Trump era: Fascist dawn, or road to liberation?

Laurelayn said:
And what is it with the pink pussy hats? :scared:
I do not understand how this can be a statement for furthering womens rights or gaining respect.

Yeah, I'm a bit baffled as well Laurelayn. I mean, since they don't like Trump that much because of his sexism and objectification, then maybe dressing in what literally is a visual representation of his "pu$$y grabbing" comments is a wee bit of an unsuccessful fashion choice :huh:
 
Ant22 said:
Laurelayn said:
And what is it with the pink pussy hats? :scared:
I do not understand how this can be a statement for furthering womens rights or gaining respect.

Yeah, I'm a bit baffled as well Laurelayn. I mean, since they don't like Trump that much because of his sexism and objectification, then maybe dressing in what literally is a visual representation of his "pu$$y grabbing" comments is a wee bit of an unsuccessful fashion choice :huh:

Yeah, I find this really off-putting, idiotic and contradictory. And look at how this twists people's (and especially women's) minds - they cannot really say something about it, because then they are 'against women's rights', 'pro Trump' or even 'fascist'. When in fact, that's not true at all, they simply are disgusted with this objectification and primitive obscenity. But so many will be tempted to accept the idea, even find it good, because they are sort of mind-trapped. Ponerology in action I guess.
 
Re: Re: Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election

Scottie said:
Niall said:
I could pretty much understand where Judd was going with this... up until she said 'Hillary'. Right there, a feminist loses me. Clinton is not an 'ideal' - she's a warmongering, people-hating nutcase.

I think it would be more useful if we were to try to understand the perspective of those who feel as Judd does, rather than brush them aside as "mentally retarded freaks."

Exactly. Much of what she said in the poem is true. But that message is greatly diluted and weakened IMO when you have people like Madonna and Hillary as "spokeswomen / wonderful examples".

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

It seems to me that Judd was being a bit of an opportunist. Whatever validity there is in the points of the words she cited is being overshadowed, and probably lost entirely by the notion of being "nasty women". My point being, nasty is usually equated with repulsiveness, or physically aggressive, or unpleasant - usually not strength and determination.

If they think they're going to get the public at large to understand their idea of "nasty women" then I'd say they're probably very mistaken. Overall it looked to me like a mild form of inciting violent uprising. Then toss in Madonna talking about blowing up the Whitehouse. Seriously? That was no off the cuff statement, it was intentional and in my perspective done with specific intent to take advantage of weak minds.

If I had to sum the whole thing in a word then I think herding fits best and triggering might be appropriate too.
 
As for the star-studded cast speaking at the Woman's March, I basically see them as paid entertainers. To them, it's probably just another "gig" to attend and do what is expected of them? Some - may truly be sincere on some of these human right's causes but at the end of the day, they go home to their Mansion's, in private gated communities. Their lifestyles, alone, shut out the human misery beyond the gates of their protected fortresses. Few may be involved in real human causes but they're the exception and often work behind scenes without fanfare.

When Trump won the election, Clinton shot back with - she won the Popularity Vote and should be the winner. It's like, because she didn't get her way, she pulled the "woman-weaker sex" bonus card and expected everyone to genuflect and hand her what she wanted. I think, this Woman's March, which she fully endorses, is an extension of her temper tantrums?

Hillary Clinton Thanks Participants of Anti-Trump Women's March on Washington
https://sputniknews.com/us/201701221049867469-hillary-clinton-women-march/

Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has endorsed the Women's March on Washington in opposition to newly inaugurated US President Donald Trump held on Saturday, thanked the participants.

Thanks for standing, speaking & marching for our values @womensmarch. Important as ever. I truly believe we're always Stronger Together," Clinton wrote on Twitter.

Michelle seems to have the same personality, mannerisms and pan face characteristics?

Michelle Obama Memes Light Up The Internet
https://sputniknews.com/us/201701201049840289-michelle-obama-memes-amuse-internet/

Humorous memes and GIFs of former first lady Michelle Obama looking irritated at the Inauguration spread quickly across the internet on Friday.

It started with Obama looking somewhat unimpressed at a gift given to her by Melania Trump, a tradition between the new first lady and her predecessor.

​While President Donald Trump was being inaugurated, Obama looked as though she preferred to be almost anywhere else.
Some even thought she was giving the controversial billionaire the cold shoulder when she greeted Trump and his wife Melania alongside her husband, former President Barack Obama.

One, of several concerns, with this Woman's March - isn't the march itself and what it signifies in Human Right's causes but that it was staged on the back of Trump's Inauguration. It was purposely planned to diminish and tarnish a traditional Ceremony, while also mocking "the people's choice" for President.

So - who's "real Human Right's" have been violated - if not those of the people that voted?

Again, we are seeing the masses being subverted from the real issues and manipulated into a parallel direction. In selecting their own President, the voters and their rights have been substituted for "Human Rights" in general. It's a switch-a-roo, to divert a cause in a different direction, which only supports and promotes someone else's personal agenda. In this case, I suspect Clinton and Soros as the main agitators behind these developments?

Many reports have stated that these marches and protests "shouldn't necessarily be regarded as anti-Trump or pro-women" instead - protests are a combination of grievances (such as LGBTQIA rights, workers' rights, civil rights, disability rights, immigrant rights and environmental justice, etc.)

This brings up another concern, under the title of Woman's Marches and going globally, that other protests, unrelated to this Movement will be lumped into the same category - as a mask or cover up - for real protests, in line with other issues? Like protests against NATO occupying foreign Countries, or the US occupying Germany, Poland etc. with their military hardware and troops, or protests against the US base in Japan - will now be lumped into a human right's issue, by just calling in "a sister counter part of the Woman's March organization"? What about protests against Soros meddling or GMO's? Will they now be masked under woman's rights?

Women’s Marches In Solidarity With Washington DC Spread Globally
https://sputniknews.com/world/201701221049867844-womens-march-on-washington-sister-marches/

About 2 million people in 75 countries across the globe flooded the streets to march for human rights on January 21, US President Donald Trump’s first day in office.

​​The marchers — women, men and children — say that the protests shouldn't necessarily be regarded as anti-Trump or pro-women, but rather that their aim is to highlight different human rights issues such as LGBTQIA rights, workers' rights, civil rights, disability rights, immigrant rights and environmental justice.

"We're not marching as an anti-Trump movement per se, we're marching to protest the hate speech, the hateful rhetoric, the misogyny, the bigotry, the xenophobia and we want to present a united voice with women around the globe," Mindy Freiband, organizer of the march in Sydney, Australia, told Reuters.

"We unite and stand together for the dignity and equality of all peoples, for the safety and health of our planet and for the strength of our vibrant and diverse communities." London event's official Facebook page reads.

In Italy, protesters gathered outside the Rome's Pantheon, carrying placards that said "Yes we must" and "Women's rights are human rights."


In Italy, on the same day of the Woman's rights protest - there was a large NATO protest.

Some 1,000 People Participated in Anti-NATO Protest in Northeastern Italy
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201701221049867952-thousand-people-anti-nato-protest-italy/

About 1,000 protesters participated on Saturday in a demonstration against NATO bases and major infrastructure projects of the local authorities, such as construction of a motorway and a railway for high-speed trains, in the city of Vicenza, located in northeastern Italy.

Until the people do not mobilize, until they put pressure on the government to expel the US military from our territory, politicians will do nothing as they are not interested in it. Politicians should be forced to give us an answer, and now they do not want to do this at the moment," one of the march's organizers Francesco Pavin told RIA Novosti.

The demonstration was sanctioned by local authorities and was accompanied by a police escort. There is a total of four NATO bases in the Vicenza area.


A Woman's Protest was held in Berlin and on the same day - another large protest was taking place against the meeting of Eurosceptics.

About 3,000 People Protest Against Meeting of Eurosceptics in Germany's Koblenz
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201701211049859164-koblenz-eurosceptics-protest/

Around 3,000 people gathered on Saturday in the western German city of Koblenz to express their protest against the meeting of the Eurosceptic European Parliament’s group Europe of Nations and Freedom (ENF).

A group of activists also staged a sitting protest near the building where the meeting is taking place. Police deployed about 1,000 officers to ensure security during the protests.

The ENF meeting, which kicked off earlier in the day, is attended by leading Eurosceptic politicians, including French National Front leader Marine Le Pen, Alternative for Germany’s (AfD) co-leader Frauke Petry, Dutch Freedom Party head Geert Wilders and Italy’s Lega Nord leader Matteo Salvini.
 
Interesting article from the NYTs regarding Soros having more than 50 ties to the Women's March organizations: _http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/01/20/billionaire-george-soros-has-ties-to-more-than-50-partners-of-the-womens-march-on-washington/

Not surprised Soros was behind a lot of funding. More surprised the NYTs went with it.
 
Laura said:
Some images of the inauguration crowd that totally contradict the MSM nonsense.

I wonder if CNN is getting the message about being fake news? They've posted a gigapixel panorama view of the Inauguration:

__http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trump-inauguration-gigapixel/
 
Quite a good talk by Stefan Molyneux on recent events.


Two highlights - he says [more or less]:

"See the Left? So much into diversity, a wide variety of perspectives and opinions... They want diversity, but anyone who disagrees with them is Hitler. Pick one, Leftists, you can't have both."

"Leftists tend toward violence. Political ideology is a strong predictor of criminality potential."

The latter is pretty much in line with what Roger Scruton says about the Left and hatred. It still feels kind of odd for me to like and recommend a conservative philosopher, declared monarchist and so on. But the last few months was a time of a quite radical re-evaluation of my life-long sympathies and leanings. Thank you progressives, liberals, SJW's etc! It seems, there may be more to it than just psychopaths ponerizing this or that group or corrupting an ideology although I don't know yet how much of the 'baby' should be thrown out with the bathwater. Anyway, here is Sir Roger Scruton (most of his talks are worth watching and you may find some points very close to what Jordan Peterson talks about, too).

 
Re: Re: Donald Trump wins 2016 US presidential election

Laura said:
goyacobol said:
Perhaps President Trump is more like Putin than we think. I consider Putin to be quite smart and difficult to "anticipate".

As this interesting article (not a perfect news source but interesting) tries to estimate his IQ:
Donald Trump is a Genius – But That’s Just His IQ!
I estimate that Mr. Trump has a 156 IQ at the minimum.

That's an interesting article with some good psychology quotes and description. I couldn't help but think about many of the members of this forum in the personality descriptions.

I also think that this is a very interesting article. I like the term "self actualized" person, and totally agree that the personality descriptions given in the article would define many of the members of this forum. I also think that self actualized people also seek other self actualized people to communicate, or surround themselves with, others that have the same aim, just like this forum. It's like "self actualized" people have the ability to see and understand things more objectively, or at least they have the inclination to do so.

This might explain why so many people question many of the people that Donald Trump appointed to work with him in his administration. Trump, a self actualized person, chose "other" self actualized people that he "knows", whether consciously or not, have roughly the same "aim" as he does, and more importantly, also "think" the way he does. And since the general population are not "self actualized", they simply are not capable of understanding why Trump would choose the people that he did. One person that comes to mind is Kellyanne Conway. Everytime I've seen her being interviewed by the mainstream press, I was always impressed by what she said. She always had very intelligent answers to their questions, always a "straight shooter", just like Trump. If the reporter was trying to "trap" her, she knew it and wouldn't fall for it. I think she played a huge part in getting Donald Trump elected, and that's the kind of "self actualized" people that Trump has chosen.

After reading the article, I also thought about what the C's said at the end of the November 12, 2016 session:

A: Things are developing nicely. Help is close.

So maybe (and this is just a "maybe") Trump is "the help" that the C's were alluding to (or at least a part of it). I mean, can you imagine what things would be like if Hillary Clinton would have won the election? And how that could have affected our "work"? But with Trump as President, I think it "buys" us more "time" to continue the work at a more fervent pace, for the benefit of others...
 
NormaRegula said:
Interesting article from the NYTs regarding Soros having more than 50 ties to the Women's March organizations: _http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2017/01/20/billionaire-george-soros-has-ties-to-more-than-50-partners-of-the-womens-march-on-washington/

Not surprised Soros was behind a lot of funding. More surprised the NYTs went with it.
I did not quite catch why they were protesting with their pink hats even after seeing clips here and there, but, reading about Mexico City policy _http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-22/preview-trumps-seven-imminent-executive-orders in which Trump recently stop it, the IPPF wont receive a cent anymore, I suppose... now I get it!
 
The MSM are going nuts now claiming Spicer's first speech regarding crowd numbers was full of falsehoods. "Alternative facts" was the quote by Conway that is blowing up on social media.

And then I just witnessed this from Serj Tankian, lead singer of the band System of a Down:

m96i51.jpg


I was surprised at this considering the anti-establishment, pro-justice/revolutionary foundations of their music. Their entire music video for their song "Boom" was footage of marches around the world protesting going into Iraq. Now they're attacking the anti-establishment President that speaks of reducing wars!
I then saw the like-minded band Rage Against The Machine's bassist calling Trump Hitler. I used to consider these bands a powerful voice for the oppressed...

Consistent (un)reality checks.
 
Laura said:
And here is the comparison that MSM tried to pass off.

I think this very good proof of their lying and "fake news". I was looking at these closely and it is obvious to anyone who is familiar with the mall area that the area in front of the Smithsonian is filled (I used to live in Annandale, Va and used to take guests to sight-see in DC). One thing that kind of helps too is there are so many red caps present to show they were Trump supporters.

All of the above are good examples of the view I think. I hope the fake pictures backfire.
 
SummerLite said:
Kellyanne Conway speaks about womens march, Madonna, CIA, crowd size, Obamacare etc. Repeatedly asked/badgered about Sean Spicer giving false information about the crowd size. Whoa, these msm people are very hard to listen to.. Kellyann held her own very well, she is a excellent spokes person. Well done. The remark by CIA, Brennan is horrible!





Stephanopoulos was being the usual MSM jerk I think. Kellyanne Conway is one smart cookie and gave it back with both barrels.

I kind of hope they keep talking about the crowd size and get shot down for it. There are pictures out there that can show the "real crowd size".

I found some excellent pictures of the inauguration here.

Pictures 101, 104 & 107 have mall views.

For a good diagram of the mall layout the National Park Service has a good one that I attached as the first picture from a screenshot blowup.
 

Attachments

  • National Mall Area.png
    National Mall Area.png
    2 MB · Views: 208
  • 101.jpg
    101.jpg
    248.2 KB · Views: 137
  • 104.jpg
    104.jpg
    353.7 KB · Views: 136
  • 107.jpg
    107.jpg
    338.3 KB · Views: 133
SummerLite said:
Kellyanne Conway speaks about womens march, Madonna, CIA, crowd size, Obamacare etc. Repeatedly asked/badgered about Sean Spicer giving false information about the crowd size. Whoa, these msm people are very hard to listen to.. Kellyann held her own very well, she is a excellent spokes person. Well done. The remark by CIA, Brennan is horrible!

Thanks for sharing that video. One thought I had watching this - to get something positive out of this whole situation: while of course the MSM spreading fake news is ridiculous and needs to stop, maybe it's not such a bad thing that the media is going tough after the Trump administration? I mean, isn't this what they are supposed to do? Fourth Estate and all that? Maybe it's a good thing to finally have a media that holds the administration accountable. Maybe everyone will profit from this - the administration can't afford any nonsense because they will be called out on it, and the media must up its game as well and engage in real journalism. Otherwise they will be called out on it by the administration (like with the Martin Luther King bust). And they certainly won't cuddle and become a mouth piece of those in charge at the White House, like it used to be. So - maybe everyone will grow?

Well, I don't want to delude myself, but maybe there's some hope :)
 
Possibility of Being said:
Quite a good talk by Stefan Molyneux on recent events.


Two highlights - he says [more or less]:

"See the Left? So much into diversity, a wide variety of perspectives and opinions... They want diversity, but anyone who disagrees with them is Hitler. Pick one, Leftists, you can't have both."

"Leftists tend toward violence. Political ideology is a strong predictor of criminality potential."

The latter is pretty much in line with what Roger Scruton says about the Left and hatred. It still feels kind of odd for me to like and recommend a conservative philosopher, declared monarchist and so on. But the last few months was a time of a quite radical re-evaluation of my life-long sympathies and leanings. Thank you progressives, liberals, SJW's etc! It seems, there may be more to it than just psychopaths ponerizing this or that group or corrupting an ideology although I don't know yet how much of the 'baby' should be thrown out with the bathwater. Anyway, here is Sir Roger Scruton (most of his talks are worth watching and you may find some points very close to what Jordan Peterson talks about, too).


Thank you PoB for bringing these videos to attention. That is quite interesting and like you I have also had to re-evaluate my sympathies. It also appears as if many things stand on its head, which ponerology can account for at least to some degree. In discussing the EU I find many who are staunchly for it and who are conservatives by conviction. The same people then appear perplexed when it is pointed out how EU has eroded many conservative values and how the EU appears more like a 'socialist' tyranny which enforces its views and dictates things, thus crushing the indidual in the process and stifling creativity and freedoms.

I think that the traditional workers union and workers in general can be classified as being conservatives. They are not for revolution, but for the continuation of a stable society with defined rules and where they are respected and appreciated for the work that they do. They are not tradtionally for an upheaval of the existing order and the spread of chaos. Thus Putin has a broad support by workers and Trump too appear to have a large support from workers as he stands for conservative values. Both have a strong work ethic. and the creation of real values. They are not advocates for a free lunch.
 
Back
Top Bottom