All you accomplish like that is getting people comfortable with restrictions. You create their mental justification. And as long as they don't think like you, their restrictions will be barely noticed, and they'll know, or at least have the notion, that adopting your ideas are just a way to reduced comfort. It's only detrimental.
Right now is the time to form a coherent ideology that people don't instinctively find repugnant. America First is the best vehicle for that currently, even though it's pretty crappy all in all. Discomfort will come from economics. As peoples material comfort diminishes, they'll become more open to ideas they think will increase their comfort, even if they once found them distasteful. Especially if you can make a cogent argument. You can't really accelerate that discomfort, but you can prepare for it.
The problem with modern ethnonationalists is that their ranks are filled with idiots who have no idea how to sell their ideology, other than some vague notions of jew and negro hate. There are sound arguments as to why some demographic groups are detrimental to a healthy society, but they aren't made effectively, and most people won't listen, even if you do.
Aristotle already made compelling arguments for homogeneity and the issue of faction. Building new ideologies on old foundations would be a better use of time right now than any sort of violence. Book clubs, not bullets.
The problem is, if you just go off half cocked, you're just an excuse to further enable them. "Screw your optics" guy managed to raise around 15mm for the causes he was ostensibly against.
Fuck "screw your optics" guy.
Well... oppression.
Wasn't a well worded comment, though. What I mean is that the Knesset isn't bound by the any great constitutional measures. They can dictate law through simple majority, and there doesn't seem to be any safeguard against tyranny of the majority.
It'll be interesting to see how the arab uprisings within Israel proper are handled.
I'm just saying that the executive has broad authority on how it rolls out legislation. If it was excluding white males, there'd be a case. If it was prioritizing white males, there'd also probably be a case. I just don't see it, when prioritizing protected classes.
The CRA is hardly meaningless. It's just massively unconstitutional, and no judge would ever touch it beyond the margins.
I don't want the vax, and luckily, my family received antibodies naturally, but the adverse reactions seem rare enough that they'll still make money hand over fist, despite a few settlements.
Passports would fuck us, though.
Such is America. Regulatory capture blows.
Because racial based law has a lot more precedent that can jump through legal hoops. This is a challenge to affirmative action. However, because it's really an issue of EO prioritization, it will fail. Precedence also establishes the right to prioritization.
Miller is a disciple of Horowitz. I won't say it's designed to fail, but they surely know it will.
That's not the way. But if it ever comes to such blatant displays of violence, Edward I did it better.
Following the trial, on 23 August 1305, Wallace was taken from the hall to the Tower of London, then stripped naked and dragged through the city at the heels of a horse to the Elms at Smithfield. He was hanged, drawn and quartered—strangled by hanging, but released while he was still alive, emasculated, eviscerated and his bowels burned before him, beheaded, then cut into four parts. His preserved head (dipped in tar) was placed on a pike atop London Bridge.
Fair take. There's no domestic political benefits to Biden publicly supporting Israel, and geopolitically, it's a given. America First isn't anti-Israeli (I hope?). I'd hoped it would be domestically anti-Zionist, but the magapedes are disappointing on that front.
Fascism seems to have more in common with Progressivism than Communism. With the demonization of words, it all gets very confusing, though.
In the US, I could support something like Fangalism (based on a cursory glance). As long as it deals with redistribution of the 28% owned by the federal government.
In his book A Critical Theory of Police Power, Mark Neocleous argues that “the genius of liberalism was to make the police appear as an independent, non-partisan agency simply enforcing the law and protecting all citizens equally from crime.” He adds later that “the existence of discretion allows the state [...] to appear as standing at arms-length from the processes of administration and thus the policing of civil society.”
This guy is part of Red Quill Books, who published the Communist Manifesto in comic book form. That's the sort of academia the author is relying on.
Also, obligatory Yousef, though Neocleous is probably Greek or Cypriot, surprisingly enough.
Nah. Last time they were emancipated from free food and housing, it only took out 1/4 of them.