Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "The Rubin Report" channel.

  1. 1
  2. 1
  3. A populist feature I hadn't noticed:s The content creators who rise up out of the oyster grass to become major YouTube presences have more than their share of patrons, but ALSO more than their share of the $1, $2 or $5 contributions from us "small folk." To stamp out the voice of the "small folk," it's easy to see who's getting all the 2s and fews, and I imagine those small donations are more cost and less profit from the payment processors. They don't like us small folk. We say mean things about bankers and our petty transactions cost more to process for what they pay. And there are so damn many of us. Anyway, just by tracking the pain-in-the-ass channels that have many SMALL contributions, they can zero in on most of the subversive voices after they start getting traction. The trouble from the banker's side is that as soon as they use this tactic, there are 2 more to take the last guy's place. They're in their own self-made version of Zombie Apocalypse, with all us small folk representing the zombies! It's like we are H.Y.D.R.A. Chop off one head, and 2 more appear. But they're doing everything they can to plug all the holes in their dam against free expression. And their contrrol of "process" is very tight, and we haven't heard the last of them, nor shall we. The best we can do is marginalize/minimize their effect. I think the FreeThinkers are only just beginning to realize how deeply embedded this perniciousness is and what it will take to keep the power in the people's hands. As we peel away the layers of the Patreon onion, we see that there will also be every obstruction possible set in the way of free speech, now by banking laws, regulations and so-called "best practices." Best practices are more about the culture of banking and culture tends to trump the formal rule sets (or quickly be codified in rule sets).
    1
  4. 1
  5. 1
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. Almost since our nation's birth, there have been robber barons eager to influence the government to tilt the playing field in their favor. It's called crony capitalism and it seeped into our system very early, with such things as land grants to robber barons and thieves to build the transcontinental railroad. The pesky natives obstructed this "noble goal," and so the robber barons got the U.S. Cavalry to back their play. This and other corrupt/fascist plays by our government throughout its history are what fuel the Howard-Zinn characterization of American history. We didn't CURE our ills by asking government to solve them. We made them worse, or just created OTHER problems, also 'requiring' government intervention (i.e. force) to "fix." Zinn gets some things right, but totally mischaracterizes things to fit HIS state-centric world view. Free-market capitalism is good. Crony capitalism is bad. Progressives claim that the latter is the former "run amuck,' when the only problem with free-market capitalism is it creates so much wealth that even idiot socialists can survive long enough to destroy it. Where America went wrong was NOT with free markets. Where it went wrong was when it DEPARTED from free markets, in the name of whatever latest lie they were feeding the public. Not a HUGE Ayn Rand fan, but her book, "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal" gives chapter and verse on regulatory capture and crony capitalism dating back to the 19th Century. This isn't about Reagan and Thatcher, although they both did little to slow the march towards a peculiar, fascist-flavored form of socialism. If we just stuck to our limited-government principles in the first place, we wouldn't be ruled by multinational corporations, today. Government isn't the scourge of the robber barons. It's their partner in crime, and the most powerful partner the corporations could have hoped for.
    1
  9. I think I part ways with some of Peter's points around the 34:00 mark. I think he should give thought to DE-CENTRALIZING the educational project. One of the reasons this CRT is so all-pervasive is because our education institutions are centrally funded and centrally administered. One bad eye can infect the entire nation. Obama could push what amounted to CRT mandates through executive order (decree), by threatening all federal support to institutions that do not toe the line. While we do the bulk of our education funding, locally and by state, the federal contribution is big enough to be irresistibly persuasive in the few instances in which school administrators and school boards might be inclined to resist what they already half believe, in the first place. The power and perks attendant to embracing this bankrupt ideology are 100% persuasive to risk-averse leftists who are already inclined to go along with the ideology because they're almost all socialist or socialist-adjacent. This is "soft control." They can't directly punish an institution for resisting their mandates, but they CAN deny student financial aid to those institutions. Most schools depend on federal financial aid to keep the lights on. It's very difficult to break free, when your institution dies if the feds cut it off. Here's another irony in this ideological war we're in. We wouldn't even know we were in a fight if it weren't for the use of coercive tactics to push the ideology so hard. When the end justifies the means, the means can often defeat the ends. The Nazis HAD to invade their neighbors, steal their gold reserves, and export their inflation to the conquered lands with worthless printed money that they forced conquered peoples to accept as payment for what they took. Their socialist spending had buried them in debt, and World War II kept the bankers at bay, for a time. They were on a trajectory to economic collapse that was postponed only by pillaging their neighbors. That paragraph didn't go so well. My point was supposed to be that it's the coercive nature of the imposition of this ideology, top-down, that exposes it for what it is. If they'd been satisfied with "creeping socialism" for another decade or so, there would be no turning back. But they're so close to their ultimate goals that they've over-reached, in my humble opinion. They've peeled off the mask prematurely. One GOOD thing about COVID-19 is the ZOOM learning exposed the empty-headed ideologues at the tip of the indoctrination spear. A student debating their teacher on tenets of CRT looks like the adult and the teacher looks like the petulant, bullying child in the dialogue. First off, the teachers have no business pushing a faith-based ideology. But more importantly, they're actually pretty bad at pushing it, effectively. Their fall-back position is appeal to authority. Students see right through that, and while we see the successfully-indoctrinated students marching and agitating, a growing majority of students reject the teachings, in much the same way students rejected the establishment's phony arguments for the Vietnam War. The reason we HAVE those institutions was because it was the best and only knowledge production-and-dissemination mechanism available at the time. Now we have the Internet. You don't NEED big, brick-and-mortar institutions for 90% of what is taught in our colleges and universities. You only need the big institutions for things like super-colliders and other science-related apparatus. Electron microscopes, NMR and IR spectroscopy, ... Stuff like that takes some brick-and-mortar infrastructure. But little else.
    1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. So come, make Israel by force, expel the people who lived there, and brutalize them for decades is responsible? WW II was supposed to teach us that the end doesn't justify the means. Then we turned right around at the end of the war and committed a genocide in Palestine for "good reasons." We're not the good guys in this. Israel's not the good guys. What they do is understandable, given the circumstances in which they've found themselves since 1948. But it's not righteous. The end does NOT justify the means. Imagine if they tried kicking everybody out of New York City, to give it back to the Iroquois. It would be at war with the people around New York City from Day 1. Maybe the U.S. Government backs the idea of giving NYC back. Then the people who were displaced would be enemies of the state if they lashed out in reaction to being summarily kicked off the land they paid for. You guys have a HUGE blind spot with respect to the State of Israel. It's a construct, an artifact of British Colonialism which was grafted onto the USA seamlessly after the war. We're a little less obvious about it (or we were), but it's the same old "Great Game" played for the narrow purposes of a handful of powerful people, in opposition to what's best for the people around the world. You're cherry-picking history, Robert. I'm no historian, but I know enough to know how Europeans, especially the British, re-drew the map of the Middle East at their whim, depending on what their interests were. Got a leader who's not playing ball? Start an insurrection. Create chaos. Bring down the government. Re-draw the map, so the oil keeps flowing, with puppets in power or just a ruined nation that cannot defend itself from the predations of Euro/American commercial syndicates. You're usually not Neocon, but on Israel, you're blinded by your cultural baggage and don't see things objectively, in my opinion. I signed on to Daily Wire when Jordan Peterson joined the group, but I'm going to cancel. The top guy, Shapiro, and most of the people under him, are neocon. I don't think Peterson is, but he changed when he went to Daily Wire.
    1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1