C-Mag wrote: Tue Nov 20, 2018 12:40 am
I get what you are saying Bjorn. But it's difficult for me to demand that one group not be allowed to bitch like another group. I get seeking a higher standard and to display that as a means to a better end. However, what I see as the problem with that is that the SJWs don't follow rules, they don't follow good conduct and nothing is off the table for them. Stalin was very good at this 'ends justifies the means'. The White Russians lost, because they didn't get in the mud with the pigs like the Bolshies. So, where did holding a higher standard get them.
The SJW theology is dangerous for western civilization, science, art, mathematics and free speech. I don't say that lightly. When professors papers are being destroyed because the research are outside of SJW thought, we have serious problems. And this thought is being institutionalized in Western Nations. Now, Western Nations aren't the be all and end all of the world. But they are the ones that hold everything together. Maybe I make too much of it, but I see SJW theory to be extremely dangerous to the long term security of the planet.
I have no problem with pointing out that MSM media is slanted in a certain way, like painting globalization as entirely positive, painting people who want to preserve their way of life as "racist, nationalist, bigots". But at some point you're just screaming down a hole. You're waiting around for someone to fix it for you, when you yourself might be able to help offer the American people an alternative to the SJW's and an alternative to the MSM.
The White Russians lost because they were disorganized rabble, with extremely different political ideologies represented - from everything to traditionalists who wished to reestablish the czardom and aristocratic privileges, to republicans more in line with classical liberal values. They didn't lose to Soviet propaganda, they lost to Soviet guns and better organization.
Btw, if you're so opposed to "collectivism", shouldn't you be fine with people not following the rules and will of the collective, not following the "good conduct" agreed upon by the collective (society)?

I'm only half kidding - you may be opposed to collectivism, but you're not arguing like an individualist, either. People not giving a rat's ass about good conduct, about the rules... well, your country came into existence because of some landowners decided the rules, the good conduct decided by their leaders did not represent them anymore. So, hopefully you'd agree that
some indifference to,
some challenge to the establishment, to what's considered "good conduct".
However, there is a social critique of high, middling and low quality. SJW's, the PC crowd, postmodernists are low quality.
Moving back to the Soviets and their better rate of organization, that's precisely what you lack, because I'm not saying you lot should quit the dayjob and start a new political party or start a newspaper... or at least not
on your own...
You could use social media to reach out to political allies in the US, then ask your compatriots in the country to pitch in via Kickstarter (or other means) in order to simply start your
own, alt media newspaper, hire your own full-time investigators so you don't need to rely on the AP/Reuters journalists and so you can
completely independent, and hire an editor in chief who would focus on the sorts of stories
you think should get more coverage.
Hell, thinking even more outside the box, you could start an alternate news... platform, of sorts. Instead of having an editor in chief or acting like old media, users could vote on which stories would get funding for research - the contract gets up, whomever gets most votes gets hired for the job. Votes restricted to people who are paying members. Users who find some pertinent data or tip during a running story, are eligible for tips. Some of the lawyers could pitch in how one might legally restrict the site's users to people with your own political beliefs - in order to avoid stories getting sabotaged.
I know working together with others is terribly... collectivist (

), but if you could find say 20,000 Americans, who pitched in a little money each, you might be able to fund something great. And you could let whatever talent you'd consider trustworthy handle the day to day running of the site, while you'd get a small share of the membership fees.
I don't know.. I'm just spitballing here. I don't agree politically with most of you on several issues, but I believe in democracy and I find it a shame, get angry at the thought, of people pretending that they're powerless. I do think comparing the power and influence SJW's have to what power Communists had in the USSR hyperbolic and somewhat hysterical, but you're right that you don't get as much time in front of the mike as others. I just think that's not the same as Soviet style oppression. You're
ignored... not oppressed.
Fame is not flattery. Respect is not agreement.