I was thinking the other day about the (hopefully inevitable) push back - especially against immigration and islamification. That’s a tremendously difficult path to walk without falling into the abyss. And especially since it’s unlikely to happen until people’s patience has been utterly broken - very VERY difficult future we have ahead either way. I’m so furious with those who have created this predicament!!
Exactly whoever is responsible for this race to the bottom is evil and yet we allow this to continue, .The apathy in England is despicable, what is it going to take to stop this from becoming irreversible it's nauseating beyond belief .
Yeah same. The tinfoil part of my brain even cooked up the possibility that those crazy rioters were supported to cause an aggressive right wing counter-movement, throwing us into civil war and then the 'need' for an even more overreaching government because nobody has control of the situation anymore.
But he is saved by the rats that gnaw at his ropes. Anyway the Spanish inquisition never used pendula to torture their suspects. They used only isolation and food deprivation.
What I've come to understand from JL, my own experience & listening to other great social/cultural commentators, is that the key takeaway is you're dealing with people who are up to no good. Those who are trying to pull a fast one. It doesn't matter how convincing, logical, reasonable or plausible what they're saying might be, they are using the issue to manipulate you to get what benefits them. We need to stop debating the issue, and instead cross-examine who's talking to expose the lie (like in a court of law). They're not trying to solve the problem, they're trying to win the argument. It's a hell of thing to understand this, to acknowledge that there are bad people doing bad things under a mask of virtue (to put it simply).
Bullseye, as always. If our entire civilization does not implode, you and your tireless work will be one of the key reasons. Thank you. Stay healthy. God bless :)
As a blind person, I personally thank you for explaining your imagery well enough for everything to make sense sans screen. I also very much appreciate this summarized-presentation idea in general. I'm not convinced that most people involved in pushing this troublesome agenda understand at all the high-level view you present. I do, though, firmly believe that the effect of this agenda, regardless of plan or intent, is exactly as you describe - destruction of individual liberties and independence, destruction of systems of government that favor those things, and even derailment of what people think terms like "liberty" and "freedom" mean, despite their having clear and static definitions whose nature will never change regardless of terminology. To wit: If you tell me I must say x, you have violated my freedom regardless of what you call it; and if you ban or fire me for saying "People of these two religions cannot in good conscience say X," you have engaged in exclusion and intolerance, not inclusion and diversity. And finally along with many others here, I thank you for your tireless efforts to help people understand what is happening.
This runs way deeper than politics. The tricks they use come straight from the heart of western esotericism, and until you understand that, you are helpless to defend yourselves against them whilst they drag you around the arena like blind fools. Esotericism is not simply some 'woo woo' nonsence thought up by primative minds, but is instead one of the most potent systems for the manipulation and transformation of human cognition, belief, perception and phenomenology ever devised. Their understanding of this incredibly advanced. And until this is understood, you may as well be fighting them with feather swords and water guns.
More people need to watch these videos. I'd really like to hear James discuss how online politics have caused many people to disconnect from how normal people talk about politics and social issues and how many on the right have made themselves rhetorically useless in fighting communism through their terminally online behaviour.
the thing u were arguing about, Wokies will always try to confuse the conversation on purpose and deflect hard cos they are idealogues and dont have the intellectual capacity to refute arguments logically.. @@MoonshineH
hahaha u a Wokie, I knew it, u all predictable, tis only the Woke that ask silly questions on these channels@@MoonshineH u guys try act like you asking innocent questions but every time its a Wokester, a victim of oppression lol
they always say 'wheres your source' because most people dont have sources bookmarked on the smartphones ready to whip out for every argument, but when u provide sources they dont look em, they move the goalposts again, pure disingenuous, always argue in bad faith@@smackyfrog6046
Is this essentially just a part of the Cloward-Piven strategy or an adaptation of it? Action, reaction, solution. Commit an action that provoke a reaction, and offer your own solution to the problem you created.
This just happened to Billboard Chris. When he chased down the one who attacked him on to a bus. He ended up being the one attacked by the people on the bus when trying to address his attacker.
This is one of the most intelligent pieces of political analysis I have ever heard. Hope we can make this message more popular within the American mainstream.
Had this argument with my wife’s cousin. She took the position of being offended on behalf of transitioning children. She got angry at me The whole time, she’s poking and trying to provoke. But just kept saying, “your position is the extreme one here. Burden of proof is on you.” Kept saying that over and over again. She became ballistic. But everyone in that room saw: her actions mirrored her position on the subject. Both insane. I was the calm one. I think the pendulum hit her on the way back
Pendulum is a metaphor for the Overton Window, which is a much better topic of conversation as everyone seems to think their political opponent is pulling the Overton window away from their position...
Not sure that is necessarily what the pendulum is getting at, in this context at least. And it's just objective the Overton window has moved left. Gay marriage wasn't legalized because the Overton window moved right.
@@Yipper64 brother, Gay marriage was upheld by the supreme court almost a decade ago now (2015), and the Unite the Right rally was 2 years later in 2017. Whatever your politics- even if you agree or disagree with either of those developments, they together represent an oscillation of the Overton window (kinda like a pendulum). Even if one generously attributes those changes as simply reactions to the previous one (like Antifa which followed Unite the Right, antivax which followed that, etc.), their existence broadly exemplifies the pendulum metaphor, and is explained far more rigorously by the Overton Window. I'm not suggesting these things cancel each other out and go away with each shift- in fact the overton window appears to be widening, incorporating more of both extremes as a result of internet engagement optimization platforming and normalizing radical points of view.
@@DumpsterJedi Here is CNN's headline about unite the right "White nationalists dwarfed by crowds of counterprotesters" Now of course, they are lying, but I think it shows how pathetic of an example it is of right wing radicalization. Especially when compared to a supreme court decision that legalized something congress is still debating. Only people in political bubbles have any right wing shift. The general population has only been forced left.
No, he’s right. Think through practically how the change we wish to see is actioned. It’s not pretty & incredibly difficult to execute with compassion & without slipping into authoritarianism.
@@LibertarianGaltNo. It wasn't. The yids shoehorn marxist feminism and queer ideology into liberalism. Stating Islam is "the mother load of bad ideas" is equivalent to saying they're all shiesty jews, as Ben states. Harris' fame is only due to the fact that his mother wrote perverted jokes for old women on the golden girls. He's a trust fund shithead and won't hesitate to call any criticism of anything any jew does as "antisemitism".
I really appreciate all James has done teaching people why this stuff exists and how to combat it. That being said a recent interaction he had with Sargon (Carl Benjamin) on twitter about communism coming from liberalism really has me worried that he may have a Sam Harris style break. Hopefully not.
Reminds me of tacking. But that only works when there's access to a second (less fluid) medium. Solidify the water and expel the hull: the wind prevails.
This is an important conceptual idea. We can practice by apply this concept and framework to their current activism they are doing to others and to other systems.
Any history major could have predicted this. You cannot totally undermine a society and have it not fall into chaos. People have suffered and sought real justice for decades. But they will take blind revenge if that is all that's afforded.
We have to recognise that the devastation we have around us is primarily of a moral character. We are in a climate of general moral amnesia and of profound disorientation, despite all the accepted ways of speaking in common use in a society of consumers and democracy: the surrender of character and every true dignity, an ideological wasting away, the supremacy of the lowest interests, and living day by day, in general characterise post-war man. Recognising this means also recognising that the first problem, the foundation of every other one, is of an internal character: getting up on your feet, standing up inside, giving oneself a form, and creating in oneself an order and uprightness. People who delude themselves today about the possibility of a purely political struggle and about the power of one or another formula or system, who do not possess a new human quality as a precise opposing vision, have learned none of the lessons of the recent past. Here is a principle that ought to be absolutely clear today more than ever: if a state were to possess a political or social system that, in theory, would count as the most perfect one, but the human substance of which it is comprised were tainted, well then, that state would sooner or later descend to the level of the lowest societies, while a people, a race capable of producing real men, men of just feeling and secure instinct, would reach a high level of civilisation and would stay on its feet before the most calamitous tests even if its political system were faulty and imperfect. We should therefore take a firm stand against that false ‘political realism’ that thinks only in terms of programmes, partisan political issues, and social and economic recipes. All this belongs to the contingent, not the essential. Julius Evola, Handbook for Right Wing Youth
Personally, I’m very aware of this danger, and the need to remain centered, based, and grounded. I see already right wing extremists succumbing to this. Because of this, it is absolutely necessary to permanently remove the left wing leadership promoting these reactions. A do-over of the Nuremberg trials. We also need to reinvigorate the core principles of justice and equality so that this nonsense has no opportunity to regain a foothold.
What people don't grasp, mostly because they don't take interviews with KGB agents seriously, is that this process was started in America a very long time ago. There is no stopping it, and in the long run it IS going to destroy the nation. Now, what those who survive will be left with is debatable but whether or not we lose the republic isn't debatable anymore.
James, you should explain to people the concept of homophobia or transphobia. Phobia means the fear of. We are not afraid of you or your lifestyles. Totally false use of the term. We just don't agree with your lifestyles. Perhaps if we introduced the terms drugphobic or murderphobic or similar, then they would stop using the term phobic to enable their lifestyles. Just a thought.
A better metaphor with comes from New Lies for Old: an ideologist compared the dialectic to a pair of legs, which alternate motion to move the body forward as a whole.
That's because they aren't using 'racist' to call you a racial bigot, they're calling you wrong for agreeing with reality. You might as well try to convince one of the 'I am the Second Coming' people that they aren't Jesus.
“Not letting oneself go is what is crucial today. In this society gone astray, one must be capable of the luxury of having a character. One ought to be such that, even before being recognised as the champion of a political idea, one will display a certain conduct of life, an inner coherence, and a style consisting of uprightness and intellectual courage in every human relationship. All this, in a straightforward manner, with no exhibitionism, big words, or puritanical attitudes. To the impudent ‘why bother?’ of others, let us clearly and staunchly reply: ‘We cannot act otherwise - this is our life.’ If anything truly positive, like a new order, is ever to be attained, it will not be through the craftiness of democratic agitators and petty politicians, but through the natural prestige and recognition of men - of yesterday and even more so of the new generation - who are capable of as much and can vouch for their ideal.” - Julius Evola, A Handbook for Right-Wing Youth
Wow, I sort of requested a physical, technical definition/illustration of some of these weird principals, and JL literally did it the next episode, awesome. There's even a clear, repetitive visual included, to give me extra autism.
i've been saying it for years. the right needs magic on their side. right now, the left has all the good weapons. that's why they make all the good movies, all the good media generally. watchmen, v for vendetta, the matrix, etc etc. all these movies are inspired by hermetic philosophy. they resonate with the human soul, and are therefore "moving." they generate energy around them. so far, the right has had this deep fear of populism and liturgy which people like trump are starting to crack the mold on. unfortunately, when you start using powerful symbolic technologies like this to put things BACK in order, you get called a fascist reflexively. well, the left has been using these things to pull society APART for 400 years. some of it needed to be pulled apart, some of it didn't, but if you want to stop the train, you have to learn their language.
The Rittenhouse incident had enough clear footage to strongly conclude self-defense by Rittenhouse. Despite the truth being available for everybody to see, there are still millions of low information people who still believe the Rittenhouse lies spread by the MSM. So having good evidence is the absolute minimum but it isn't sufficient to opposing the freaks. What we need are an informed public who will ceaselessly proclaim the truth as the freaks ceaselessly proclaim lies.
@@jimhughes1070 I totally get it...I was making a joke. I came here by digging into current marxism after listening to martyrmade podcasts The Anti-Humans on Bolshevik Russia
Calling out their provocation is the same as "bombing their Bailey", right? And showing that their Bailey ways prevents them from attaining their Motte goals. At which time we steal their Motte.
Newton's third law simply states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. So, if object A acts a force upon object B, then object B will exert an opposite yet equal force upon object A. "PUSH, BABY, PUSH!"
'they' could never achieve any organization, especially considering the dilapidated chaotic mentalities targeted in the first place, without large scale media control. Who controls the media, honestly?
The term Right acquires different meanings according to one’s plane of reference. There is an economic Right, based on capitalism, which does not lack some degree of legitimacy provided it does not abuse its position. Its antitheses are socialism and Marxism. As for the political Right, strictly speaking it acquires its full meaning only in relation to a monarchy within an organic State: this has especially been the case in Central Europe, and partly in conservative England. Yet it is also possible to leave all institutional assumptions aside and speak of the Right as a spiritual orientation and worldview. Aside from opposing democracy and all ‘socialist’ myths, belonging to the Right means upholding the values of Tradition as spiritual, aristocratic, and warrior values (possibly with reference to a strict military tradition, as in the case of Prussianism, for instance). Moreover, it means harbouring a certain contempt for intellectualism and for the bourgeois fetishism of the ‘cultured man’ (the scion of an ancient Piedmontese family paradoxically claimed, ‘I divide the world into two classes: the nobility and those with a degree’, while Ernst Jünger, for his part, praised a ‘healthy illiteracy’ as an antidote). Belonging to the Right also means being conservative, yet not in a static sense. The obvious assumption is that there remains something worth conserving, which raises a difficult problem in relation to the recent past of Italy after its unification: nineteenth-century Italy has hardly left us any legacy of higher values that are worth safeguarding and which might serve as a foundation. Going even further back in time, Right-wing positions are only sporadically to be found in Italian history: what is missing is a moulding unitary force of the sort occurring in other countries, which have acquired solidity through the ancient monarchist traditions of an oligarchy. Be that as it may, what the claim that the Right must not be characterised by static conservatism means is that certain values and underlying ideas must indeed be there as a firm foundation, but must be expressed in different ways, in keeping with the times so as not to let oneself be overtaken by them. This enables one to avoid being left behind and to grasp, govern, and absorb anything that may emerge as the context changes. It is only in this sense that a man of the Right may conceive of ‘progress’ - and not as a mere forward movement, as is all too often held to be the case, especially on the Left; in this context, Bernanos quite rightly speaks of an ‘escape forward’ (‘où fuyez-vous en avant, imbécils? ’). ‘Progressivism’ is a whim alien to any Right-wing stance. This is also the case because, with respect to the course of history in general and in particular to spiritual values - as opposed to material values, technological achievements, and so on - the man of the Right tends to detect a fall, not any progress or genuine ascent. The developments taking place in present-day society are bound to confirm this belief. A Right-wing stance is necessarily anti-collectivist, anti-plebeian, and aristocratic: its positive counterpart is thus to be found in the affirmation of the ideal of a well-structured, organic, and hierarchical State governed by a principle of authority. Here certain difficulties emerge with regard to the issue of from where this principle may draw its foundation and consecration. Obviously, it cannot come from below, from the demos , which - pac e the Mazzinians of yesterday and today - does not express the vox De i at all - if anything, the very opposite. One must also rule out dictatorial and ‘Bonapartist’ solutions, which can only be transiently valid, in emergency situations and under contingent, provisional terms. Once again, we are forced to refer to dynastic continuity, provided - in the case of a monarchical regime - that what we have in mind is so-called ‘authoritarian constitutionalism’. What this means is a kind of power that is not merely representative but also active and regulating on the level of ‘decision-making’ - as already discussed by de Maistre and Donoso Cortés with reference to ultimate decisions - with all the personal responsibilities this entails, when direct intervention is required because the present order has entered into crisis or new forces are looming on the political horizon. Let us repeat, however, that the rejection of ‘static conservatism’ in such terms does not concern the sphere of principles. For the man of the Right, principles always constitute a solid foundation, a bedrock in the face of change and contingency. Here the catchword must always be ‘counter-revolution’. If we like, we may adopt the only apparently paradoxical formula of ‘conservative revolution’. This concerns all those initiatives that are required in order to remove negative situations of the factual sort, which is a necessary step for restoration and for any suitable recovery of what possesses intrinsic value and cannot be called into question. Indeed, in conditions of crisis and subversion, nothing has a more revolutionary character than the recovery of such values. The ancient saying usu vetera novant highlights precisely the same context: the kind of renewal which can achieve a recovery of what is ‘ancient’, namely the immutable heritage of Tradition. - Julius Evola, A Handbook For Right Wing Youth
Careful, inadvertently putting hypnotics in your work. For higher minds, it's a useful memory assist. For lower minds, it runs risk of unintended results if your wording isn't chosen very carefully.
Evolutionarily psychology says the pendulum centers around our evolved human nature. People detect patterns and in the end a group (journalists) are seen as bad meat.
No offense, Dr. L. But, just like Tim pool, you underestimate your listeners intelligence. I doubt simple physics is going to confuse any one of us. Its a bit condescending... Thanks again for your work, brotha
yeah, I think the pendulum is definitely swinging back against the 'progressive DEI intellectual 'class.in my opinion most folks are neither far left maoist or far right hitlerist.the animated image you have but up is quite therapeutic 2whatch 😀
Hitler wasn't far right, he was a Socialist and therefore far left. One glance at National Socialist economic and social policy should tell you as much.
@@MoonshineH I fail to see how significant government involvement in how your company is run, What and how much you produce and who you're allowed to hire is in any way privatisation? Maybe you don't know what private means? They had a centralised economy and abolished property rights; they were Socialists and therefore can't be considered right wing.
I didn't know so I asked Bing Copilot what the interdependence thing was - it thinks it's "Strategic Partnership Framework signed by the United Nations (UN) and the World Economic Forum (WEF) on June 13, 2019. This partnership was established to deepen institutional engagement and jointly accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The partnership identifies six areas of focus: Financing the 2030 Agenda Climate change Health Digital cooperation Gender equality and empowerment of women Education and skills1 This framework was drafted based on a mapping of existing collaboration between the two institutions and aims to enable a more strategic and coordinated approach towards delivering impact1. The agreement was signed at the United Nations headquarters between UN Secretary-General António Guterres and World Economic Founder and Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab."
Yes because Progressive Education Pedagogy has been the main operating system of State Education throughout the past century since its inception. ‘Woke’ is a culmination of Progressivism. The Father of Western Modern Education wrote ‘Education For Democracy’. Democracy = tool of Oligarchy for establishing Totalitarianism. America is a Republic, requiring ‘Education for a Republic’ not for Democracy. Huge difference in Education Philosophy, Pedagogy, Methods & Content. Everyone ‘educated’ in the State (these days increasing the Private) System post WW2 has been through varying degrees of conditioning for compliance with Communism (though it’s usually called ‘Global Citizenship’ etc).
Whole-word reading? No. Here in the UK, the very woke educational system uses phonics. Phonics vs. whole word reading are just two different approaches (the latter lacks evidence). In Australia there has been a strong whole-word reading stance but not so in the UK. It isn't correlated with levels of wokeness (even though in the US it is a left/right thing).
The implication is that the retaliation is framed and presented to the layman, who trusts the media. My findings as I speak with more and more people is that less and less are trusting of said media, to the extent where most do not consume it, but are tangibly aware of the echoes of 'woke criticality' and its effects, and hold adverse opinions in its wake. I am curious as to your opinion on this disillusionment, and whether or not it is conducive to 'their' aims.
That misconception of the fascists being right-wing might be one of my greatest annoyances of how the left, since they control the media, can completely perpetuate false information at nauseum.
The distinction ought, more correctly, be between collectivist versus individualist ideology - on the ‘left’ is socialism fascism communism globalism democracy… on the right individualism as in true libertarianism, true private-voluntary- capitalism -
@@robertseavor4304 - yes, it's one of my pet-peeves having to point this out every time - what is labeled 'left' these days is really just the "State- / Group-' above All"-ideology... the individual counts for little (and eventually becomes seen as a nuisance-to-be-canceled-silenced-abolished-... and worse" while what is labeled 'right' is simply the concept that the State/Group is, in reality and fact, made up of individuals ! And either something/ a rule/law/idea/actions... is either good for one individual and bad for all others, or good for a few and bad for many... or good for most but still bad for some... etc. etc ., - the phrase 'it's good for the group'.. for the collective' ... is a mythological concept used to deceive the individual into believing it moral and virtuous to submit to the tyranny of the few -
I’ve had these thoughts in years previous, maybe not so eloquently and in my head mainly, that those advocating for personal responsibility can not fall to using the same tactics as those that brought our Country and much of the world to this point lest we become the evil we sought victory over.
