Remo the Destroyer, by Warren Murphy & Richard Sapir. From #31, The Head Men:
Remo knew. He knew that the organization, for well over a decade now, had been secretly prompting law enforcement agencies to do their jobs properly, leaking information to the press on great frauds and, as a last resort, unleashing Remo himself during a crisis. He also knew that since the advent of the organization, the chaos had grown in the country. The streets were not safe; the police were no better. There was even a very well-paid police commissioner on a national television show complaining how the police were only “a very efficient army of occupation for the poor.”
The one thing that man’s police was not was “very efficient.” Pregnant women were shoved alive into incinerators in that man’s city. His own police rioted. Never before had so many people paid so much money for so little protection.
Remo had become hardened over the years but that was too hard to swallow. There had been a war against crime and chaos and the first to surrender had been the police. It was as if an army had not only let an invader through, they had demanded from their helpless country a higher tribute for their worthlessness. Then again, maybe the citizens had abandoned the decent policemen first. Whatever it was, the civilization was slipping.
So another politician’s life did not send shivers of respect through Remo as it did through Dr. Harold W. Smith.
“So the President’s going to be killed. So what?” Remo said.
“Have you seen the Vice President?” Smith said.
“We’ve got to save the President,” Remo said.
Ah, Yes, Minister on the EU:
Pan's Labyrinth?? Isn't the dad a sadistic soldier of Falangist Spain?
I would actually point out the next movie, Barton Fink, as an unwoke movie. Turturro plays a Jewish version of Lefty Eugene O'Neill, full of empty platitudes about the "common man," who is completely undone by messy reality. It is almost Lynchian. Is PL the same?
I would add Terry Gilliam's Brazil and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen to your list. The former is anti-government, and the latter is all about the Whole Man, the pre-Enlightenment Man, who takes on gods and monsters with equal élan.
This is the best Predator critique of all time, you may see the movie in a new light: https://pastebin.com/Cqxpih3k
Yes. And I don't think I'm wrong to do so.
I think almost every Jewish American who's come out against cancel culture has been: a Leftie personally defenestrated (Bari Weiss, Bret Weinstein); already on the right (Gad Saad, David Cole, Daniel Greenfield, Andrew Klavan, but NOT Ben Shapiro who tried to blacklist Alex Jones, Mike Cernovich, and Milo); or a few dedicated contrarians (Bill Maher). The people howling on YouTube about cancel culture on YouTube are overwhelmingly not Jewish. (Nor are they conservatives, largely.)
Obviously, I think this is very sad.
Let's take a look at the Jewish votes for President, GOP side:
2004 Bush 24%
2008 McCain 22%
2012 Romney 30%
2016 Trump 24%
2020 Trump 22%
Trump did well in 2016, but Romney is the real outlier. He almost beat Ronald Reagan, who got only 31% and 35%. (Carter had the Camp David accords. Freakin' Eisenhower beat Hitler and only got 36% and 40%. Think about that.)
Trump was polarizing, yes, but Israel is even more so.
Romney was a standard Conservative Inc., RINO candidate, not too different from McCain. What was so compelling about Romney?
I think it's his religious minority status. (Or identity, pardon while I roll my eyes.)
Romney is Mormon, of course. Yes, his essential RINOcity may have attracted some of the Jewish vote; he was governor of Massachusetts after all.
Take a second look at that Mondoweiss article linked above. "Asked whether antisemitism stems from the right or left, or is not a political ideology, here’s how Jews respond":
21.5% Almost exclusively from the right
30.8% Mostly from the right
11.9% About the same
-1% Mostly from the left
-1% Almost exclusively from the left
29.8% Social/cultural/ethnic factors, not political
5.1% Other
Pity they don't say how which group of Jews (religious/agnostic, political spectrum) responded.
How annoying: 42% of American Jews think the GOP wants them dead. But in another light, 43% of Jews think it's equal or only "mostly" right-wing. (The threshold for "mostly" is usually 55/45.) Perhaps they consider al Qaeda or ISIS "right-wing," in spite of being nothing an American would consider right-wing.
It's that 29.8% who interest me. "Social/cultural/ethnic factors". Is this really a ethno-cultural issue, or is it where leftie Jews who think anti-Semitism comes "all" or "mostly" from the Left park themselves? "Ah, poverty [or marginalization or the patriarchy or ...] causes anti-Semitism," they nod sagely to themselves.
Is this where "Romney's 10%" came from? "Ah, he's a minority like us," they thought, "he'll understand."
But that "not political" part... In addition to Hitler-on-the-brain (which I do not fault them for, anymore than I fault a black American who regards whites with a certain reserve), I think a lot of Jews are exhibiting an anti-majoritarian streak that is damaging the country as a whole―a kind of "Whatever it is (those dumb hicks want), I'm against it."
As I suggested in the post above, most Jewish Americans seem to be placing themselves in a self-fulfilling prophecy:
- "ZOMG, we have to totally restrict freedom to protect Jews!"
- "Jesus Christ, we're losing our freedom and our rights, let's find the bastards doing it and crush 'em!"
The endless hostility of Marxists towards observant Jews makes me suspect that the suicidal nature of the strategy is not accidental. (This is hard to distinguish from everyday suicidal Marxism, of course.)
The school lockdowns have convinced most Americans that the teacher unions are out to get them, and have pushed lots of people towards home schooling or toward privatizing education. Given the push for "black-only" spaces from blacks, they may well be in favor of that, too. (As a part anarcho-capitalist, I heard Antifa's first calls for "defunding the police" with glee, though I suspected they wanted to replace cops with social-workers-with-arrest-powers, which they do.)
But not the Democrats, and not non-Orthodox, non-right-wing Jews. Which brings up another hard-to-answer thought: does the relentless drive to over-regulation provoke the hostility which Jews interpret as anti-Semitism, which drives even more efforts to over-regulation?
/me reads article, esp. first two points:
- Ignore the need to have exaggerated emotional displays.
- Ignore the need to overreact.
I dunno, maybe she's a secret red-piller in disguise? (She calls them "needs," really?)
The rest of the advice is reads to me like, "don't cling. You can both keep your own friends." I would say, she only missed one thing: "Don't expect him to talk to you as if he was a girl."
That is the worst.
Yet women have far lower rates of murder than men.
No, they don't. Women have almost exactly the same rate of murder as men, except in one area.
This equality includes victim categories from domestic violence to being the innocent bystander-victim of Sudden Jihad Syndrome.
The one area where women and men have a different rate of murder? Basically, gang violence and street violence.
That's it.
This disparity, by the way, was the source of the "women are far more likely to die at the hands of someone they know" lie.
Remember "lies, damned lies, and statistics"? This is one of those situations. But the stats show: women and men die at equal rates at the hands of spouses / boyfriends / girlfriends / friends / neighbors / personal rivals.
But women don't engage in gang turf wars and bar-fights-turned-lethal. The disparity there is huge.
So, as a man, if you don't join a gang and don't get into lethal bar fights, your murder rate drops precipitously.
I'm okay with cancel culture for so long as the Left is.
And it should be enforced on them. Brutally.
If they are willing to put down cancel culture, then I will be, too.
ETA: Hold on, I have a post about this coming up.
https://infogalactic.com/info/Megalia
https://infogalactic.com/info/WOMAD_(website)
Imported. I should do that for all the cat:radfem articles.
Can you recommend a source for anti-feminist Wikipedia critics?
Sources:
- Hoyt, Nov '16: "When a magazine or a newspaper or any news or entertainment media was in real trouble, they went hard, hard left, then died. It took me a little while to realize this was a 'sane' strategy."
- Archive, Bryan Edds, Dec '17: A Psychological Analysis of How and Why Corporations Become SJW-Converged Featuring Wizard of the Coast and MagicGate
- HalfKiA article on Edds
- r/FreeMagic same
- Vox Day, Aug '16: "And then I'll explain to you, very slowly and in words of not more than five syllables, that those hard-nosed, buck-chasing 'businessmen' are observably losing literal billions as they continue to tear away at the foundations of Western Civilization..."
"Why are we shooting at these Wehrmacht guys, most of 'em aren't even Nazis! The big Nazis are in Berlin!"
In most conflict, military or political, you don't get to choose your targets. They are called targets of opportunity, and you usually want to fire on them.
Yes, Rowling is a dumb ho, a useful idiot, to the extent that she isn't part of the feminist cancer. I won't support her (working for her, as opposed to defending her, is a side issue). But she is nowhere near the most dangerous one.
If Troy Leavitt did run an anti-SJW YT channel, then I quote Winston Churchill: "If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons."
To the extent he is one of us, we defend him.
"You're a reactionary!"
"... But reacting to what?"
Like "acting out," "reactionary" is one of those negative terms that carefully avoids mentioning what the speaker considers bad.
They are false charges, mental pollutants injected into English by malefactors speaking in bad faith.
As a white person who mocked that BLM Army "bullpup" twat, I dissent. Stupid people of any race/religion/"lifestyle" deserve mockery, and all they can get.