Skip to content

Category: Authoritarianism

Trump Signs Executive Order Pandering to Jewish Voters and Israel

So now we hear that Donald Trump has signed an executive order determining what “anti-Semitism” is, like including criticism of Israel or Judaism, and punishing such speech as thought crimes by denying federal funds to colleges and schools or other programs shown to allow or tolerate “anti-Semitism” on campus.

As Kelley Vlahos at The American Conservative writes,”What it really will do is put a chill on speech, as skittish administrations shut down protests, screen speakers, and monitor classrooms for unsanctioned criticisms against Israel.” Yep.

Alan Dershowitz, otherwise known as “Mr. Freedom of Speech” and “Mr. First Amendment,” supports this and was there at the Trump Order-signing ceremony. Oh well. There goes that one. So much for Alan Dershowitless. He used to say that a worse alternative to bad speech is no speech — but now, when it comes to Israel he is for silencing others with whom he disagrees. May we now call him “Mr. Censorship”?

But this should be a further example why we need to:

1. Abolish all government redistribution of wealth schemes altogether. No one should receive funds that were taken involuntarily from others. That’s stealing. (Abolish the income tax, too.)

2. Get the government out of education. Abolish the federal Department of Education. Total separation of education and State in a free society.

3. Repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and all its subsequent Amendments, or strike any parts that apply to privately owned property. Only the government may not “discriminate” against people based on religion, national origin, sex or race. It should not apply to people in their private associations or economic matters. Otherwise, it is a thought crimes act. This current executive order imposed by the orange fascist is based on Title VI of the Act.

Unfortunately, politicians pander to a very sensitive spot in American politics: support for Israel. Many politicians tremble at the thought of not being seen as a big supporter of Israel, so they overdo it. (See Rand Paul and his “Stand with Israel Act.” Pander, pander, pander, Rand.)

And then there are the True Believers, the zealous Christian Zionists like George W. Bush, Mike Pompeo, and our current vice president Mike Pence who support Israel and “the Jews” mainly because the zealots believe in “End Times,” and the “Great Tribulation,” the “Rapture,” and all that icky stuff. They only support “the Jews” because they are looking forward to those End Times when, in order for Jews to be saved they will convert to Christianity and become believers in Jesus Christ as The Savior. Or else, they won’t be saved.

But regarding Trump’s fascist threats against colleges and schools, academic institutions used to be places encouraging debates from all perspectives, the expression of any ideas, including uncommon, dissenting and even abhorrent ideas. But as we know now, the political correctness and intolerance give us silencing of uncommon, dissenting and supposedly abhorrent ideas. Apparently believing that there are only two genders is now an abhorrent idea. Some people including the moron President think that criticizing Israel is an abhorrent idea, no matter what its government does.

But if you criticize Israel now, you are an “anti-Semite” (or a “self-hating Jew” in my case). There are many sound reasons to criticize Israel, just as there are many sound reasons to criticize the United State of Amerika. I do the latter all the time here. Why is Israel so special? Why is Israel such a snowflake that it can’t endure some critical opinions?

I personally am not a Zionist, because I am not a collectivist and don’t believe in group identity politics. That is what Israel is all about. Zionism is a political movement for over 100 years encouraging the world’s Jews to move to that one location, based on the Bible and Biblical scriptures. It isn’t based on living a better life, because if it were then Jews should be encouraged to live in the United State of Amerika. Israel is a socialist nation based on government central planning, and a militarist police state, much more than the U.S. Imagine TSA and U.S. border control “your papers please” but not just in the airports or on the border, but throughout the whole country.

And why must there be a “Jewish State”? Should there be a Christian state? An Islamic state? Or an atheist state? Duh.

People should live where they want to live, where they feel most comfortable, where it’s economically or culturally best for them, and so on. If they want to live in some kind of neighborhood covenant based on Judaism, then do that. But to seize an entire territory, which is what the British Empire, the U.S. and other Western governments and their militaries did during the 20th Century, and have it be an artificial country based on a particular religion at the expense of people who hold different religious views, then we have not only a theocracy but an entire country that’s based on the negation of freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

But we’re not allowed to say those things or give those opinions. People dare not consider those concepts or those ideas of dissent from the usual dogma they’ve been fed since their early childhoods.

So, unlike Israel where there is no Constitution or Bill of Rights or a First Amendment protecting freedom of speech, in the United State we DO have those things. And we can say whatever we want about the bureaucrats and criminals of the U.S. government (sorry for the redundancy), just as we can say what we want about Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and worse, the U.K.

Even here in Amerika, we can say what we want about religions. Including Judaism. That’s not “hate speech,” or “discrimination.” I can say that Judaism and Christianity are not my thing, even though I consider myself Jewish because I was raised in a Jewish family. But I don’t believe in a lot of the Biblical teachings. I think that Judaism is, like Christianity, a very authoritarian religion. But then, I can’t think of a religion that is not authoritarian. And I can criticize it for that reason if I want to.

Just like the conservatives and talk radio personalities we hear are constantly criticizing Islam, another extremely authoritarian religion. Right?

Speaking of authoritarians, the Orange One is extremely authoritarian in his imposing an executive order to stifle freedom of speech on college campuses in the name of pandering to Israel and Jewish voters.

The Climate Fanatics Want to Scare People More Efficiently

The climate alarmists now are dissatisfied with their vocabulary of “climate change” and now want to “rebrand” their alarmism to “climate collapse” because they feel their current fear mongering isn’t enough, according to Robert Wenzel in a post yesterday.

“Global warming,” “global melting,” “climate collapse,” “climate catastrophe,” “climate doomsday,” “climate end-of-the-world-we’re-all-going-to-die,” and so on and so forth. Why not just change the language to “Climate Ocasio-Cortez,” because you might as well given the young congressbimbo’s hysteria that was in the news recently.

Yes, the climate on planet Earth has been changing, since the world began. There have been warming periods, and there have been ice ages. And more warming periods, and more ice ages. Unfortunately, thanks to screen-staring addictions, xanax and process foods, the masses seem to be more influenced by hysterical propaganda than by the truth especially in the past two decades.

But what is their real goal? Well, what the activists, propagandists and useful you-know-whats really want is the expansion of more governmental powers and control over the lives of the people. They want the government to be even more empowered to take even more income, wealth and property from the workers and producers from society. So, it all has to do with taking, stealing, and exercising power over others. That is what these people really want.

And speaking of global warming, why is that such a bad thing anyway? If more ice melts and the areas of the world that had been icy and chilly-frosty would then become warmer, those areas could then be used as additional places for agriculture. We can grow more food for the world and feed the masses more than we are able to do now. Isn’t that a good thing? Isn’t ending or at least reducing world hunger a good thing?

Oh, wait a minute, many of these activists and propagandists also want to kill off millions of people because they also believe the world is “too crowded.” Many of them are also pro-abortion, they support killing babies before they are born (and in some cases after they are born). They aren’t particularly concerned for the welfare of others now, are they? Nope.

So the activists now want to change or “rebrand” their language and vocabulary to more efficiently scare the people into supporting their program of more governmental powers and more government theft. Don’t listen to them. They are nuts, and those who are not nuts are just dishonest and are criminals who want to enslave and steal from their neighbors. Buy those SUVs, go on long trips, and on Earth Day 2020, make sure to keep all the lights on in the house, along with the air conditioners or heating systems. And that is what I have to say about that.

More News and Commentary

Sharyl Attkisson has the least-biased impeachment guide.

John Solomon says there are many documents that could change the Ukraine scandal if Trump released them.

Eddie Scarry on the NYT memory-holing its own report that Ukraine interfered in 2016 election.

James Bovard suggests sending Thanksgiving greetings to Chelsea Manning, a.k.a. Bradley Manning.

Jacob Hornberger discusses guns and violence.

Joy Pullmann says that media propaganda about Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s health is irresponsible.

Brian Shilhavy with Ann-Marie Timmerman on doctors and CPS in medical kidnapping.

And Health Impact News with an article on a doctor who doesn’t want to consider Gardasil vaccine as cause of patient’s seizures, because such disclosure would result in loss of research funding.

Today’s Anti-Immigration Nationalists And Their Love of Central Planning and the Police State

Thomas DiLorenzo writes on LRC about the curse of American nationalism, with reference to the recently published Volume 5 of Murray Rothbard’s Conceived in Liberty, transcribed from Rothbard’s handwritten notes and edited by Patrick Newman. DiLorenzo quotes Rothbard regarding the early American nationalists,  such as “Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, Sam Adams, John Hancock, Thomas Paine…” who wanted to “destroy the original individualist and decentralized program of the American Revolution.”  DiLorenzo writes that “Conceived in Liberty tells the story, chapter and verse, of how these men subverted and overthrew the principles of American freedom that inspired the American Revolution with their ‘devious and sinister machinations,'” as Rothbard would put it.

Now, I don’t know whether DiLorenzo agrees with me on the immigration issue. But that is one issue in which today’s nationalist conservatives go off the deep end, and abandon their supposed advocacy of private property and free markets in the name of American nationalism and their deeply indoctrinated worship of “America” with all the myths and glorification that go with it.

Today’s conservatives are supporters of centralization and government central planning in many aspects of life. And they love the tyrannical national security state. With the faux “war on terror” and the wars on drugs and immigration, today’s nationalist conservatives are police statists and militarists. Not big on individualism, decentralization or privatization, these people.

One of today’s extreme nationalists, Michelle Malkin, has been on the talk shows promoting her anti-immigration and “stand with ICE” tour and her book, Open Borders, Inc.

Stand with the police state, you mean. Certainly not stand with freedom, and the ideas of the Declaration of Independence, such as unalienable rights.

Now Malkin is being snubbed by conservative groups because of her defense of someone named Nick Fuentes who has been accused of being an anti-Semitic Holocaust denier and a racist. Malkin still insists on defending Fuentes, despite his controversies. I don’t know why. And her tour is now being banned by the intolerant academic fascists on the left, including the latest being Bentley College.

Malkin, and her anti-immigration cohorts Donald Trump, Ann Coulter et al. have this collectivist, nativist ideology that overrides whatever support they might ever have for the founding principles of America.

In fact, regarding the immigration issue, in one of the Founders’ complaints against the King in their Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote:

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

Do they know this? So, these so-called conservative people of today are really anti-free market, anti-private property and anti-freedom of association. As I wrote in this post summarizing several past posts on immigration, when you have genuine free markets people sell their labor or goods to employers or customers, and such contracts are between them and don’t involve third parties unless specifically noted. And in a society of freedom and free markets people come and go as they please. No police state at the border, no having to report to government bureaucrats. As I wrote in that post, statists look to the ruling government bureaucrats for validation.

In contrast to the free society, if you favor the current system that consists of workers and employers having to get the government’s permission to do business or trade, then that is socialism, not capitalism and not freedom. Private property rights are such that an individual owns his own labor and sells it to an employer in a voluntary contract. When you have to get a third party’s permission or ultimate authorization in these things, then the real owner is that third party, not the laborer or employer. In the current system of government ownership of the people and “their” property, that third party owner is the U.S. government.

There are a lot of myths thrown around in the immigration debate, and one of them asserts or implies some kind of collective ownership of the U.S. territory as a whole, but there is no such collective ownership. If so, then such an arrangement overrides private property rights.

Once again I ask, why aren’t these so-called conservatives spending their time and activism on getting rid of the welfare state if they’re worried about “illegals” coming and getting on welfare? Because they LOVE the welfare state! They love Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Otherwise they would constantly advocate those socialist programs be abolished.

But there shouldn’t be government confiscation of private wealth or earnings — that’s criminal. There shouldn’t be government-imposed redistribution in any case, whether redistributed to other people here or to foreigners. Those schemes are immoral, illegitimate, and criminal, in my view.

And why are today’s conservatives so short-sighted, like the ones on the left? They don’t seem to want to address the causes of the “illegals” and the caravans coming up from the southern border. Such causes include U.S. government’s foreign interventions and foreign aid to corrupt regimes in Central America, and the “war on drugs.” The immigrants are fleeing because of the violence as consequences of drug prohibition. But sadly, many of today’s conservatives support the drug war and the nanny state in which we must turn to gubmint to tell us what we may or may not consume in our “own” bodies. Today’s conservatives support siccing the goon government police on innocent, peaceful people who haven’t harmed anyone, just as is the case with immigrants. It is the goons of ICE, that Michelle Malkin et al. love so much, who are the thugs.

And given that many more violent crimes are committed here by U.S. citizens than by immigrants, the fact that these “conservatives” spend so much time and activism only concentrating on the unauthorized entrants to the territory, then that tells me that it’s not about crime, it’s not about “stealing Americans’ jobs,” it’s not about welfare, it’s all about foreigner hating, and that’s it. It’s about collectivist nativism, and envy and covetousness as well, very much like that of the left.

If today’s conservatives such as Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh and all the ditto-heads really favored the principles of America’s founding, they would promote unrestricted free markets, protection of private property, decentralization and abolishing of the police state.

The Democrat and Republican Parties Are a Criminal Racket

Jacob Hornberger may or may not agree with me that the two major political parties are a criminal racket. And I’ll explain further down why I think they are.

But he sure writes terrific columns. In this one Jacob comments on Elizabeth Warren’s socialist soak-the-rich plan. He notes that the U.S. had no income tax for over 100 years, in which Americans were free to do whatever they wanted with their own wealth and earnings. It was not stolen from them by the government.

But in 1913 the gubmint convinced i.e. bamboozled the American people to accept a compulsory income tax, sans any kind of voluntary contract. It was an involuntary contract, the same kind of involuntary contract that a robber has with his victim on the street. “Your money or your life,” and so on. Yep, that gubmint.

Hornberger writes:

So, what happened? Both Democrats and Republicans began spending government money like it was going out of style on both domestic welfare-state programs and foreign warfare-state escapades. The result was that the middle class ended up getting fleeced to pay for all that welfare-warfare junk.

Just consider all the middle-class people today who are having trouble making ends meet. Manyof them do not have a nest egg in the event of an emergency. They live paycheck to paycheck. That’s because the federal government has fleeced them of their money to fund its ever-burgeoning welfare-warfare state expenses.

There is something else to consider about Warren’s “soak the rich” philosophy. It ultimately hurts the middle class and the poor. The rich provide valuable services in society. One, many of them own businesses that employ middle class and poor people. Two, the rich accumulate capital, which is a key to rising standards of living for the middle class and the poor. Three, many of the rich become rich by providing goods and services that the middle class and the poor value. And four, the rich buy expensive products when they are first invented, which ultimately leads to mass production that enables the middle class and poor to buy such products.

Soaking the rich leads to impoverishment of the middle class and poor. Just look at Cuba, where Warren’s socialist counterparts seized everything from the rich, including money, businesses, and homes. At first, it was party time with all that money and property. But over time, the socialist system started caving in on itself, leaving everyone in Cuba impoverished.

Of course, Warren would undoubtedly argue that at least everyone in Cuba is equal in the sense that everyone is equally poor. But is that really a good thing? Wouldn’t it be better if everyone in society is prospering, even if some have more than others?

Nope. Liawatha would prefer that everyone be equally poor, and not that people are prospering. Except for herself, her fellow apparatchik commissars in the bureaucracy, and their crony industrialists, of course.

Just like in Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, the old Soviet Union, and of course, today’s good ol’ USSA.

That is why the whole area surrounding Washington, DC is the wealthiest area of the country.

So “soaking the rich” really just means stealing from everyone as much as possible, and living high off the hog at the expense of the workers and producers of society.

Of course, these criminals are causing, or would cause, a continually diminishing population of workers and producers, that’s for sure. They will put everyone out of work in the current “capitalist” system, and the minimum wage laws are a micro view of all that. Instead, in their world the gubmint is the one “employer” i.e. master, and the rest of the population are the “workers” i.e. slaves.

So Liawatha, Bernie, and the rest of those criminal kooks are “SOAKED” with more envy and covetousness than the more honest and normal people who don’t want to steal from their neighbors.

Additionally, the socialist grabbers and takers want to grab the reins of power and control all the industries, all the property, and make a whole bunch of rules that the rest of the population must follow — Do this, do that … Do things this way and don’t do things that way, and so on. Jawohl, Dear Leader! And with all that crap is that they want to control your thoughts by making you have to openly accept crazy things like transgender nonsense and all the group identity politics that they espouse.

But the Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats. Republicans believe in socialism just as much. They love the income tax, Social Security, Medicare, Prescription Drug Welfare, foreign aid, and all the other forms of compulsory redistributionism that are now in place.

In fact, I would go so far as to suggest that the Republican and Democrat parties are a criminal racket, because throughout the years they have imposed laws, fees and restrictions on third parties or otherwise non-establishment candidates to get their names on the ballots in elections. Any and all of those in power who have imposed such unconstitutional restrictions should be charged with racketeering, extortion, fraud, and whatever other charges that apply.

Also, the people in the U.S. government who have sent fellow Americans off to their deaths for no good reason in Vietnam and Korea, and started wars of aggression against Iraq and Afghanistan and initiated drone bombings and killings of innocent civilians in other countries, and imposed murderous sanctions, have been members of those two establishment parties, Republican and Democrat. They have not been Libertarians or Greens.

And it wasn’t Libertarians or Greens who imposed the aforementioned income tax-thefts, which have enabled those wars of aggression and redistributionism from the workers over to the military contractors the merchants of death. It was Republicans and Democrats. Certainly not Libertarians, Greens or members of the Constitution Party.

Involuntary taxes are acts of theft. Why? Because they are … involuntary. They are not based on a voluntary contract. For any transaction to be legitimate in a free society, it must be voluntary, not involuntary. If it’s involuntary, then it is nothing but stealing, robbery, theft, extortion, fraud, mugging, embezzling, pilfering, shoplifting, you name it. It is not an honest transaction. It is criminal.

So, in addition to the Democrats and Republicans’ restricting the rights of the people to participate in democracy and run for office (and oppose the power-abusers), those other reasons are further evidence that the two major parties are a criminal racket.

News and Commentary

John Whitehead comments on a new kind of tyranny: the global state’s war on those who speak truth to power.

Ron Paul analyzes the Trump administration’s proposed pre-crime policy of sentence first, crime later.

Peter Earle on the feds’ totalitarian Real ID.

Richard Enos on all the doctors being paid to be shills for Big Pharma.

Richard Ebeling writes about the history and meaning of the Berlin Wall.

Chris Hedges on the enemy within.

John Solomon reports that Hunter Biden’s Ukraine gas firm pressed the Obama administration to end corruption allegations.

The Last Refuge on why John Brennan, Peter Strzok, and DOJ needed Julian Assange arrested, and why U.K. officials obliged.

Fox News article on “whistleblower” attorney having tweeted that the “coup has started” in early 2017.

Jacob Hornberger comments on the problems with Tulsi Gabbard.

Jon Rappoport says that rising up against the oligarchs does not equal socialism.

Robert Murphy on the bogus “consensus” argument on climate change.

Michael Snyder with 45 population control quotes that show the elite are quite eager to reduce the number of people on the planet.

B.N. Frank discusses government schools mounting electromagnetic devices on kids’ heads to collect brainwave data.

Don Boudreaux doesn’t like Marx’s writing.

Laurence Vance wonders whether the feds should have a war on peanuts.

Peter van Buren has a note to progressives.

Joy Pullmann on the first Common Core graduates being the worst prepared for college in years.

Alan MacLeod on the arrest of Max Blumenthal and the war on alternative media

And L.K. Samuels on the original social justice warriors: Hitler and Mussolini.

More News and Commentary

Laurence Vance comments on military habits.

Kerry McDonald in praise of spontaneous order.

Thomas DiLorenzo on the Soviet-style university system in Amerika.

Kurt Nimmo comments on the police state escalating its war on freedom of speech.

Caitlin Johnstone says that mainstream journalists who refuse to defend dissident journalists are worshipers of power.

Ray McGovern on the arrest of Max Blumenthal.

David Stockman says, Yes, Virginia, there is a deep state.

Matt Agorist with an article on Florida police caught creating illegal lists for tracking gun owners.

Donald Boudreaux has some questions for immigration skeptics.

Bryan Caplan on the plight of the worker.

Dagny Taggart on what the idiot central-planner utilities bureaucrats are doing to the people of California with the deliberate power shut-offs.

Steve Penfield discusses in depth the forgotten media purges of the Great Depression.

Jacob Hornberger comments on the never-ending wars on terrorism and drugs.

Ron Paul on Trump flip-flopping on Syria withdrawal.

James Bovard says U.S. aid makes corrupt countries more corrupt.

Aaron Kesel: Trump further militarizing police.

Human Rights Watch with an article on CIA-backed forces committing atrocities in Afghanistan.

Robert Wenzel asks, Should we accept the conclusions of experts?

Richard Ebeling discusses Max Weber on politics as a vocation.

And Tyler O’Neil discusses the new Austin, Texas sex ed curriculum that trains kids to be LGBT activists.

The “Social Justice” Mob in Amerika

You probably remember the case of Michelle Carter, the young high school student who through phone calls and texts urged her boyfriend to kill himself, which he did. She was convicted of involuntary manslaughter based on her words alone. She was a mean, nasty girl, and for that she was convicted of manslaughter. Carter then appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Court, which upheld the conviction! So now she appealing to the U.S. Supremes.

Hmm. As I pointed out in this post, if someone’s meanness and verbal “bullying” can be made criminally responsible for someone else’s suicidal death, then how about other forms of speech? Such as a  bitter campaign speech by a candidate who calls others terrible names, or a “hateful rant” on a blog or Facebook, something a possibly “vulnerable” person reacted to by then committing suicide?

But now there is a new case, and in Massachusetts no less, of a terrible, nasty b*tch girlfriend urging her boyfriend to commit suicide, which he did. They were both Boston College students. Like the Michelle Carter case, this young “girlfriend” sent the boyfriend tens of thousands of texts, such as “go kill yourself,” etc. After he killed himself by jumping off a parking garage just hours before he was to graduate last May, the girlfriend then fled to her home country of South Korea.

In the Michelle Carter case, the two were taking antidepressants. Dr. Peter Breggin had testified during the trial regarding the effects of antidepressants. He has a whole resource page on just that case with several links to his articles on that. And I have written about the psychiatric drugs and their being contributors to worsening depression, suicide, aggression and violence, more recently on the Anthony Bourdain and Kate Spade suicides.

So far we haven’t heard whether the two Boston College students in this new case had been taking any psychiatric drugs. But he had severe depression, supposedly. It wouldn’t surprise me if he was taking antidepressants and, if so, that the drugs worsened his depression, as Dr. Peter Breggin has testified and written about extensively. But it may not be the case, so we’ll see.

In any event, the subject of psychiatric drugs is not what I’m writing about here. This post is more about speech, and freedom of speech.

In the case of the two Boston College students, the girlfriend in the new case, Inyoung You, is being charged with involuntary manslaughter. Just for being a verbally mean b*tch. But being a verbally mean b*tch isn’t a crime. So I think there is something else going here with the Suffolk County, Massachusetts DA Rachael Rollins.

DA Rachael Rollins is one of those “social justice” prosecutors who will selectively prosecute or not prosecute someone by taking the suspect’s socioeconomic background (or race) into account. She states: “If the person presents with mental health issues, substance use disorder, homelessness, or poverty, we’re going to pause just for a moment to see who is this person in front of us … Before branding someone with a criminal record, we just want to pause if they have some of those characteristics.”

Among the suspects she has chosen not to prosecute so far: 11 assault or assault and battery charges. One suspect was accused of punching his wife in the face. In another case, a lady jogger was assaulted and suffered a fractured skull and traumatic brain injury.

And so I’m wondering if the charging of a verbally mean girlfriend with involuntary manslaughter, but not charging physically violent criminals, is a part of a subtle, longer-range scheme to go after speech, not as much “mean, bullying texts” but as a stepping stone to eventually criminalize so-called “hate speech.” We already know the activists want to do this. They already have been doing this.

Of course, “hate speech” is subjective. The leftist mob will not want to go after me if I criticize nationalism, flag-worship, organized religion and the military. (But I’m sure the Archie Bunkers out there would go after me for such “hate speech,” no?)

No, the “hate speech” will be determined by the “social justice” crowd, and by law, anything considered to be “racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic,” anti-LGBTQ+++, but not anti-Christian, or anti-conservative, or hatefulness toward non-irrational leftists. Do you know what I mean?

So, will we be more like Germany, in which the modern “hate speech” gestapo invades people’s homes and steals their property, accusing them of making “threats” and “inciting violence” merely for expressing unpopular views such as about LGBT people?

And now, in a recent survey of millennials, according to Reason, most of the young people support censorship of “hate speech” that is “hurtful or offensive,” and support censorship “in universities or on social media” as well as legal crackdowns on news outlets who publish or broadcast “biased, inflammatory, or false” information.

But thanks to the moonstream media now, actual evidence-backed truthful information is now considered to be “false” information or, as the brainwashed sheeple like to say, “debunked conspiracy theories,” simply because its sources are from alternative media, such as about Ukrainians meddling in the 2016 election.

If the millennials had their way, they would censor that Red State article, and the Politico and New York Times articles linked there, so that the general public would still not know the truth about Ukraine. The ignorant activists would censor former CIA official Ray McGovern and former NSA official William Binney’s articles that went into their own forensic work regarding the DNC computers and McGovern and Binney’s debunking the “Russian hacking” conspiracy theory promulgated by the entire moonstream media and all the little twitterbots and Fakebook snowflakes on the Internet.

So are we looking at a future in which the truth is labeled “false” and censored while the real fake news is presented as “truth” when it’s really just a bunch of propaganda?

First there were the crazies including Marxine Waters telling people to stalk conservatives at restaurants and malls and harass them. And now, the obsession by the Trump haters to remove him from the White House has gone from bad to worse, from the Russia-Mueller crusade to the current impeachment craze.

We have a lying, Soviet apparatchik-wannabe Adam Schiffty who lies and makes up stuff, he runs committee hearing by not allowing the Republicans to ask witnesses questions and he is literally coaching the witness in testimony!

“Witness tampering” much, Shiffty?

Outside of politics in Warshington, on the “social justice” front, we now have speech codes, college campus diversity conferences and implicit bias training, requirements on college campuses to know “emotional risks” of events.

So while the “social justice” activists have been promoting silencing those with a point of view that’s different from theirs or not accepting of transgender activism, at the same time the “social justice” activists are promoting actual physical violence against innocent people as long as the violence is committed by allegedly members of “oppressed” or discriminated-against groups and against anyone who is targeted as “racist,” “nazi,” “white supremacist,” etc., sans any due process, even if the angry mob knows nothing about their victim.

Gee, let’s elect more “social justice” activists to District Attorney or state attorneys general, and to other legally powerful offices to create such an Orwellian dystopian society. You bet.

This is truly a mob-rule society now.