Comments by "" (@indonesiaamerica7050) on "Liberal Hivemind"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@AndeH7 It's hard for me to imagine but what I see is that lots of people spend time in law school and practice law in long careers and never build any interest in Federal law and what has happened to the country since FDR's war on the Bill of Rights in favor of The New Deal. The Byzantine bureaucracy created during the New Deal and expanded under WWII and the Cold War is now just "Our Democracy" where the people in power don't ever face any elections and control who can run for office. The status quo is unfathomable if you just study the Constitution itself and then just accept "modern life is complicated" as an explanation for why things are the way that they now are. It's actually not that complicated if you research SCOTUS rulings decade by decade since Dred Scott v. Sandford through Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. and Citizens United v. FEC. And here is the plain English summary. Dred Scott ruling put together a bunch of demagogic rhetoric to explain that the slaves were not actual Citizens because they as a group were not part of the US Revolution. LOL. Crazy, eh? After the Civil War, as we all know, the so called Jim Crow laws were all about de facto apartheid or official two track justice system. And whenever you have a "two track" justice system there is always a hidden third track: The permanent ruling class that guard and protects the innate injustice. So, basically, alongside the KKK and Jim Crow, enforcing "apartheid", you also had Progressives putting together a permanent ruling class. The new institutions didn't really gel until The New Deal. There were several decades where The New Deal legislation and stupid Progressive court rulings lived right alongside KKK and Progressivism. Progressivism is required for the entire New Deal to even be suggested. And Progressivism relies on dogmatic Marxism and dogmatic Darwinism. But the dogmas are presumed to be "settled science" and arguing against Progressives is proof to them that you have cognitive dissonance described by Richard Dawkins as "God Delusion". And like Calvinists, they decree (and propagate the doctrine) that if you disagree it means you were made that way so they have no burden to improve their arguments. LOL. You see these tensions not only in pop culture but in the Federal judges sort of making dual commentary and finding versus dissenting arguments on judicial panels, including SCOTUS. But if you understand my analytical paradigm and step through the relevant history even a properly educated high school student can understand not just the US Constitution and how it should be applied but how Progressives have destroyed the rule of law in DC as a desperate gambit after losing the Civil War where the Secessionists never had any vision of living out equal application of the law. They enjoyed running a permanent ruling class and the cult, even over many generations, never really overcame this problem. The Democrats were always afraid of Patrician Republicans. The buzzword now is The Patriarchy because that fits better with the global "two class" war between Capitalists and Oppressed classes. And after you finish cruising through those histories take another look at Robespierre. He was the same kind of deluded "freedom fighter" that simply envied the monarch's power and wanted it for himself. That's what these people are. They feel oppressed, truly, because they know they have no skills, must blame society for their laziness and paranoia, and set out to resolve it by "flipping the script" and jumping not to the "Oppressor class" but to the new unspoken ruling class that was created by Soviet Communism. Every Marxist revolution since Lenin follows this third class as ruling class model to solve the alleged two class war. The New Deal was a Fabian Marxist revolution. Once you remove all of these blatantly corrupt ideas from your mind you no longer are mystified by moronic judges and their insane behaviors and rhetoric. The Constitution really is that simple to follow. Deciphering the BS takes time. But it's not unfathomable. The corruption is equally easy to understand if you look in the right places.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I just want to remind people of something I have said before about these networks and cable operations that are owned by massive conglomerates. They usually have cellular phone operations, internet access operations, now they're buying production studios for film and TV and the whole world is carved up by just a few of these international media corporations. These are the kinds of corporations subject to regulation and or antitrust actions. What has happened in the modern era (since FDR) is that big corporations have to "virtue signal" if they want protected spaces. The entire idea of the New Deal was to organize key industries so that they could deliver more value and keep prices down so even poor people could eat well. That was in FDR's initial campaign for POTUS. But anywaym, it's a known side effect that small farms would fail and get bought buy bigger operations that could join the segmented land and plan crop rotations and so forth. IOW, these are planned "social justice" monopolies, but not quite monopolies as in only one for the whole country but usually they faced no local or regional competition for things like eggs, chicken, certain crops like corn and so forth. So what happened over time is that the DOJ is supposed to investigate antitrust violations. Since network television was even conceived they were "licensed" aka regulated monopolies but 3 major networks would compete, in theory, but at the same time they must also deliver value according to what measure? Social justice. Put another way, if you piss off the post WWII Deep State you will get investigated. OTOH, if decades of history prove that it's ok to keep consolidating in "Television" and then in "media" and "data access" and whatnot and certain kinds of appeasement, like donating to the SJWs in Congress and flattering "government" in the "news division" will keep the antitrust lawsuits away, taht becomes part of the calculus. From what I understand, take CNN for this example, CNN sold rights to cable providers and the profit motive for CNN itself was those licensing fees and even though they also sold commercial spots that alone would not keep CNN afloat. So the question of salaries for moronic SJWs is really about getting enough eyeballs and convinced the DC fascists that it's a good idea not to split up these conglomerates. They are literal PR flacks for the Deep State and the elected officials that must protect the Deep State or face a culling from the DNC. It seems like government propaganda for that reason. It actually is government propaganda as a strategy of the umbrella corporations that own them. MSNBC was launched by Microsoft not long after they reached a settlement with Clinton's DOJ. So, yeah. They act like agents of this Deep State aka Military Industrial Complex and in effect they are.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2