They Want to Give Robots Human Rights so that Human Life has Less Perceived Value

The Trans-humanism Agenda includes making you think you’re soulless bag of meat and your consciousness is an accident so that you’ll value yours and other’s lives less. 

 

Who Fact-Checks the Fact Checkers? Court Documents: SPLC Co-Founder Allegedly not a Great Person

Why are these guys the ones who are trusted to “fact check” social media? 

Profits of Hate SPLC Southern Poverty Law Center

Co-Founder of SPLC Allegedly Blackmailed, Beat Ex-Wife into Signing Separation Agreement. Tried to molest step daughter with vibrator

A recently-uncovered court document from the divorce proceedings of a prominent Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) figure alleges horrific conduct on behalf of one of the most influential lawyers in America.

Maureene Dees, ex-wife of SPLC co-founder Morris Dees filed for divorce on March 8, 1979 after a decade-long marriage marred by difficulties, according to an appellant brief obtained by Big League Politics. The brief was filed by Maury Smith, Julia S. Waters and Charles M. Crook, attorneys for Maureene, in the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals:

Read  here:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/files/morris_dees_divorce_papers.pdf

The Sexual Revolution and New Wave Feminism Were Agendas That Actually Hurt All Humans

The Problem With Hormonal Birth Control

Published on Jul 18, 2018

Platforms:
Gab: https://gab.ai/Blonde_Beast
Minds: https://www.minds.com/BlondeBeast

Beauty and the Beta Podcast on Sundays at 9 PM ET: http://bit.ly/1WC1TBI

Ways To Donate: -PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/blondebeast

-Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/blondeinthebe…

-Bitcoin: 1FYM1Pv5CTcJs6VQU3Mq9ypjgVgPeMbohK

All donations are greatly appreciated!

Sources and Mentioned: Butch Broads and Soy Boys: What Happened to Millennials?:
https://youtu.be/_OS2KOwZ6xw https://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/22/sc… https://www.scientificamerican.com/ar… http://time.com/3596014/attraction-se… https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/cont… https://www.theatlantic.com/health/ar… https://www.nber.org/papers/w14969 https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-li… https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/arti… https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama… https://www.everydayhealth.com/womens… https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/c…

Solving Problems by Taking More of Your Stuff – Should Work Just Fine: NOT!

alexandria ocasio cortez all your money are belong to us

What Democratic Socialists Don’t Get

NY socialist candidate wants to solve problems with the same tools that created them
Valentin Schmid  July 9, 2018

What prompted the 16,000 primary voters (out of 292,000 eligible in the Queens/Bronx 14th district) to vote for Ocasio-Cortez over her competitor, who only got 11,800 votes? Free stuff and anti-Trump rhetoric. Free education, medical care and a federal jobs guarantee (free stuff), as well as the abolishment of Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE (anti-Trump).

“I understand the economic crises people are facing in New York City; we can’t afford to live in the neighborhoods that our families have called home for generations, including my own family,” she told Vice News.

But her own family background is far from “working class” as she describes on her campaign page, as the Daily Mail reports. Although Cortez was born in the Bronx and lived there until age 5, her father—an architect who ran his own business—moved the family to posh Westchester County, where she attended Yorktown high school. Cortez, who attended Boston University, only moved back to the Bronx after her father died, making money as a waitress and bartender—working class after all.

Either way, for her and her family, the days of not being able to afford to live in the Bronx, or anywhere else for that matter are most likely over. If elected representative, Cortez will enjoy the benefits of “earning” $174,000 base pay for 120-150 days of “work,” a budget of $1.2 million for staff and travel expenses, as well as insider trading privileges.

If she is smart, she can use some of that free time to take lessons from Democratic Rep. Judy Chu from California, who built up a net worth of more than $3 million day-trading the S&P 500 with call and put options since her first election in 2009.

Not bad for 16,000 votes; and at least one Bronx family won’t have economic issues again for the near future. Of course, it remains to be seen how many people turn out for her in this year’s midterm election.

Socialist Confusion

As for her politics, Cortez demonstrates the same delusional lack of understanding of history and economics that other socialists exhibit, most recently and notably Bernie Sanders.

“I don’t believe that in a moral and wealthy America, people should be too poor to live,” she told Qatari-funded AJ+.

This is why she promises the free stuff to poor people, as well as government job guarantees. “I will not compromise on the future that I think is best for this country,” she tells Vice. Given these statements, it sounds awfully like she thinks she is the wise central planner who knows what’s best for everybody. The wise central planner who so far has never materialized for all socialist and communist societies and has brought about misery and death. That this lesson of history is lost on Cortez and her backers of the Democratic Socialists who openly state that “communism is good,” is sad but hardly surprising.

New York Socialism

It is more surprising Cortez hasn’t noticed that the city of New York, where all those poor people who can’t afford to live in the houses they wish to live in, has mostly been ruled by democratic mayors since the 1850s, with the occasional Republican in between, —mayor Bloomberg notwithstanding. It is similar though less clear cut for New York State.

Or may we say she hasn’t noticed because she lived most of her life in Westchester County rather than the Bronx?

Either way, her policies reflect the same socialist delusion, whether it’s on the local or federal level: The problems of poverty and unaffordable housing, according to Cortez, don’t exist because of the thousands of failed government initiatives but because there hasn’t been enough of them.

Of course, the subtleties of supply and demand, as well as investment and production, are probably lost on Cortez, but let’s go through the example of real estate, which is a good one.

Let’s start with the basics. Real estate prices are high because of a corrupt monetary system, supported and sanctioned by the state. The Fed and private banks print money out of nothing which goes to them and their cronies first. They buy up assets like stocks and real estate on the cheap while the working man’s wages go up last, if at all.

Because money can be created out of thin air by private banks, and the state accepts it as payment for taxes, this is not free-market banking, but rather a corrupt private-public hybrid more akin to Marx’s centralization of money and credit than to Rothbardian free and fully-reserved banking.

In case something goes wrong in this operation, like it did in 2008, the state stands ready to bail out the private banking system with taxpayer money voted for by Democrats and Republicans alike. Although Cortez is critical of Wall Street, her vision of the banking system probably will eliminate private banks altogether and fuse them with the state. The outcome of that operation certainly won’t be pretty either.

Second, decades of city interference in the housing market has punished private developers who want to build affordable housing of lower quality. Why? Because the city, through rent controls, sets prices too low which always and by definition leads to shortages in supply of the desired product. Let’s say to recoup investment and make a modest profit, a developer needs $100 in rent per month from an affordable housing unit. If the city says the maximum he can charge is $50, there won’t be any development of affordable housing.

Since the developer doesn’t want to give up his job, there will be more development of real estate where the regulations don’t apply, like the thousands of luxury condos currently under construction in Manhattan funded by money created out of nothing in the state-sanctioned, fractional-reserve banking system.

Read More: https://www.theepochtimes.com/what-democratic-socialists-dont-get_2587709.html

The Southern Poverty Law Center Produces Hate Speech for a Political Agenda

More people need to start suing the SPLC for their own defamatory, hate speech, because many of their claims are politically-motivated slander.

Profits of Hate SPLC Southern Poverty Law Center

Southern Poverty Law Center Pays $3.4M to Resolve Defamation Case

Guilt-Tripping White People Based on Historic Lies

Maybe the Japanese should give their island back to the Ezo people… Or the Russians should give Russia back to the Yakuts…. Or South Africa should give their land back to the Khwe, etc, etc, etc… but no, only white Americans deserve to be guilted and shamed for what we now consider historic wrongs…

Emperor Palpatine says, Good Good Let the White Guilt Flow Through You

WHY WHITES DIDN’T STEAL AMERICA FROM ANYBODY

Well it is that time of year again. The time when “progressives” nation wide start sharing memes about Europeans being “Illegal Aliens” and Native Americans were kind enough to let us into “their” country…

We see this all the time from the ignorant fools, but more so around Thanksgiving. They fail to realize that, if anything, their arguments promote stricter immigration polices, not laxer.

What we see here is a prime example of what is called “presentism” . Presentism is when historical accounts are judged by the standards of the present. Most scholars will agree that it is a rather ignorant way to look at the past.

It would be improper to claim that George Washington was an evil man because he owned slaves simply because during his life, the majority opinion was that owning slaves was not evil. As a better example, let’s say that in 100 years, we discover that plants have advanced consciousness. It would be ignorant for people of that time to say that everyone alive today is evil for eating plants, because in todays standards, eating plants is not only acceptable, but encouraged.

So let’s instead look at what was acceptable, and encouraged during the time of colonial America. Throughout much of history (including the 1600’s) it was normal for a conquering army to claim the lands of their defeated foe. This is a practice that goes back into antiquity with the Persian, Greeks Romans, Egyptian, Israelis, Chinese and many other cultures taking part.

Taking land by conquest was also a part of Native American culture. Creek Indians conquered land from Choctaws and Chickasaws and the Creeks. Comanches came in and took the land from the Apaches by war, Aztecs, Incas and Mayans all grew their empires by conquering lands from other tribes. The Tainos and Canib tribes fought over land. When Spain Defeated the Aztec empire, the did so with an army of 1,000 Spanish soldiers and 75,000 soldiers from the Tlaxcallans, Choulatecs and Totonac tribes..

The practice of claiming the land of conquered enemies extended well past the colonization of America. It wasn’t until the conclusion of World War II in 1945 that western culture shunned the practice (and even then, the Soviet Union claimed Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Austria, and many other territories as part of their victory spoils).

To claim “white Europeans” “stole” America from the native tribes is to force the cultural norms of the past 50 years (that white Europeans created) on events that happened hundreds of years earlier. That is just ignorant.

Read More: http://www.thetruthhunter.com/why-whites-didnt-steal-america-from-anybody/

Political Correctness is Marxist Doublethink to Allow Globalism to Destroy Sovereignty and Civil Society

Michael More and Pizza The Hut Explain Identity Politics.

What It’s All About: Coercion

James Kunstler June 18, 2018

PC acts as a filter for sifting out thought that doesn’t conform to orthodox ideology, and for punishing those who dare to express the filtered-out ideas. So, PC only allows for a narrow range of expressed opinion on identity politics. PC is literally thought-policing. It’s hard to imagine anyone being in favor of that, which is exactly why PC behavior is so odious to those of us who value free speech.

The orthodox view in identity politics these days is that “white male cis-heterosexual patriarchal privilege” is responsible for the discontents of women and “people-of-color” — a squishy, mischievous category which obviously doesn’t count Chinese grad students at Harvard or the Asian-Indians in the Silicon Valley C-suites — and demands reparations of one kind or another.

Mr. Peterson laid it out nicely: identity politics assigns everyone to ethnic, racial, and sexual groups, and all the human relations among them amount to never-ending battles for political power. Nothing else matters. Individuals especially don’t matter, only the group. And no group has abused its power more than European white men.

This animating idea comes out of the mid-20th century “post-structural critical theorists” Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault, whose Marxian views emerged conveniently at a time when women and non-white people were vying for departmental chairs in the college humanities and social science programs, and thus have two generations been indoctrinated.

Well, if human relations are solely about power, than exercising power over others is all that matters. Hence, the key to identity politics: it’s all about coercion,

… Read More:
http://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/what-its-all-about-coercion/

Open Borders Libertarians are Globalist Pawns

His idea that a border is the initiation of violence is assuming it’s initiating violence to have defensive protection of your people, resources and interests.

If only we had a Utopian world where everyone sought to share and contribute equally…. but with the welfare state and economic realities like labor availability versus wages, it’s just as easy to see illegal residents as having initiated violence against me, by breaking our laws to unlawfully break our borders and take our resources.

The argument is ridiculous. Do you call locking your door at night an initiation of violence against the people that would illegally enter and take your possessions or rape your wife or daughter?

As a libertarian you still contribute to a greater organization of people that we call our society, and involves government even if you want to call it another name, there is some organization for common defense required in any organization of people. It’s not violence to defend what you have built and the resources you’ve collected.

The people entering our country illegally are not here to share their resources, they’re here to take our resources. That, in itself violates the NAP.

 

Who deserves to have a race and a culture? 

This is a “racy” topic. It might be hard to talk about and think about, but maybe it’s worth it.

Who is worthy of having an identity? Who deserves to have a race and a culture?

Would the world be a better place if we all mixed up together enough to lose any distinction of difference? Would it be better if people lost their identities so the government and corporations could tell them who and what they are?

The Left And The Right Aren’t Hearing The Same Jordan Peterson

Rescue+your+father+from+the+underworld+bucko

A New York Times Magazine hit piece says more about the mainstream media than it says about Jordan Peterson.

By 
 21, 2018

Dr. Jordan Peterson, who has enjoyed a surge into fame over the past year, has become a bit like the Yanny and Laurel audio meme. People listen to what he has to say but disagree wildly about what they are hearing.

Some hear a man with important ideas that can help people live a more fulfilling life, others hear a dangerous misogynist who wants to set back the cause of liberated women, trans people, and the rest of the cast(e) of oppression. In a feature for The New York Times Magazine this weekend, Nellie Bowles clearly came down on the latter side.

The first paragraph makes this obvious: “Look back to the 1950’s he says.” It’s not clear from the article if this is a quote from Peterson. In any event, this interpretation has an essential mistake. When Peterson talks about changes in gender, sexuality, family, and work, he is exposing central contradictions, both evolutionary and social, that he believes are making people unhappy.

He is not suggesting that all women should aspire to be a 1950s Donna Reed housewife, but that on many levels some women do want something closer to that lifestyle. Part of the evidence for this is that since the sexual revolution the question of whether women can “have it all” has been so often on our tongues and pages. Peterson suggests the answer, in many cases, is no.

He isn’t telling women not to strive for whatever they want, or to be forced into anything. But that’s the progressive narrative against him, one that the Timesreinforced. A perfect example of this is Bowles’ mischaracterization of Peterson’s argument that societies are better off with “enforced monogamy.”

Read More: http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/21/the-left-and-the-right-arent-hearing-the-same-jordan-peterson/