Posted on 08/18/2017 5:53:52 PM PDT by ETL
[by Jason Kessler]
12/6/2015
Here's a different kind of question I've often had about large scale tragedies like natural disasters, diseases & gun violence:
We get so caught up in the emotion of the violence that we don't consider the long-term, historical consequences. To put it bluntly: the planet is overpopulated already. Maybe we shouldn't try to cure every disease, we shouldn't confiscate all the harmful drugs, etc.
Perhaps we'd be happier if we made peace with the fact that rabid animals are going to dwindle the herd from time to time (as they have in much greater volume throughout history) & that's not really a bad thing in the long run.
Should we try to stop as many large scale attacks as possible? Of course... but I don't think the zeitgeist should have an aneurysm every time one occurs either.
I think we be served to draw some historical perspective on how difficult the human condition has always been & how that is something of a blessing in disguise.
Take for instance how valuable the conquerors throughout history, as bloody & awful as they were during their reigns, have been to population control.
We think the planet is overpopulated now: the environment sick, the resources dwindling; where in the world [would] we be without Genghis Khan, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Julius Caesar or for that matter the bubonic plague, cancer & AIDS?
Here's an article on the beneficial impact Genghis Khan's conquests had on the environment & sustainability, for example.
There are already 7.125 BILLION people on Planet Earth.
Try to extrapolate out how many people would be here now if EVERYONE had survived & had kids, which seems to be the ultimate aim of modern society... a right if you will... to defy the boundaries of nature.
It'd be one hell of a dystopian nightmare that's for sure.
Seems to me there's a possibility that this guy, a 'former' Obama supporter, and pro-Occupy Wall Streeter, intentionally set out to launch a race war, perhaps, to, in his distorted mind, reduce the human population. Either that or he was a lefty plant looking to ignite a race war. Was he coordinating with others in this? Who knows. Not me.
Thank you for doing so.
“Why the Holocaust was super cool” by Jason Kessler
Lot of stuff there.
JasonKessler.net
2015:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150601000000*/http://www.jasonkessler.net/
2016:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160501000000*/http://www.jasonkessler.net/
2017:
https://web.archive.org/web/20170915000000*/http://www.jasonkessler.net/
I don't believe for a second that he didn't expect this event to trigger the reaction it did. I think this whole thing was a lefty setup for sparking a race war, somewhat similar to Charles Manson's "Helter Skelter".
Obama pals Dohrn and Ayers' Weather Underground and Manson basically had the same agenda: to incite a race-based, black vs white, revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist class.
Not saying he's as sick in the head as Manson. Only that the basic overall plan appears similar.
Yeah, this guy is a complete leftist. This is more evidence that the “Unite the Right” was a false flag operation.
I aint clickin’ on that link.
and bad publicity for us to have it here. JMO
Yeah, not a good idea to study the mind of those seeking to bring a revolution to the USA where the leftists win... /S
Not as sick perhaps, but just as cold blooded.
nuke ‘em
No, it’s not. No one here is speaking positively of him. In fact, just the opposite. He's being exposed for the phony that he more and more seems to be. The indications are that, in reality, he was actually aligned with the left.
No one can go from a supporter of communist Obama and anti-capitalist Occupy Wall Street to a right-winger of any sort in such short time as he claims. Maybe a young naive college kid, but very unlikely a grown man.
The suspicion is that he may well have been a lefty plant, used by them to ignite their so-called "revolution".
Agitprop
https://www.britannica.com/topic/agitprop
Agitprop, abbreviated from Russian agitatsiya propaganda (agitation propaganda), political strategy in which the techniques of agitation and propaganda are used to influence and mobilize public opinion. Although the strategy is common, both the label and an obsession with it were specific to the Marxism practiced by communists in the Soviet Union.
The twin strategies of agitation and propaganda were originally elaborated by the Marxist theorist Georgy Plekhanov, who defined propaganda as the promulgation of a number of ideas to an individual or small group and agitation as the promulgation of a single idea to a large mass of people. Expanding on these notions in his pamphlet What Is to Be Done? (1902), Vladimir Lenin stated that the propagandist, whose primary medium is print, explains the causes of social inequities such as unemployment or hunger, while the agitator, whose primary medium is speech, seizes on the emotional aspects of these issues to arouse his audience to indignation or action. Agitation is thus the use of political slogans and half-truths to exploit the grievances of the public and thereby to mold public opinion and mobilize public support. Propaganda, by contrast, is the reasoned use of historical and scientific arguments to indoctrinate the educated and so-called “enlightened” members of society, such as party members.
The term agitprop originated as a shortened form of the Agitation and Propaganda Section of the Central Committee Secretariat of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union. This department of the Central Committee was established in the early 1920s and was responsible for determining the content of all official information, overseeing political education in schools, watching over all forms of mass communication, and mobilizing public support for party programs. Every unit of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union, from the republic to the local-party level, had an agitprop section; at the local level, agitators (party-trained spokesmen) were the chief points of contact between the party and the public.
The word agitprop is used in English to describe such departments and, by extension, any work, especially in the theatre, that aims to educate and indoctrinate the public. It typically has a negative connotation, reflecting Western distaste for the overt use of drama and other art forms to achieve political goals.
If you consider “Nazis” (national socialists) to be leftists then it’s not such a big leap. He simply decided he’d rather be a white power socialist instead of a rainbow power socialist. The whole spiel about reducing the population is nothing new to either camp.
Anarchists/Communists/Internationalists, antifa is too good of a word, are just out there to provoke. I heard this months ago.
One of the most powerful tools the Kremlin has in its secret arsenal of Special War is provocation, what they call provokatsiya.
While Moscow cannot claim to have invented this technique, which has existed as long as there have been secret services, there’s no doubt that Russians have perfected the art and taken it to a whole new level of sophistication and deviousness. At times, it can become a strategy all on its own (not always, mind you, with edifying results).
Provokatsiya simply means taking control of your enemies in secret and encouraging them to do things that discredit them and help you. You plant your own agents provocateurs and flip legitimate activists, turning them to your side.
When you’re dealing with extremists to start with, getting them to do crazy, self-defeating things isn’t often difficult. In some cases, you simply create extremists and terrorists where they don’t exist. This is causing problems in order to solve them, and since the Tsarist period, Russian intelligence has been known to do just that.
While this isn’t a particularly nice technique, it works surprisingly well, particularly if you don’t care about bloody and messy consequences. ..."
http://20committee.com/2014/03/29/understanding-provocation/
I'm saying he well may not really have been supportive of any of those extreme so-called "right-wing" groups. It was all an act in order to ignite a lefty revolution. I believe there's a good chance he was planted in that position by the revolutionary left.
Or the FBI. In any case he got a number of real deal white power pimps to follow him into the slaughter pens. They all believed him and thought the whole thing was a good idea.
Right. That would be the plan.
The site is no longer live and the link is to the archive of the site on “The Way Back Machine “, which proves the internet never forgets...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.