is raw
And the victim writhes in anguish
I leave out that non-PC part that follows.
Look at the behavior of Woke Women, who will actively work to DESTROY their opponents – there is NO mercy. Don’t apologize or beg (as VoxDay would say in his insightful SJWs Always Lie).
If you are not prepared to fight to the death, walk away.
Many have commented on how Trump seems to be moving at a snail’s pace in keeping aliens out, and removing those who are already here.
It’s true, it’s been a slow process. The latest Supreme Court decision may have made it easier, and I think there is a good reason why this is taking so long.
Trump is, despite his tendency to seemingly spontaneously shoot his mouth off, a guy who feels his way through processes. His moves are designed to make the OTHER guy reveal his strategy, and to reveal his hand (forgive me, my dad was a serious poker player – I work from that context).
I believe Trump senses if he pushes too hard, too fast, he’ll lose the guys that are on the fence (on the Supreme Court). I think that it will take some time to solidify the relationships/alliances, and without that, some decisions may go the wrong way.
That could be fatal to legal reform. A bad decision often has to outlive the people who wrote it – look at how Roe v. Wade has hung on. Better to move more slowly, than to spur a decision that will reverberate over the decades.
UPDATE: A commenter, Fifty Cal, had linked to this editorial from VDare, re: the role of Kirstjen Nielsen, Secretary of DHS (Dept. of Homeland Security), in acting contrary to Trump’s plans for dealing with illegal aliens. VDare is a controversial site, so – feel free to check it out, but Caveat Emptor.
I’ve been following the immigration issues for some time. Many are disappointed that Trump has not built the wall, nor managed to stop the invasion, so far.
It’s clear that he has the support of ICE, and most of the law enforcement near the border. However, thanks to the unyielding refusal to cooperate by his opponents – both the Dems, and the NeverTrumps – every move forward has been stymied by the Deep State and the courts.
One thing that has happened is that the elements under his control – overturning the Executive Decisions, changing personnel, and educating the public – he has, and is, delivering.
One relatively small change that probably won’t make the news is the new requirements for H-1B workers. They now have to provide biometric ID, be investigated by us and other nations, and generally provide information that should make tracking them easier. Since many of the illegals entered on temporary visas – like the H-1B ones – we could cut down on their continued presence after their visa expires. Trump has, apparently done an end-run around the sneaky ways that aliens evade the law.
An additional action Trump has taken is to get rid of close to 1/2 million new H-1Bs that Obama awarded “with a pen”.
I think this is in line with his experience with large projects. Getting them done is not just a matter of designing the Grand Plan. It’s a matter of tweaking small fixes that allow the workers to get back on task, once roadblocks surface. Ideologues cannot do this. They have to work according to their principles. Rand Paul is a principled man, but I suspect that he could not bring himself to sidestep his principles to get his goals accomplished. Nor could most True Conservatives.
I’m OK with this progress, for now. Small changes, put in place, snowball.
It’s been a lengthy process to get through Marcuse’s writings. “Repressive Tolerance” was bad enough. I still have to make my way through “Eros and Civilization”. I’m not expecting a fun time reading it.
Other than that, I’ve been:
- Getting the taxes ready for our accountant to file.
- Cleaning/organizing at home – it’s cathartic to sweep away clutter and restore some physical order to my life.
- Nailing the insurance agent exam! Now I just have to prod the people in charge of background checks to finish and get me that OK, so I can get that license.
- Nursing a sick husband back to health – he’s on the mend with his circulation problem, but, now, he has a cold.
- Working on a short story – about 1/2 way complete. Originally, I wanted to write one a month. Who am I kidding? I’ll be happy with 4 a YEAR!
- Simultaneously writing the Leftism for Beginners book, and planning the content of unwritten chapters. Also, researching – Lord, those Leftists are tedious, wordy, and decidedly Germanic in their writing – lots of complex sentences with terms having specific meaning different from normal usage. Ponderous.
- Working on losing weight. It is NOT easy. It IS important, and my diet needs to be supplemented with more exercise. I have a free week coming up, and I think that’s an excellent time to plan, and execute, a fitness schedule.
I’m in awe of my Declination co-bloggers who have created posts that are lengthy, thoughtful, and deep. That’s not me. I write shorter and more superficially. I wish I had the kind of mind that can dig deep into a topic, and draw out the meaning in well-crafted prose.
But, that I cannot, is one excellent argument for my Leftism book. I think, and write, closer to the way average people think. They really don’t need a well-referenced, lengthy, and complete description of how The Left has screwed up America, and The West. There are people who have already written those books.
The trouble is, they are not being read by those who need it most – the innocents who have gone along with what “Everyone Knows” to be true – pure Leftist propaganda. It’s what they were taught in school, it’s what the “cool kids” were talking about in college (it’s what that really cute girl/guy was so enthused about, that was mostly slogans and buzzwords). It’s the point of view that will allow them to be accepted into mainstream middle-class society.
To NOT follow along will get them labeled as Haters, Nazis, and Evil. They will be isolated at work, at school, and in their social circles. It’s easier to go along, particularly as they don’t know just how skewed that philosophy is.
Leftism for Beginners is designed to be the first step of a very long journey. One that can provide them with the tools to see how they have been manipulated by The Left, for most of their life.
Some will close the book, and largely forget it. Some will not even finish it.
And, some will read, begin to see, and take the next step. Those are the ones I’m writing for.
“War to the Knife” – mortal combat; a conflict carried to the last extremity. (Webster, 1913 edition.)
The origins of the above phrase are rather obscure. Yet anyone genuinely familiar with the history of the 20th century – especially those who have lived all or much of their lives in the period – understand the meaning of the maxim instinctively. And, of course, there are people from places such as Yugoslavia in the 1990’s, Lebanon for much of the 1970’s and 1980’s, or any remaining European, Chinese or Filipino survivors of the 2nd World War who have actually lived it.
It would be a mistake, however, to dismiss the idiom as merely a melodramatic description of a major war. Even some of the greatest large scale conflicts – the Napoleonic wars, the War of the Roses, as well as most of the campaigns of the Romans, the Mongols or Alexander of Macedon – were curbed to a significant extent by their participants. Such struggles were usually resolved without national or civilizational scale civilian massacres and/or deliberate, widespread destruction of the civil infrastructure of a participant’s territory, as they were ended when some rational or otherwise relatively bounded objective was achieved – a wealth-producing region was captured, a ‘debt of honor’ was paid, a strategically advantageous position was established and so forth.
When one considers the phrase “War to the Knife” more carefully, it becomes apparent that such an event doesn’t necessarily involve the mass deployment of formally organized, trained and equipped armies to a battlefield or military front. The sanguinary and unconstrained ruthlessness implied by the expression can on occasion be an accurate description of the civil discord arising within a civilization in a period of existential crisis.
Whether the clash is one between empires, nations and tribes or an internal societal/cultural contest, there are certain commonalities to such events:
1. The battle is between opposing belief systems. One or both can be a theology. It could also involve one or both having an ideology that is so intensely believed as to become a de facto religious creed.
2. At least one of the combatants is completely and totally unconstrained by any moral, ethical or legal principles, pursuing victory as a zero sum game. This ‘end justifies the means’ approach can be either apparent at the outset of hostilities or evolve as the conflict endures over time.
One of the 20th century events which perfectly captures the meaning of “War to the Knife” is this one:
Mao’s Cultural Revolution endured over a 10-12 year period, ending with his death in 1976. Millions died; many more millions were socially and professionally ruined; hundreds of millions were incessantly terrorized. But though it might seem at first glance that China’s society had descended into madness, there was very clearly a method to that madness. What were some of the defining characteristics of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, and how did these characteristics manifest themselves?
- The revolution was conducted against the entire collection of established institutions in Chinese society. Particular focus was placed on eradicating religious symbols, monuments and organizations, as well as any institution that had roots in the past, as China’s pre-Communist history was treated as an endless litany of evil acts whose legacy could only have a malign influence in the future unless completely stamped out.
2. The ranks of the civilian revolutionary cadres were composed mostly of university students (though K-12 students were heavily recruited as well in secondary roles.) Between their youthful vigor, the thoroughness of their indoctrination and the typical eagerness of a young generation to assert themselves and exercise their energies in effecting change, they proved to be a shrewd choice to coerce Chinese society and its institutions.
3. Assembled into large gangs, the university-based Red Guards intimidated establishment figures in the educational and political spheres by publicly shaming and berating them, coercing confessions from them for imaginary crimes against the principles of social, political and economic justice of the Revolution, and with increasing frequency physically assaulting and/or killing them. These purges included Party members who had previously been considered to be staunch supporters of the Revolution but had been deemed to be lacking in sufficient revolutionary fervor.
A more complete but nevertheless concise summary is available here:
Does any of the above sound….familiar?
America’s situation today is obviously different from that of 1960’s China. Theirs was a factional struggle amongst Marxists who already exercised absolute control over every aspect of China’s society. As the occasions and opportunities presented themselves and appropriate facets of the state apparatus were maneuvered into position by one faction or another, the contestants could exercise their will over various institutions and the citizenry. Furthermore, the party could legitimately point to the past century and a half of imperial and, later, militarist authoritarianism for many examples of the cruelty, injustice, inefficiency and corruption of the previous regimes. China’s pre-communist history had indeed been unhappy and even ugly for a good 150 years. Only the deeply brainwashed or venemously spiteful could say the same about America.
Nonetheless, we can see every day in the news how America’s progressives/neo-maoists are emerging from social justice oriented university departments and programs with the goal of attacking and destroying American culture and history. These new Red Guards are having an internal struggle of their own within the Democratic party – a fight which they have been very clearly winning over the past 15-20 years. But they are also fighting on two other fronts: the battle to wrest control of the remaining 50% or so of political and legal structures from their ideological/theological nemesis in the form of the Republicans, and the campaign against all economic, cultural and social institutions which they do not yet completely dominate.
Along the way, the neo-maoists are leaving no stone unturned to accomplish their mission. As an example of how dedicated they are to infiltrating and undermining every facet of American society, take a good look at this:
I’m part of a very early stage software startup where a very advanced AI is a central component of what we are developing. We’re well beyond the mundane image/pattern recognition bricabrac that is so breathlessly hyped nowadays. Seeing the intent of some of those course titles on offer from Google made my stomach sour and flip over. The cult-like obsessive mania of SJWs is glaringly evident.
There are those who have gone so far as to characterize the current state of affairs as a cold civil war, poised to potentially turn warmer:
In previous posts, I had speculated that any success by the neomaoists stemming from the 2018 midterms would fuel the neo-maoists and drive them to greater extremes of action – and my musing have unfortunately proven to be providential. The signs of what the neo-maoists would do with any level of success in the midterms were obvious beforehand. Now, they’re acting them out.
The Psychology of Progressive Hostility
As party apparatchiks did in 1960’s China, many establishment figures in the Democratic party, either out of cynicism, previously hidden affinity or simple fear, are publicly and enthusiastically aligning themselves with the American Red Guards and their media facilitators. Some examples: Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer proclaiming that the president had been taught a lesson in the last budget and shutdown impasse; House Majority leader Nancy Pelosi proclaiming that Roger Stone’s ridiculously overblown arrest somehow proves President Trump was helped by Russia to win in 2016; the doubling and tripling down of members of the MSM on the Covington kids false flag despite the clear and incontrovertible refutation of their charges; and the ringing endorsements of all the current Democratic presidential candidates of AOC’s laughably retarded Green New Deal.
And what of the American Red Guards themselves? Antifa is clearly preparing to ramp up their actions to the next level of violence. The ex-leader of the Eugene, Oregon chapter who is featured in the link below was himself ex military, and his followers seemingly consider him an example to emulate:
And what will be the end goal of those driving the American Cultural Revolution?
It appears to be the same as that of Mao’s Red Guards. Power and CLEANSING.
I’d like to be clear about something, folks – I don’t want this. I dread the idea that things are moving in this direction.
But the Progressive Left won’t stop, because they DO want this. Remember: they’re playing this as a zero sum game. And since, in their theology, we are not only stupid but EVIL, it stands to reason that their success can be achieved only by our utter abasement or, failing that, our extinction.
They have already taken steps to ‘shape’ the battle and publicly justify their actions, as they are positioning this to be all on us:
One can see that these developments are being recognized in a growing circle for what they are, and a reaction seems to be building at the ‘grass roots’ level. However, it appears that those on the far Left either don’t care or are blinded by their delusions of the inevitability of history:
So where does that leave us – the Normals of Kurt Schlichter’s books and essays?
I honestly don’t know. It’s clear to me that we can’t rely on the Republican party to fight back effectively. Most of their officeholders appear to be reacting to all of this passively and would be quite content to serve as a permanent minority party, pretending to take an oppositional stance while holding what positions of power and influence-peddling they could, coasting along behind the scenes while the Neo-Maoists do all the heavy lifting of actually governing.
I voted for Trump as a counterweight to all of the above and am still enthusiastic about my choice. He is the Grey Champion of our Time of Troubles. But it’s not clear to me yet that he’ll be enough.
I managed to finish the next part of Leftism for Beginners.
Next, I’m going to tackle the New Left (pray for me).
This is not making it any easier to finish my fictional book – but, given the abysmal ignorance of most people about the “thinking” underlying the current crop of Leftist, it’s quite necessary.
The link above takes you to a long article about how AOC’s grab for power is connected to her growing independence from DNC control. That makes her potentially quite a threat – both to the Democrats, and to the electoral process.
Another relatively new activist powerbase is the Sunrise Movement – which AOC has allied with publicly, most notably when they confronted Pelosi. Unlike other organizations, it is NOT largely funded by the Soros-allied foundations. Instead, they bring in a lot of young people, actually pay them something (barely, but more than most internships), and fund their salaries and other operating expenses through online donations (Paypal, VISA, MC, etc.).
They make no bones about being an advocacy organization. On their website, they specifically state that your donation is NOT tax-deductible (although they also have an ‘educational’ component that is).
ActBlue Civics is a registered charitable organization formed to democratize social welfare giving. A copy of our latest financial report may be obtained by emailing email@example.com or calling (617) 517-7600. Alternatively, our report detailing our programs, a financial summary, and the percentage of contributions dedicated to our purpose, along with a copy of our license, may be obtained from the following state agencies: FLORIDA (registration #CH48620) — Division of Consumer Services 800-435-7352 www.800helpfla.com; GEORGIA (registration #CH012404) — contact ActBlue Civics; MARYLAND (registration #32940) — Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401; NEW JERSEY (registration pending) — Attorney General, 973-504-6215, www.state.nj.us/lps/ca/charfrm.htm; NEW YORK (registration pending) — Attorney General, Charities Bureau, 120 Broadway, New York, NY 10271; NORTH CAROLINA (registration #SL010079) — State Soliciting Licensing Branch, 888-830-4989; PENNSYLVANIA (registration #106113) — Department of State, 800-732-0999; VIRGINIA — Office of Charitable and Regulatory Programs, PO Box 1163, Richmond, VA 23218; WASHINGTON (registration #38989) — Secretary of State, Charities Division, Olympia, WA 98504-0422, 800-332-4483; WISCONSIN (registration pending) — contact ActBlue Civics.
Registration with and reporting to these agencies does not imply endorsement, approval, or recommendation of ActBlue Civics.
I am at least eighteen years old.
This contribution is made from my own funds or the funds of an authorizing corporation or other entity, and the funds are not being provided by any other person or entity.
Note: Contributions, donations, and gifts to Sunrise are not tax deductible.
They support our advocacy and political efforts and allow us to build the most powerful movement we can to stop climate change and create millions of good jobs.
Sunrise is a non-profit, tax-exempt, 501(c)(4) social welfare organization.
DONATE BY CHECK: Make your check payable to Sunrise and send it to Sunrise, 50 F Street NW Suite 800, Washington, DC 20001, USA.
You can MAKE A TAX-DEDUCTIBLE DONATION to the 501(c)3 Sunrise Movement Education Fund here (https://actionnetwork.org/fundraising/donate-to-sunrise-movement-fund), which supports our educational work to raise awareness about climate change and expose the corrupting influence of fossil fuel executives on our politics.
Questions? Issues? Email us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
In one way, Sunrise is smart – they are actually providing a base wage, that will tend to keep their people with them longer than volunteers. They are also spreading around fancy titles to all – which should make it easier for the drone to find another job in the future.
Their front page has this motto:
We’re building an army of young people to stop climate change and create millions of good jobs in the process.
That ‘army’ part does give me pause.
As far as the House freshmen, I sense that the telegenic and glib AOC is the figurehead for a lot of discontent with Democratic leadership. The power behind the throne may be Saikat Chakrabarti, her former campaign manager and current chief of staff. He’s a Silicon Valley alum – his LinkedIn profile is here.
What I’m finding useful about LinkedIn is not the self-promoting BS – it’s the background information, and the connections to other people (People Also Viewed sidebar).
If you look at AOC’s FEC data, the contributions are, predictably, from ActBlue (small amounts – but a LOT of them – I’m assuming that this was a bundled contribution setup), some individuals – Benjamin Burkert (not a New Yorker – wonder what his interest was -he contributed $2500 in the primary), George Lane (also a CA resident who contributed $2500), Prajit Gopal – a young man in NYC, who is connected to technology through his work, also gave $2500.
So, it sounds as though a lot of AOC’s primary money was from:
- Leftists (ActBlue)
- The technology community (her chief of staff is from that industry)
- The Indian community (her chief of staff is of Indian heritage)
ActBlue donations can be tracked, but it takes more time that I have to give. Here’s some information about ActBlue. If you scroll down the page, there’s a chart showing which races benefited most from ActBlue-connected donations.
Some of the top contributors to ActBlue.
I’m going to continue to keep an eye on this. AOC received a lot of cash for a newbie.
If the Left opponents don’t work to get something like this in place, they likely will be outspent in the next election. Few candidates have Trump’s ability to capture free publicity; the money is needed to get their name out.
I’m a big technology lover. I owned a Commodore 64, actually learned to program using it. I moved onto the PCs, various iterations of Mac, Unix, and now Linux, in the form of my Raspberry Pi.
I like tech, use it (even gave into my children’s urging to get an Alexa for Christmas), and am seldom without means to hook into the Net.
However, it does have its down side – and, in Africa, China is using it to increase their control of the people of that continent.
In a time of growing fears about the accessibility of global data, China has positioned itself as one of the largest providers of technological infrastructures in the world.
As a central part of the Belt and Road Initiative, China is in the process of creating a “digital silk road” that connects China with the rest of the world. The plan includes providing upgraded underwater cables connecting east and west, and introducing new broadband connections to countries with underdeveloped telecommunications infrastructures.
Having the access to the technology is the lure. Chinese control of their country is the hook that will tie them to dependency for a long time. It’s literally “Technological Colonialism”. The free initiatives of the West, particularly of Americans, is a poor substitute.
The reason for Africa’s acceptance of the tech is obvious – it is a powerful aid to the government in their efforts to stay in power. It represents stability, growth, and control, all things that dictators love.
I’m not generally a fan of Western efforts to ‘bring in democracy’. Most of the efforts have allied with the educated classes (those who are not in power at that time), and not with the poorer members of that society. Revolutions cannot succeed without the majority of the country – or, at least, a sizable plurality of its citizens. The Elite, by themselves, cannot wrest power away, without support of at least a sizable number of the masses.
If I were in charge of looking for pro-American people to support, I’d work on getting to know:
- The hill people – traditionally, these are people who are looked down on by the rest of the country, who gain little from government, and whose economy tends not to depend on the central government. In nearly every country, they are the Hillbillies, despised by the rest of the country, and antagonistic to authority.
- The group just under the Elite – the merchant classes. They are reasonably well-educated, have good communications networks established, and stand to gain from the freedom that toppling the dictator may bring. They also resent the government, and its petty tyrannies over their lives.
- Teachers – if you want to influence the future, bring in teachers who will make the linkages between freedom and their history, their language/literate works, and their art. Ground it, not in Jefferson and Madison, but in their own culture. Introduce not our Founding documents, but works that stir that universal yearning to be free.
- Religious figures – teach them to be wary, speak in parables native to their country, and based on written holy books. NOT Islam, which is highly vulnerable to being used by thugs. Preferably Christianity, IF you base it on the Bible. If they have a native religion, incorporate it into those teachings – bring it back to their comfort zone. Use natives, not imported missionaries.
Comment if you have some other ideas.
Many moons ago, Milo Yiannopoulos told us that the demand for hate crimes far outstrips the supply. This has been obvious to many on the Right for quite a long time now. Jussie Smollett’s hoax certainly wasn’t the first such incident, though it is unusually prominent. In this, we see the Media’s journey into a Pravda-like arm of the DNC reach its final conclusion. Like Alyssa Milano, they desperately want the image of violent MAGA hat loons running around to be true. Their desire finally trumped the last vestiges of integrity they still possessed.
But beyond this, as Tom Kratman once told me, the Left does not understand us. They do not know their enemy, though we know them a bit better than they know us. Jussie’s faked hate crime smelled wrong to us from the beginning, and not just because of the lack of credible evidence, but because the Left’s conception of who and what we are is so out of touch reality. Their image of MAGA hat wearers is completely at odds with reality.
To explain this in more detail, I will tell you a story. A friend of mine used to be a bouncer. He’s a Rightist, and has always been at least vaguely conservative. And he did witness (and deal with) a homophobic “hate” crime (I loathe the term hate crimes in general, but let’s play along for the moment).
He was at a seedy biker bar a couple decades ago, and a very obviously flamboyant gay man entered the premises. The gay man appeared to be oblivious to the unwelcoming looks of the bar’s regulars. At some point, the gay man decided to go to the bathroom, and some drunken, addled bikers followed him into the john with obvious intentions.
My friend, naturally, followed the bikers. When he got in, the gay man was already being attacked, and my friend had a real hard time dealing with them – they were bikers, after all – but he successfully fought them off and told the gay man to leave before it got any worse for him.
This is how a crime against a gay man, motivated by his homosexuality, would likely take place. If Jussie was walking down the street, acting particularly flamboyant, and a couple of drunken guys accosted him in the street, it would be believable. Crimes of this sort aren’t planned, generally. Nobody is carting around rope and bleach, while pointedly wearing MAGA hats, to find a homosexual to beat down. If someone has an issue with gays, the attack is likely to be unplanned, spontaneous, and like the case my friend dealt with, it will probably involve copious amounts of alcohol.
Most Rightists don’t care much one way or the other if a gay man walks by, or enters a bar, or whatever. Contrary to Leftist belief, most of us don’t care who you are screwing. If there is any annoyance, it’s probably with the sort of folks who like to wave their sexual preferences around like a badge of honor and won’t shut up about it. Even then, that is usually a minor annoyance, barely above that of people who drive slow in the left lane. But if a Rightist were to care, and take offense, and want to hurt someone over it, it would go down like the incident in the biker bar.
It would not go down like the Jussie Smollett hoax. Or the “poop Swastika” incident at Missou. Or the drum-beating Indian complaining about “the Smirk heard ’round the world.”
Rather, these fake hate crimes are presented in the manner a Leftist would conduct a hate campaign. Leftists are fond of indirect, symbolic tactics. PETA-tards enjoy throwing paint on people wearing leather or fur. They are fond of weird symbolism like dressing up as bloodied animals up for slaughter. See the parallels with the noose and bleach supposedly dumped on Jussie? It’s basically PETA-behavior, but staged as a Rightist thing.
No. If a Rightist is going to have a problem with you, the odds are he’s going to punch you in the face. Or follow you into a bathroom and beat you down. The Right is much more fond of directness. Does anybody really think, say, a redneck is going to dump bleach on you and run away? Do you think he cares about the symbolism of a noose, or that he’s going to go out of his way to wear a certain hat – so as to make the right fashion statement during the attack? No. If he has a problem, he’s going to get in your face, probably punch it repeatedly, and walk away when he feels his point has been made.
In this the Left betrays how little they understand us. For even their hoaxes seem like bad parodies to us. It’s what a Leftist would do, only reversed in ideological polarity. It’s not what a Rightist would do. They don’t get us. Their rank-and-file doesn’t have any clue who they are dealing with anymore. Even the Media is too stuck on Leftism to understand anymore. There was a time, perhaps, when wiser Leftists would have thought “well, that doesn’t sound a whole lot like them… maybe we should check into this a little more.”
That time has passed.
This is profoundly dangerous to us all. Because, not knowing us, they cannot understand where the limits are. They’ve been butting up near our maximum levels of tolerance for some time now. Sooner or later, one of them is going to exceed that boundary because he doesn’t even know it’s there, anymore.
It won’t go down any better for them than it did the oblivious gay man walking into the wrong biker bar at the wrong time. And given that no Rightist will be willing to stick up for them, as my friend did back then, it’s likely to go down much, much worse.
A lot of people have commented on various social media that AOC seems awfully dim about basic Economics for someone who majored in that very subject in College.
Wonder no more. I think I’ve zeroed in on why she seems so clueless.