Antifascist
versus Communist
Left
wing academics liked to boast of being Communist
but too many people know the reality so they call themselves
Antifascist. They
are prone to be members of
Unite Against
Fascism [ UAF ], just like Cameron, a nominal
Tory.
Bludgeon versus baton
The police restrained him with their batons when he attacked them with his bludgeon. [ Who is the thug? ]
British people
versus British citizens
Brits are English,
Scots,
Welsh and Ulstermen
as well as people from some offshore islands. They founded great nations like
America, Australia, Canada & New Zealand while
British
citizens are prone to be Third World
aliens granted the right to prey on us and the dole system by
Her Majesty's Government
&
Treason.
Diversity Hires
English team versus England team English versus
British Fair versus Unfair Fair share versus I want more Grooming versus Flirting Jungle versus Rain Forest
Populist versus Popular
Privilege versus Advantage
Public Schools versus
Private Schools
Liberal versus Cultural Marxism
Racism versus patriotism Social justice
Troops versus Soldiers
Views or Extreme Views White
Privilege Xenophobia versus
Racism Said/claimed/admitted/boasted/argued carry their messages:- He claimed that [ but he is lying ] He admitted that [ but only because he
was forced to ] He argued that
[ but you shouldn't believe that ] He boasted that [ he should
be ashamed but he isn't ] The crowd/mob/mutinous assemblage/victims/refugees [ victims or perpetrators? ] advanced/charged/fled from/moved toward/stormed/attacked [ victims or perpetrators? ] the police officers/thin blue line/thugs/storm troopers [
upholders of the law or
perpetrators? ] and were repulsed/restrained/set upon/threatened/ fired on/dispersed [
victims or
perpetrators? ] Newspaper reports are not usually quite so blatant but have a look at
'Racist' police blocked bridge and forced evacuees back at gunpoint
and see the contrast between the message and the facts as claimed [ also notice my
presumption of their guilt ]. How To Frame A Patriot
Newspeak for the Oldest Profession
The Wikipedia takes a public position:- Review of
Robert Conquest's The Dragons of Expectation - Reality and Delusion in the
Course of History
When Magical Thinking Enters The Arena What my professor meant was words like “feminism,” “social
justice,” and “fair share;” words whose meanings are perpetually twisted and
stretched to fit a political agenda. Substantially speaking, these words are
nothing more than fluff. They rely not on rationality, but on emotion.
“Feminism” invokes feelings of female empowerment; “social justice,” feelings of
equality and solidarity. For me, the words “fair share” usually evoke anger and
frustration because of the common misuse of the phrase, but those “magic words”
are intended also to invoke feelings of fairness and equality. While these
“magic words” or broader—“magical thinking” are useful during campaign speeches,
on holidays, or at memorials, when applied to public policy, they take a far
more sinister turn. When “magical thinking” invades the political arena, tensions
are sure to ensue. Often, one side, either right or left, will hijack a word or
phrase and claim that their definition is absolute. For example, “feminism” is
commonly associated with liberal ideology. However, what does feminism actually
mean? Here’s where the magic comes in. Feminism is commonly
defined as “the
theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.” Sounds
good, right? However, once an ideology grasps onto a “magic” word like feminism,
its meaning changes entirely. For the
National Organization of Women,
feminism encompasses the idea of “reproductive rights,” and supports the full
legalization of abortion. However,
Sarah Palin has
advocated for an emerging “conservative feminism,” which includes traditional
family values and a pro-life agenda. Which side’s version of “feminism” is
correct? In short, both of them and neither of them. That’s the magic of
“feminism.” Slap on your own definition of feminism and bang, you’re a
“feminist.” However, I can’t say it’s accurate to put
Sarah Palin in the same
category as Gloria Steinem. “Magic words” are bipolar. What I mean is, if your definition
of a magic word does not align with that of another person, then you must be
“wrong” and they must be “right,” or vice versa. If you’re against the liberal
conception of feminism, well then you must hate women. Uneasy about social
justice? You must, therefore, support injustice. If your concept of “fair share”
is too small, then you must hate the poor. It’s a vicious cycle, but one to be
expected. “Magic words” have to power to induce brief euphoria, but fade quickly
when actual policies come into play. This makes political debate all but
impossible. How can you possibly argue against amnesty for illegal immigrants
when your opponent labels it “social justice?” Sure, you can bring up solid
facts and a rational argument, but it’s still impossible to escape the
accusation that you are “against” social justice. That’s the true power of these
“magic words.” Bring them up in an argument and you’ve won, regardless of
whether your facts are accurate or your points logical. Who wants to argue
against fairness, equality, or even freedom for that matter? Magical thinking
and magic words must stay where they belong on the campaign trail and in holiday
speeches, where a politician’s main goal is to invoke passion or create
solidarity. When it comes to deciding public policy or arguing the facts in a
political debate, leave the magic words at the door. Progression is all but
impossible if we are not able to rely on reason and facts instead of meaningless
words and “magical” thinking.
Means
third raters, usually black given jobs for the sake of
Political Correctness.
Do many people notice? Probably not. The English team
would be full of Englishmen. The
England team is full of foreigners, which is allegedly something to do with
England.
Englishmen born in England, speaking
English, caring about England are something
of a dying breed. The
BBC and other traitors promote the idea
that
England does not exist, until it comes
to football hooligans and anything else that they think will make us ashamed of
ourselves. They use "British" to include the
Third World undesirables that have
washed up on our shores incited by a treasonous ruling class, and given
British passports, bribed by the dole, free medicine etc.. There is an agenda with the destruction of
England as an idea
at the top. The same propagandists are using Slavery
as part of their propaganda war. They do not tell us that
Jews Monopolized Black Slave Trading. That would give the game away.
It's not fair means whatever
the propagandist wants it to mean, as in: He's paid more than me.
He gets more than me. It's not fair. What is fair? Whatever the greedy want it
to mean.
Rapacious men
groom innocent young girls to satisfy their evil passions. Lads and lasses
flirt, they court, they even get married, have babies then bring them up
decently.
Jungles are hot, damp, full of dirt, diseases, insects that bite
and unfriendly natives while rain forests are part of a fragile environment
full of wonderful people living in harmony with nature
and valuable cures which have not been discovered yet and are likely to be
destroyed by ruthless capitalists.
Populism means pandering to the worst instincts of what Karl Marx called the
#Lumpenproletariat, plebian swine, the hot sweaty masses
by cynical politicians on the make. Popular
means approved of by people or of the people as in Democracy, rule by the
people.
Privileges are unfair, unearned advantages,
allegedly. See e.g. White
Privilege ex Wiki
Public Schools educate the sons of English gentlemen while
private schools give unfair advantages to rich children paid for by the ill gotten gains of
Capitalist Swine who grind the faces of the poor into the dirt.
The word liberal is related to liberty. It was a respectable
word in American politics. Now it has been perverted, becoming quite the
opposite.
Bill Lind tells us that
Liberal Democracy is a Contradiction.
Racism is a Marxist construct, one invented by Leon
Trotsky - see The Word
Racist Was Invented By Trotsky then
Marxists decided to use it as a
Propaganda tool. It has been extremely effective.
Patriotism is perfectly respectable among honest men. That is why the
BBC and other communist subversives call it racism and use
it as way of blocking objections to the Third World immigration
they are using to
destroy England and
Christendom. Recall that racism, a total non-issue
after the war in 1945 was crime in 1965 due to the
Race Relations Act.
Social just means whatever communist subversives want. Fair play for unmarried
mothers? Check. Fair play for illegal immigrants as in council houses, dole,
medical treatment? Check. See
Illegal Immigrant Housing
Men don't exist any more. Soldiers do get
mentioned. Troops is the word used to hide the fact that men wage war; the
pretence that women are just as capable of doing the job.
Are, somehow different from research, a dissertation or a thesis. Thus "His
claims are beneath contempt. He is a Moral
Cretin." It is mentioned in
Richard Lynn, Cultural Marxism, and the War on Objective Science.
We have unfair advantages - allegedly.
The inherent assumption is that we have
privileges, unfair advantages, unearned advantages.
We invented Western Civilization.
Blacks want it. Socialists want to destroy it.
Men who came back from the Second World War had never heard of
racism. They might have read the word, Xenophobia but not one in a hundred had heard
the word used. Now racism is rammed down our throats by the media day in and day out. It
is a close synonym of patriotism
invented as a tool to use against us by a traitorous media. It means hatred of
foreigners and immigrants by Englishmen or by white men but not vice versa.
Blacks are allowed to hate us because they are victims of the
Western Guilt
which Left Wingers love to promote.
He said that.......... [ he said it, not us
]
Barry Krusch writes about HOW it is done. He is interested in the mechanics of
media manipulation rather than being a sympathizer. It is in .pdf format
unfortunately but well worth a read.
Is a view from someone else on the same theme. He gives us:-
cripple >> handicapped
>> disabled >> differently abled
idiot >> imbecile
>> retarded >> special needs
>> educationally sub-normal
deaf >> hard of hearing
sodomite >> homosexual
>> gay
also
squatter camps
>> informal housing
illegal immigrants
>> undocumented workers
illegal immigration
>> informal migration
crime >> informal employment
terrorism >> informal violence
but not
extortion
>> tax
harlot
>> whore >> strumpet >> prostitute >>
sex worker
This article contains
weasel words, vague phrasing that often accompanies
biased or
unverifiable information. Such statements should be
clarified or removed.
Their public position is a mask for their real agenda.
QUOTE
Even now, when the opening of the Soviet archives has revealed that matters were
even worse than Conquest could prove, one strand of “liberalism” continues
inexcusably to treat the
Cold War as a battle not between free societies and
totalitarian dictatorship, but between “ideologies” that, it is implied or even
stated, should be seen as morally equivalent.
UNQUOTE
Ideologies or very different political systems? It is fair to say that America
under Bush is becoming as bad as Russia under Lenin and Stalin.
QUOTE
I was recently
awoken from a Zyrtec-induced (allergies are the worst) stupor in my American
Revolution seminar class when I heard my professor make an off-handed comment
about “magic words.” Having recently spent an undisclosed number of hours
watching multiple Harry Potter movies, I assumed that he was referring to words
like “Wingardium Leviosa” shouted with a swish and flick of a magic wand.
Needless to say, I was a little off. The magic words he meant have probably
never echoed through the halls of Hogwarts, yet they have become unbelievably
common in our cultural vernacular.
“Magical
thinking” is commonly associated with the words “social justice” and “fair
share” as well. Social justice certainly paints a picture of serene equality and
national solidarity, but in action, it often manifests itself as something quite
different. The left-leaning Sojourners
magazine portrays social justice as a concept of equality which encompasses
positions like amnesty for illegal immigrants and affirmative action. I’m all
for justice, but I can’t say I support either of those two positions. However,
that doesn’t mean I’m for social “injustice.” Based upon the nature of “magical
thinking,” the answer might be yes, depending on who you ask. The phrase “fair
share” works the same way. I will personally shell out $10,000 to anyone who can
give me a universal definition of fair share. Fair share is a concept defined
both relatively and individually. It essentially means whatever the person
saying it decides it to mean. For Occupy Wall Street, fair share means a massive
tax increase for the “1%.” However, more conservative Americans tend to believe
that our progressive tax system is unfairly targeting the rich and instead, the
bottom 50% of taxpayers (or non-taxpayers, as the case may be) are not paying
their fair share. Again, I’ll ask the question, whose definition is
correct? It is impossible to tell. This sort of magical thinking makes consensus
and rational debate all but impossible.
Amy Lutz | Saint Louis University | Saint Louis, Missouri |
@AmyLutz4
UNQUOTE
Miss Lutz has brains and beauty; a goodly combination.
