Harvey Weinstein: That Time When We Decided To Smash Cultural Marxism Once and for All

[SuburbanFarmer]

Hi guys.

So, as usual I think you're kind of lumping the liberal left into one big ball, defined by it's worst elements. Of which there are plenty.

Of course, just as many Republican elites would happily allow the waltons to devour your first born in a ritual for immortality, liberal powerbrokers are fine with all kinds of misdeeds among their own so long as they agree that racism is bad and it would be neat to have a woman president.

The left I am more in touch with hates people like Weinstein as much as you guys. They aren't shy about bill being a pig etc. They have been roasting both Weinstein and the ny da at every opportunity. They understand perfectly well that limo libs are abhorrent and drive the country right.

Anyway. What interested me about this case is how Harvey often had little to no real power over these women. The philosophers I read would say even someone with the power to kill you has no real power. That's a little hard to internalize. But in this case we are talking about people who would have plenty to eat, live in nice houses and marry desirable people regardless of what Harvey did. Yet he was able to behave this way for decades.

Not that I blame them much. But its sort of interesting the degree to which someone can build and abuse power on matters that are mostly mental or of little consequence.

Good post. The only real “power” anyone can have over you involves your loved ones, and your own threshold for pain.

Glad to see you back.

[Smitty-48]

I don't think the point is that liberals are disavowing big Harv now, the point is that they hold these Hollywood celebrities up as paragons of moral superiority and lecture everybody about "sexual harassment", when in fact Weinstein was like this for years and all the liberals in Hollywood knew about it, but they didn't out him, because they're not actually paragons of virtue, they're actually whores who prostitute themselves for money and fame.

Did they say nothing because they thought he was going to kill them like the mafia? No, obviously not.

Did they say nothing because they thought he would sue them? No. He avoided court like the plague, he paid out hush money a $100K at a time.

They just didn't want to mess up any potential gigs at Miramax, that was the power he held over them, he had the keys to the money and fame, and they were willing to sell anybody down the river to get it, including themselves.

They knew he was a total scumbag, while they were fawning over him on national TV at the Oscars, year after year after year, right before they turned to the American people and in fact the whole world, and started lecturing and wagging fingers from their moral high horses.

They are the ultimate symbol, of the utter corruption and absurd hypocrisy, of the liberal elites.

[LVH2]

The key term being liberal elites.

But I also think it says something about human nature in general. There are a lot of situations in which we permit someone above us to get away with murder, even when there really isn't that much they could do to us that REALLY matters.

[Smitty-48]

The key term being liberal elites.

Please, the vast majority of liberals in America fawn over these people and hold them up as paragons, don't try to snow the snowman.

What are you trying to say, non elite liberals are highly critical of the Hollywood celebrities who fundraise for the Democrat party? Ca'mon, get real.

[Smitty-48]

But I also think it says something about human nature in general. There are a lot of situations in which we permit someone above us to get away with murder, even when there really isn't that much they could do to us that REALLY matters.

Yeah, but this is a case where the liberals let someone get away with murder, and not just one murder, and not just recently, many murders, a mass murderer, a serial killer, in their midst, for decades, whom they were fully aware of, and whom they were actually protecting, and whose campaign money they were courting, while at the same time, they were voiciferously castigating everybody else as murderers, and declaring themselves to be squeaky clean on that, it's not just that they didn't out big Harv, they didn't out big Harv for thirty three years, because he was buying them off, while they were screeching at everybody else for ostensibly doing the same thing they were doing.

Like Barack Obama and his crew at the White House, they had "zero tolerance!" for "sexual harassment!", they were raking the US military over the coals for that for example, while at the same time, Michelle Obama called Harvey Wieinstein "a wonderful human being" and "a good friend", after he raised $5 million for the Obama reelection campaign.

As if the Obama's weren't aware that Weinstein was a total creep? Please, everybody knew, it was an open secret, in Hollywood, and Washington too. They knew exactly who they were dealing with and they knew, at the very least, that he had paid many women off to make sexual misconduct complaints go away, one might be interpreted as a mistake, dozens, could not be, they're not that naive in the White House, and they do have serious checking done on those they take their money from, they don't go in blind, so Michelle was aware enough, of what kind of creep she was calling a "wonderful human being and good friend".

Now, if liberals, in general, weren't so holier than thou about it, then they wouldn't look so absurd, but moralizing hysterically about "sexual harassment!" is one of the big issues they hang their hats on, and yet it's also one of their biggest foibles, Bill Clinton being the ultimate example of, until big Harv got outed that is.

[LVH2]

My long phone typed post deleted!

I do have a so so story about the shooting. Ill post in the relevant thread.

[LVH2]

So, my deleted points were, while of course Harvey would have been exposed sooner if he was/for being a conservative, that there's no shortage of similar stories on the right, complete with hypocrites shrieking about devil music, the gays and abstinence. I don't really see much difference.

As for libs/left it's pretty complicated. However, as you might have noticed, an elderly Jew who nobody had heard of would have trounced the most anointed candidate we've ever seen without plenty of rigging. One of the key divisions was fundraising. This division still exists, between liberals of the Hillary Hollywood type and the Bernie type. If it can be summed up, perhaps it's a division between elitists who are interested in culture and symbols and materialists who are interested in... uh, material stuff, like healthcare and prisons.



There are a lot of people on the left who don't describe themselves as liberals, and equate that term with Hillary/New York Times types and constantly bash liberals including people like Linah Dunham.

I think there are probably also a lot of casuals, people who are just on team Dem. and just kind of believe whatever they say and like movie stars and stuff like that.

[Martin Hash]

I think there are probably also a lot of casuals, people who are just on team Dem. and just kind of believe whatever they say and like movie stars and stuff like that.

"The Left is composed of feminists, minorities & weirdos." - me

[TheReal_ND]

Looks like LVH and his human trafficking buddies' days are numbered. Fox News is calling out pedos on air.

[Ex-California]