Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 11/11/2025 5:00:07 AM PST by MtnClimber
There’s an anti-Left storm brewing among the once conservative/libertarian Generation Z, which follows a predictable and dangerous path that’s left a trail of destruction throughout history.
It came to light in the split between Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson last week over Carlson’s platforming of Nick Fuentes, the virulent antisemitic, pro-Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler-adoring, Holocaust-denying influencer, who’s become the heroic voice of Gen Z’s heterosexual white Christian men who have been devastated the hardest by America’s decline.
Shapiro called Carlson out for giving Fuentes an uncontested platform, leading to a bitter parting between two friends who had fought to preserve a conservative America.
The breakup of a bromance between alternative-conservative media heavyweights made headlines.
But the real story is the anti-left’s disturbing path, which feeds on Fuentes’s galling rhetoric, that’s becoming their uncontested rallying cry.
Gen Z is mad as hell and turning their anger to the usual cast of scapegoats: Jews, women, immigrants, minorities, Baby Boomers, and government conspiracies. We’ve seen this play before, and we know the results.
Gen Z is waking up to the reality that they’re inheriting the overwhelming problems of a debilitated America that they didn’t create and can’t solve by relying on traditional conservative politics. They’re suffering consequences created by generations of Baby Boomer and GenX politicos who wrecked their shot at the American dream by sacrificing their future for short-term political wins years before they were born. Here’s what they face.
They’re the first entire generation that’s predicted to underachieve their parents’ success. They aren’t marrying, and when they do, their divorce rates are at an all-time high.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
And the constant refrain at the time was that it wasn’t going to change anything. It passed without all that much fanfare at the time.
Wikipedia article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Nation_of_Immigrants
Key quote:
“The book was written by Kennedy in 1958, while he was still a senator. It was written as part of the Anti-Defamation League’s series entitled the One Nation Library.[1] In the 1950s, former ADL National Director Ben Epstein was concerned by rising xenophobia and anti-immigrant rhetoric, so he reached out to then-Senator Kennedy to write a manuscript on immigration reform”
I hope it was not “anti-semitic” to mention that.
Lol.
I agree. As for religion, there are plenty of left-wing Catholics and left-wing Protestants to add to left-wing Jews. As far as ethnics go, left-wing Brits, French, German, Canadians, etc.
There is antisemitism in the world. By antisemitism, I mean anti-Jew. The Muslims of course hate everyone. Muslims aside, what is the source of antisemitism? I think bad old ideas never die; they just lie dormant. Bad ideas:
1) The Jews killed Christ.
2) Jews took over banking. Dishonorable mention - banks are bad.
3) Jews are greedy capitalists.
4) Jews are dangerous leftists, to include communists.
Once a charge is made explicit, it can be considered. The only charge that strikes me as having some merit is 4.
Marx was Jewish. Engels was Christian. With the dynamic duo of Marx and Engels, Jews were over-represented among communists. That’s it. Prominent American Jews could do everyone a favor and disavow socialism. Likewise, the leadership of Christian churches could do everyone a favor and disavow socialism.
“However, if there is one man who can take the most credit for the 1965 act, it is John F. Kennedy. Kennedy seems to have inherited the resentment his father Joseph felt as an outsider in Boston’s WASP aristocracy. He voted against the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, and supported various refugee acts throughout the 1950s.
In 1958 he wrote a book, A Nation of Immigrants, which attacked the quota system as illogical and without purpose, and the book served as Kennedy’s blueprint for immigration reform after he became president in 1960.
In the summer of 1963, Kennedy sent Congress a proposal calling for the elimination of the national origins quota system. He wanted immigrants admitted on the basis of family reunification and needed skills, without regard to national origin.
After his assassination in November, his brother Robert took up the cause of immigration reform, calling it JFK’s legacy. In the forward to a revised edition of A Nation of Immigrants, issued in 1964 to gain support for the new law, he wrote, “I know of no cause which President Kennedy championed more warmly than the improvement of our immigration policies.” Sold as a memorial to JFK, there was very little opposition to what became known as the Immigration Act of 1965.”
“JFK literally wrote the book on immigration and ran on the immigration platform.”
I did not know that, so I looked it up on Grok. You are basically right. Not clear that he would approve the extremes as it is now carried out.
This is the democrat party platform that JFK ran on in 1960.
Immigration:
We shall adjust our immigration, nationality and refugee policies to ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATION AND TO ENABLE MEMBERS OF SCATTERED FAMILIES ABROAD TO BE UNITED WITH RELATIVES ALREADY IN OUR MIDST.
THE NATIONAL-ORIGINS QUOTA SYSTEM OF LIMITING IMMIGRATION CONTRADICTS THE FOUNDING PRINCIPLES OF THIS NATION. It is inconsistent with our belief in the rights of man. This system was instituted after world war I AS A POLICY OF DELIBERATE DISCRIMINATION BY A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION AND CONGRESS.
The revision of immigration and nationality laws we seek will implement our belief that enlightened immigration, naturalization and refugee policies and humane administration of them are important aspects of our foreign policy.
These laws will bring greater skills to our land, reunite families, permit the United States to meet its fair share of world programs of rescue and rehabilitation, and take advantage of immigration as an important factor in the growth of the American economy.
In this World Refugee Year it is our hope to achieve admission of our fair share of refugees. We will institute policies to alleviate suffering among the homeless wherever we are able to extend our aid.
We must remove the distinctions between native-born and naturalized citizens to assure full protection of our laws to all. There is no place in the United States for “second-class citizenship.”
The protections provided by due process, right of appeal, and statutes of limitation, can be extended to non-citizens without hampering the security of our nation.
We commend the Democratic Congress for the initial steps that have recently been taken toward liberalizing changes in immigration law. However, this should not be a piecemeal project and we are confident that a Democratic President in cooperation with Democratic Congresses will again implant a humanitarian and liberal spirit in our nation’s immigration and citizenship policies.
Don’t GAF about your supposed Harvard degree, n0ob- you still write like a child. Is it meds?
The facts are I don’t have PTSD, and neither you nor the author can legitimately claim Fuentes as “pro-Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler-adoring.”
Stop posting smears and lies about others, then go back to Harvard and learn how to write a fkn paragraph.
You won’t need to be corrected.
Great quote.
“1) The Jews killed Christ.
2) Jews took over banking. Dishonorable mention - banks are bad.
3) Jews are greedy capitalists.
4) Jews are dangerous leftists, to include communists.”
The tropes that send folks like the Anti-Defamation League into hysterics these days are not those four.
They are these two:
1) Wealthy Jewish people have an outsized influence on American politics (left and right) due to their wealth, political activism and effective organizations.
2) Wealthy Jewish people do not share traditional Western values of fair play and free speech—but instead will try to silence their opponents with censorship (public and private), defamation (name calling), doxxing (including seeking to financially bankrupt those who oppose them) and other sneaky and nasty tactics.
So many in the cast of writers for American Thinker are not among the best “American thinkers”.
Over the weekend, Mark Levin revealed that TPUSA wanted to stage a debate in December between him and Tucker Carlson. This is to TPUSA’s great credit... we have a civil war brewing on the right... so let’s hash it out in a civil way... with an exchange of ideas. Who rejected the plan? Not Tucker Carlson who was fully on-board but rather Mark Levin who responded with venom and invective instead of arguments and ideas.
See post 89—this is what Levin would face.
When he is ready to address those (last two) points then a great debate can happen.
The 1965 Immigration Act was JFK’s baby passed in his honor upon his death, why do people here ignore that?
JFK literally wrote the book on immigration and ran on the immigration platform.
Yes and Gen Z is voting for Mamdani and becoming trans-furries and playing videogames all day. The author's generalization is worthless.
Thank you for the references.
Very educational.
I have never been a big JFK fan.
See post 82—the Wikipedia link explains the timeline of the book.
The full book was not published until after the JFK assassination.
Here are sources for those two posts.
1960 Democratic Party Platform
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1960-democratic-party-platform
JFJ-—Fade to Brown
“He voted against the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, and supported various refugee acts throughout the 1950s.”
https://www.amren.com/news/2011/09/fade_to_brown_1/
Thanks. I ask, perhaps rhetorically, are these accusations testable? Perhaps testable is too strong a term. For starters, are they observable?
I saw a Charlie Kirk video in which he debated a young lady who had a machine-gun like series of charges that reminded me of the late Christopher Hitchens. I loved watching Hitchens go after Islam. I didn’t care for it so much when he went after religion generally. Hitchens was not nice or fair. Neither was the young lady.
I watched a few Charlie Kirk videos. He was always both nice and fair. He was strong and effective enough that he would interrupt a tirade and force others to listen as he addressed something that had been said.
He was a little reminiscent of New Gingrich. Gingrich was surrounded by a dozen liberal Democrat reporters peppering him with harsh questions at once. He would interrupt them and insist on one rule: one question at a time. This effectively turned 12 against 1 into 1 against 1, twelve times. After that, he never had a problem.
Ethnically, Hitchens was Jewish, but I don’t think his unfair and nasty debate practices are limited to (nor especially common among) Jews.
Is Ben Shapiro (Jewish) unfair or overly harsh in his criticism of Carlson? That’s a lightning rod question at Free Republic.
To capture his style, on stage with Megyn Kelly:
‘Kelly replied: “Tucker’s made the point — I’m not gonna try to be Tucker’s defender — but he’s made the point that Maduro is cultural conservative.”
“Who gives a sh*t!?” fired back Shapiro incredulously. “The guy’s a communist dictator!”’
To me, Shapiro’s intensity is off-putting. Trying to silence (cancel?) Carlson is wrong. However, I’m not convinced that such behavior can be ascribed to Shapiro being Jewish.
I’ve seen Stephen Miller speak a few times. Loved it. I certainly agree on his arguments. Is he unfair? I don’t think so.
It takes a lot of work for the Deep State/Intelligence Community to sustain their deniability of obvious evidence of government misdeeds, both Federal and state, during the past 17 years. The FBI, the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, the EPA, the FCC, the USDA, the Department of Energy, the Department of State, even the Federal judiciary — all of these agencies put enormous effort into their claims of deniability over every thing under their purview, ever since Inauguration Day for Barack Obama.
Nobody could possibly be so abysmally stupid and ignorant of what they are charged with knowing and taking action on. Recent revelations about the so-called pipe bomber of January 5, 2021, suggesting she was a known Capitol Police officer who is now safely snuggled into the CIA, have remained deeply buried in the bowels of the FBI and the CIA since spring 2021.
Weaponized FISA Court corruption and violation of the law was allowed to grow beyond belief and destroy all credibility of the Federal judiciary, and absolutely nothing has been done to clean it up [that I have seen]. Election integrity issues since 2020 are obvious in a dozen states. The blatant criminality of the Obama DOJ under Criminal General Eric Holder have been denied at great effort for all these years.
The entire January 6 fiasco has been hidden and obstructed continuously since the Biden Department of Justice and the Democrat Congressional committee began destroying citizens’ lives over “offenses” which had no factual or legal basis. With crucial evidence now destroyed, nobody knows nothin’ about nothin’.
Anybody who has expectations that these Deep State/Intelligence Community agencies will suddenly come clean, now that President Trump has appointed his cabinet officers, is in a dream world. The Leviathan is just too big, too deep, too powerful, too entrenched, too resistant to outside forces, ever to be reformed from the outside. There is a century’s worth of corruption, deceit, criminal behavior, and guilt that can probably never be unearthed.
Slay the dragon, or live with him forever.
GUY MILLER
“I’m not convinced that such behavior can be ascribed to Shapiro being Jewish.”
That is a legitimate point of view that could and should be debated without drama and name calling.
Fuentes takes the opposite view—and gives lots of reasons with data and examples (receipts) to support his claims.
Everyone should be OK with shining a bright light on this topic—and play fair like adults.
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.