Posted on 06/04/2018 1:10:36 AM PDT by Kaslin
Liberals want to win the victory they cant achieve at the ballot box by using their cultural power to systematically marginalize and exclude Normal Americans from every aspect of society and we cant let them. From the business world to Hollywood, we are seeing them react to their utter repudiation in recent elections by trying to intimidate us into silent conformity as the price of us being allowed to participate in the non-governmental institutions of society. We must therefore have a two-part response to this act of cultural warfare not only must we get right back in their smug little faces, but we must also build our own cultural institutions, ones that they cant control.
The militant Normals built this country; they can build their own institutions too.
Now, of course we cant always build parallel institutions right away. Sometimes we need to force the existing ones to behave. Social media platforms like Twitter (in which I own stock) and search engine institutions like Google are so humongous that they are difficult to replicate (but Gab and engines like Duck Duck Go are trying). The fact is that social media is becoming our societys primary public forum, and excluding conservatives is essentially excluding conservatives from participation in politics. Thats unacceptable, meaning we will not just sit there and accept it.
So when the social media companies start deplatforming conservatives, and engines like Google start up with antics like listing the GOPs ideology as Nazism, we need to respond to their exercise of their power with the exercise of our own power via our elected representatives. A GOP bill requiring social media platforms to explicitly and clearly explain their content policies, to disclose to banned people their exact violation, to provide a rapid, meaningful appeal process, and to provide for lawsuits (with fee awards to prevailing plaintiffs) to remedy violations is just the first step toward a regulatory solution.
The Fredocons will whine that this is not a conservative solution. Oh. Well, we tried submission and that doesnt work for us. My conservative principles include fighting fire with a firestorm. Dont want none, dont start none if you exercise your power, well exercise ours. I dont want to do it, but the two choices are 1) open, free, and unregulated platforms, or 2) platforms regulated to protect our rights. Maintaining platforms that exclude Normals is not an option. So, choose wisely Silicon Valley.
But for most institutions, we have alternative options that dont necessarily involve leveraging our government power. When companies start deciding they want to modify our behavior by refusing to do business with people the libs hate, like NRA members, we can boycott them. We can also choose to support businesses that dont disrespect us. There are lots of banks that dont discriminate against those exercising the Second Amendment. By supporting companies that respect us and not patronizing ones that diss us (like Dicks Sporting Goods) we are effectively building parallel institutions. But we can also create our own businesses from the ground up.
And we need to. Who isnt sick of Starbucks and its insufferable limo lib condescension? Theres a space for a coffee house chain that doesnt tolerate druggies, vagrants, and bums Ill have a venti hobo with an extra shot of bindle.
How about someone starts an objectivist coffeehouse chain called Galts? You can order, but the barista will make you a cup of fancy joe according to his personal vision of what your drink should be, and if you complain he will give you a 50,000-word lecture on how he wont ever compromise his heroic java artistry. Plus, not just conservatives will love its restroom policy. Whos in Galts john? Paying customers only!
Insurgent coffee houses can distinguish themselves from woke bean water joints by welcoming all Americans, not just the ones who are assimilated into the Samantha Bee hive mind. That goes for every kind of business. How excited would you be to patronize a company that has the mob show up and says, Yes, some of our customers are outraged by what [whoever] said. We sell [whatever] and we think you can make up your own mind about politics. We are not excluding anyone. Thanks!
Hollywood is likewise willfully alienating customers by taking sides. Think what you want about Roseanne herself, but her show touched millions of overlooked people and the show employed hundreds of people who are now out of work. Solo, which was not woke at all, was wokeness-fatigue collateral damage because many of us expected it to be another boring lib lecture with ray guns after the last three iterations of Jedi Girl Ghostbusters in Space.
Luckily, technology is breaking down the barriers to entry into the entertainment field. Networks are no longer gatekeepers heck, they are barely relevant. We can make our own entertainment, and we need to. How about Adams 12, a gritty crime procedural with conservative superstar Adam Baldwin as the grizzled leader of a dozen elite cops and prosecutors? The best part would be how the criminal always turns out to be the gangbanging scumbag everyone originally thought was guilty, instead of having the hackneyed Law & Order twist where the villain is revealed to be the rich businessman, the conservative radio host, or the pro-life activist. You know, just like in real life.
Or perhaps we could do a show about a guy on a mission worthy of Superman patriotic actor Dean Cain starring in Dean Dean Cain, about the new conservative head of a liberal arts college fighting for free speech and campus carry against student SJWs and a commie faculty led by a bitter, lonely gender studies professor played by Alyssa Milano. Yeah, shed take the role she needs the cash.
Certainly Normal Americans would binge watch Nick of Time, where acting legend and bane of Twitter liberals Nick Searcy could play a conservative avenger who wanders the Red states, stepping in at the last minute to save Normal heroes like gun makers, born-again Christians, and people who work to support their own families, from oppression by wicked villains like uppity hipsters, angry atheists, and malevolent bureaucrats.
The truth is that the walls really are coming down what good is a gatekeeper if you can just walk around the gate? Technology makes production accessible at a fraction of what it used to cost, and the ravenous Internet is starving for content. Theres nothing to stop us conservative from stepping in and doing it ourselves.
The same is true in the world of publishing. While some traditional publishers will take a chance on conservative books (like my Militant Normals, dropping in October and Derek Hunter's excellent Outrage, Inc, out in two weeks), technology like Amazons Kindle and publishing on-demand has let me reach many thousands with my conservative action novels about America torn apart and patriots fighting back against tyranny. And more conservatives are taking advantage of this opportunity because they are being systematically driven out of the public sphere as the old players refuse to meet the needs and wants of the Normal Americans they hold in contempt.
The best solution would, of course, be a free market in which the cultural and commercial producers supplied content solely in accordance with demand that is, where their goal is the laudable one of just making some bucks. After all, conservative money spends just like liberal money, so theres no incentive to discriminate. Freedom happens when the motive is profit, not ideology.
But as we keep seeing, money is not the only motivation to those temporarily holding sway over our cultural institutions. They will take a hit in the pocket book to score their cheap little points against us. We need to confront that nonsense, hard, and raise the cost of liberal virtue signaling high enough that they will think twice before trying it. But we also need to build our own institutions, institutions that meet Normal Americans needs, not the needs of some Silicon Valley socialist or Hollywood pinko. And if we dont, we may well find ourselves exiled from our own society.
The author doesnt even know the difference between a democracy and OUR REPUBLIC. People like him get ignored and dont succeed or even get to participate outside of liberal pussy zones.
Part of a series on Libertarianism Origins[show] Concepts[show] Schools[show] People[show] Aspects[show] Organizations[show] Related topics[show] Outline of libertarianism Libertarianism portal v t e The libertarian perspective on immigration is often regarded as one of the core concepts of libertarian theory and philosophy.[1][2] Some libertarians assert that "[e]fforts by the government to manage the labor market are as apt to fail as similar efforts to protect domestic industries or orchestrate industrial policy. [...] If an immigrant seeks to engage in peaceful, voluntary transactions that do not threaten the freedom or security of the native-born, the government should not interfere".[3]
Is that what you think?
Nope
Agreed on the confusion issued with propaganda, but we need to retain some of our language and terms for the purpose of teaching the next generation.
Conservatism is not so hard to understand despite the confusing obfuscations and subversive claims of impostors. To be conservative is to agree with the relevant tenets behind the founding of our nation.
To be conservative is to agree with the most important fundamentals taught and agreed upon by George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and others who stood with them on those principles.
More young folks should engage in learning more about civics and American history in order to be less affected by Internet propaganda disseminated mostly from drug-addled minds in blue states. We’ve failed for more than a generation to make sure that such education is delivered to them.
When those who oppose our freedoms begin to lose or get impatient, they tend to try to make messes of our tools of communication in hopes that more of their own kind will become confused enough to rise from the mess to their side and against our freedoms.
And one way to try to have our freedoms outlawed is to promote unreasonable extents of freedom for some people (”more equal animals”) that allow the way to violations of freedoms, property rights or lives of others. As I said before, the objective of anarchists in Europe was to clear the way for communists, as we recently saw on display from the cruddy likes of Antifa.
The other side isnt having children.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“Our” side also needs to make sure ‘their’ side, which tends to run the education system, doesn’t indoctrinate our kids into their view of society and the world. For those that can home school, I believe that is the ultimate way to keep kids out of the clutches of the Left. If you can’t home school, then be vigilant as to what the kids are being taught and be active on school boards, etc. The Left may not be having kids, but they’ll appropriate yours for their purposes and the public education system currently in place allows them the opportunity to do it.
In your original comment, you said the Left does not reciprocate tolerance - so true, a very important point and lesson still to be learned. The Normal Americans, expect reciprocity and have been finding out the hard way that you don’t get it with the Left. Give an inch, they take a mile rather than giving you a reciprocal inch back. Trump has learned from this and fights back ... he doesn’t turn the other cheek, acquiesce, back off, or act polite when the Left spits in his face, he goes on offense ..... we should also learn this lesson and quit being polite and shocked when the Left doesn’t reciprocate our decency .... Normal Americans, as a people (not just a few here and there) need to realize that we must stand in the breach and fight for our ‘culture’ and thus, our country.
Crush COMMUNISM and things may return to normal.
Denounce the extreme Left at every turn. The blood of a hundred million people are on their hands and they support it and mock it.
If you don't eradicate the evil of Communism, one day it will eradicate all else.
As we saw under Lord Obama, it isn’t simply about homosexuals serving in the military, their service is highlighted, special parties, job promotions, etc. Equality isn’t a factor, homofascists want supremacy and dominance and power.
Can the ranks look up to a commanding officer who cross-dresses in uniform?
>>You have a right to reject unwanted advances and its the reason we have laws in place against sexual harrassment and sexual assault.
The reporting of same sex rape in the military has been climbing.
#MeToo
Are there any mental illnesses you consider to be incompatible with military service?
I think the labels “Normal” and “Stooge” are more accurate than “Conservative” and “Liberal” as in:
Normal Americans respect America’s Constitution.
and
Chris Matthews smiles whenever he parrots stooge-news.
Likewise, why fight hand-to-hand combat on individual beaches and towns, when a MOAB can be dropped on the entire proglib edifice? I know a lot of people think Trump has been damaged by the attempted coup, but in actuality it's the greatest gift that can be given any leader. Consider if Trump had experience a normal transition of power - who would be suggesting calling out the Marines and/or circumventing established criminal justice procedures?
On the contrary, we find ourselves actively engaged in CWII; albeit low level legal fighting at this point. However, the point stands that when Trump prevails, he is going to be able to wield 'scary' power. After all, that's what happens when you fail to kill the king - the chopping block literally comes out to 'process' thousands of traitors.
All Trump has to do is win in November - it really is that simple. That sets up stacking the SC and passing certain legislation like the wall, voter ID, etc. Once that's in place, it's fairly trivial to destroy proglib institutional control in media and education. So, win in November, using the attempted coup as the red flag to wave in front of the voting populace.
Easy breezy, amiright? And what is Trump doing? Exactly.
I think the labels “Normal” and “Stooge” are more accurate than “Conservative” and “Liberal” as in:
Normal Americans respect America’s Constitution.
and
Chris Matthews smiles whenever he parrots stooge-news.
Nice game plan.......I like it.
A conservative streaming platform would be excellent. Get James Woods, Gary Sinise and Patricia Heaton on board too.
Her entire popular vote margin came in California. Trump won the rest of the country by a small margin.Also, I think a large percentage of her voters (blacks, hispanics and Muslims) are actually socially conservative.
They will control. They will find a way
You are making excuses that are invalid. The fact is the margin exists and can’t be swept under the Free Republic dogma carpet
You by denying the problem are the problem
A good discussion is The von Mises Instutute article "The Origin of Libertarianism". In this article they take credit and blame for resurecting the term "libertarian" to describe classic liberalism, the term "Liberal" having been stolen by and perverted by the left.
The article summarises the issue by concluding " libertarian is the opposite of an authoritarian. Strictly speaking, a libertarian is one who rejects the idea of using violence or the threat of violence legal or illegal to impose his will or viewpoint upon any peaceful person. Generally speaking, a libertarian is one who wants to be governed far less than he is today."
Now as to your point "If an immigrant seeks to engage in peaceful, voluntary transactions that do not threaten the freedom or security of the native-born, the government should not interfere". Well let us examine this closely because I think the premise is unsustainable. In the first place, the author restricts the inquiry narrowly just to a presumed singular immigrant and inquires whether such acts by such and individual affects, narrowly, a native born's "freedom or security." Of course, one by one the impact of an individual illegal but otherwise law-abiding immigrant has little collective impact, though you might ask whether any singular individual native born citizens were adversely affect.
But the issue is really whether a mass influx of such immigrants negatively impacts the broader interests of the native born. And there the issue is actually inarguable, which is why the hew and cry especially over H1B visa abuse, which is a good place to examine the question.
You see individual rights in a society are much broader than just freedom [e.g. to protest Tommy Robinson outside the British embassy] or security [e.g. said immigrant did not invade my home at gunpoint or blow up a train].
In the first place a native born has a vested interest in the language and culture [and accompanying institutions] that he was born into, which are fundamental building blocks of a society. Of course the Marxists know this which is why they have sought so single-mindedly to undermine western culture attacking it by co-opting the words we use and undermining their meaning.
In the second place, rights include property rights and includes freedom to contract. Now, we protect some property rights at gunpoint. Included in property rights is intellectual property which includes professional education and licenses. Try practicing law without a license and the state will show up with guns drawn in the middle of the night, shoot your dog and haul you off to prison.
But how about other professions, the most obvious being software engineers and computer scientists, the targets of the H1B visa scam. There is a sort of social contract between citizens and the market. You get an education, you develop requisite professional skills and you can reap the benefits by competing in the market for remunerative employment. But that contract has been broken and no you can't compete because the market has been flooded by the dumping on the market of the products of heavily subsidized foreign education systems that don't come here with enormous debts.
Once you have severed the remuneration for a job from the consequent benefit to society [pay taxes, support your favorite local institutions, raise a family, etc.] from the fact of employment you have undermined the society the culture that provides freedom and security.
Libertarians have allowed themselves to be undone by the socialists and their running dog crony capitalists and globalists into confusing the freedom to trade (exchange) goods and services across boarders through a market with the right of one country to undermine the economic security of another country for long term global strategic purposes.
The problem that constitutional conservatives (classic liberals) have is the submission to glib labels as a way of arguing a point, and the left have become very good at hypercharging the meaning of the labels pinned on conservatives with their own connivance.
So arguing what "libertarianism" "is" is to fall into the trap of Clintonian dialectics.
1) It won't turn a profit. Corporations will blackball it and not put their ads on it. Yes you'll get the same type of creepy ads that Rush Limbaugh gets like gold investment schemes and dodgy vitamins, but you won't get ads from the beer companies, the automobile manufacturers, the food companies, etc.
2) It won't change minds. Even if you can get some billionaire to fund the money-losing effort, it'll basically be an echo chamber where conservatives go to video one another rather than text one another as on FR.
All of this has been discussed ad nauseum by YouTubers who are trying everything they can to branch away from YouTube but finding that YouTube must still be an important part of where they present their messages.
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.