The latest anti-liberal rant thread (get your daily dose here)

[alhoon]

We're not labeling (Well, not all of us) BLM as a commie conspiracy, but we have on video one of the founders calling herself a Marxist. It is also not a surprise that communism is appealing to poor people disenfranchised because of their poverty and suspect because of their skin color. An ideology that promotes equality, even at the cost of individuality, is probably more appealing to them than me.

In short, yes, it is undeniable that BLM would have more communists than the generic population because communists are more attracted to such things and poor people that are kept at arms-length from society are more likely to be communists.
Not all BLM people are communists and not all communists support BLM.

[pacifism]

Because of the Cold War, anyone who has deep criticisms of capitalism will probably flirt with Marxist thought at some point. If someone thinks that our institutions aid and abet every social problem, at some point they will probably wonder if capitalism itself is to blame. Marxists schools of thought make up the most widespread anti-capitalist political alternatives currently out there. It's important to remember that not all Marxists are Communists. It's quite trendy for young progressives to call themselves Marxists and socialists and will point to capitalist Nordic countries to describe what they want. Oh well.

What I find a bit ironic is that many people will agree that the U.S.' domestic and foreign policy during the Cold War was based on misplaced assumptions that all Marxists were united and steadily infiltrating every society across the globe (I would argue that most of 20th-century Marxism was often just a blunt tool for people with a beef against the system to get some more foreign funding and popular support, but I digress). Those incorrect assumptions are why McCarthyism existed, or why the FBI thought almost every left-wing movement in the '60s was a Soviet front, or why America entered the Vietnam War. The belief that the left is actually trying to erode Western Civilization^tm was basically just as false when the Communists^tm were at the height of their global power. And yet people still believe it and still level similar accusations at progressive liberals. You would think that red-baiting would lose its luster since 1991, and yet here we are.

What I'm trying to say is that implying that the opposition are a bunch of Commies lowers the public discourse about as much as implying that the opposition are a bunch of racists. You gotta have stronger critiques against BLM and this new American iconoclast movement than red-baiting and emotional appeals. People really need to start taking the high road these days.

[Ludicus]

He got more from black Angolans for marrying into the enemy

A cynical, unfair interpretation.Racism was prevalent inside some MPLA factions. Neto - doctor, poet and revolutionary- was depressed, demoralized, ready to quit politics and return to medical practice. His wife encouraged him to accept the nomination. Neto survived these difficulties, remaining committed to anti-racism.

Blacks seem the kids from interracial marriage as threat and many hate them with a passion.

I know. In the Spanish colonial empire, mestizos were rejected by all races that the colonial caste system considered...before the Portuguese revolution there were no mestiços or black Africans in the upper echelons of the Portuguese colonial administration.

You don't know how it feels like to be seen as "colonial left-over", hated for your skin color and told to renounce your ancestry. First it wasn't all blacks that suffered slavery.

I think you completely misunderstood what I said. In fact, why did creoles wanted Independence from Spain?
-------
So, where we disagree?

Jose Van Dunem and Sita Valles had it coming, their pawn Nito Alves was preparing a coup under the premise that the government had excess of half-whites and whites,

How come? Zita was of Goan origin...she was brutally murdered.




No, not at all...
1- Read the book - written by the Portuguese historian Dalila Mateus, Purga em Angola
2- Read the interview with Francisca Van Dunem, Portuguese Minister of Justice, sister of José Van Dunem. Francisca Van Dunem: “O meu presente é o mais ... - Expresso

The point is that they will NOT STOP AT STATUES..You first erase the history, then you erase the people

A gross exaggeration. Of course not.
---------

An hallmark of white racist right is the attempt to deal with the past making dissimilar events appear equal (I'm not referring to you, Menelik...I think)

1) Racist nationalistic right deny or grossly trivialize the uniqueness of transatlantic slave trade, the biggest deportation in history, in terms of the destructive impact it had on Africa, unique within the entire history of slavery due to its duration, its scale, and the legitimization accorded to it, including colonization, segregation, and apartheid, and praises the "civilizing mission" of a white, imperialist colonialism that disregards cultural pluralism.
Historically speaking, the Chinese were also deeply convinced of their own cultural superiority . But, to be fair, Chinese empire conducted no crusades, dispatched no missionaries and rarely supported forcible sinicization.From the Portuguese, Spanish, French, British civilization missions, to the American version ( the US informal empire), nothing really fundamentally changed in the nature of the imperialist design, when the US embarked on its civilization mission abroad, after the Mexican War, with the conquest of Philippines.

See TWC Are Africans better off now that they rule their own countries? TWCenter
But I can't stop thinking- from a positive perspective- reconstruction after the Civil war can be seen a laudable attempt to civilize the racist South after the end of slavery.

--------

2) Racist right always tends to trivialize the Nazi era, or even denies Holocaust. Instead of recognizing that the Jew has a unique place in the Nazi perversion, the white, nationalistic rhetoric right seeks to counterpose other crimes.( Stalin, etc...)
Did the Holocaust really happen? - TWCenter.net
Holocaust-Comparative trivialization - Total War Center Forums
Holocaust possibly blown out of proportion? - TWCenter

[Lord Thesaurian]

It’s interesting to see the flipside of the partisan playbook at work. Republicans downplayed the obvious and cried McCarthyism for the last 4 years every time inconvenient facts surfaced about Trump that were perceived as a threat to the party agenda. As many have already said, one hardly needs an investigation to establish the facts this time around, though I suppose we can expect Democrats to create their own preferred narratives just the same. We’ll have to wait and see what the electoral map looks like in November before we can guess how Republicans will use whatever Congressional oversight power they have left, as well as which narratives either side will use to create investigative or defensive inertia (welcome to the new normal).

In the meantime, the Dem establishment is reluctant to let the radicals into the hen house, even as they compel everyone else to bend the knee. I expect this will function like the idiotic GOP “we support him but we don’t support him” triangulation we’ve seen. At this point the best we can hope for is that the Democrats aren’t the Duma. The livelihoods of everyday Americans are just collateral damage either way. After all, it’s not as though Republicans have a monopoly on the total lack of self awareness. The left has spent decades construing patriotism as the prerogative of right wing lumpenproles. Now they wonder aloud why this is the case.

We can lament political polarization all we want, but like the Republicans have demonstrated over the last 10 years, running your platform from the fringes of your political base isn’t always worth the trade off. I would have thought Bernie losing both before and during Trump was enough of a lesson, but I digress. On the other hand, Democrats’ institutional advantage at most levels of government and in media and academia lends credibility to their fringe that the Republicans simply haven’t had. Hats off to the patriots willing to speak out at personal and professional cost.

[Lemon] continued, "If someone started a movement that said 'cancer matters' and then someone comes in and says, 'Why aren't you talking about HIV?' It's not the same thing."

Crews, 51, rebutted, "But when you look at the organization, police brutality is not the only thing they're talking about."

Earlier in the interview, Crews explained why he thinks his stance is important.

"I wanted to bring up the fact that there are some very, very militant type-forces in Black Lives Matter and what I was issuing was a warning," he said. "I've been a part of different groups, I've been a part of different things and you see how extremes can go far … and when you issue a warning and a warning is seen as detrimental to the movement, how can you ever have checks and balances?"

He continued, "Someone wants to control the narrative and I viewed it as a very, very dangerous self-righteousness that was developing that really viewed themselves as better."

Crews added that Black Lives Matter is a "great mantra, a true mantra" but takes issue with "the leaders who are responsible for putting these things together."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/enter...er/5389274002/

[Cyclops]

.. Hats off to the patriots willing to speak out at personal and professional cost.

Its a huge problem, but the US system is inherently extremely robust. The reason idiot fringe dwellers are able to play so freely is because the centre holds very strongly. Have to agree completely though a very sensible summary.

There are things going right too. Three Bush presidencies was one too many, and the electorate responded to the lesson by blocking a third Clinton term (the best argument against Biden from an external POV, too much "dynasty" about this run).

[Ludicus]

the Dem establishment is reluctant to let the radicals into the hen house, even as they compel everyone else to bend the knee...I would have thought Bernie losing both before and during Trump was enough of a lesson.

Wake up. You can't win without the left. In fact,nothing stops a gradual progress.
Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders Deepen Their Cooperation

Mr. Biden is expected to adopt many of the recommendations, which were submitted by six policy task forces and cover a wide range of issues including health care, criminal justice, education and climate change...And though the set of recommendations from her task force “doesn’t go as far as we all wanted on the Sanders side,” Ms. Jayapal said, she still viewed it as “a real step forward.”

There were all kinds of frustrations here,” said Sara Nelson, the president of the Association of Flight Attendants union and a Sanders-aligned co-chair of the economy task force, adding: “If somebody were to say, ‘Well, are you pleased with the outcome?’ That’s all relative.”
But she also said it was important to consider the relatively unprecedented nature of the joint task forces and what they actually did achieve.


“The people who supported Bernie Sanders — this absolutely gives us a step forward,” she said. “We improved Biden’s policies, and you can always be stronger in the fight when you’re fighting from higher ground.”
Even if some progressives remain unhappy with Mr. Biden, there are signs that some who opposed him in the primary are increasingly willing to actively support him in the general election against Mr. Trump.
On Wednesday, Ady Barkan, a prominent liberal activist and advocate for Medicare for all who supported Senator Elizabeth Warren and then Mr. Sanders in the primary, endorsed Mr. Biden, saying, “Even though he wasn’t our first choice, I don’t think that progressives and democratic socialists should sit out the election, or vote third party, and I wanted to make that clear.”

Obviously.Trump is the common enemy.
------
From your link,

Martin Luther King, the moral conscience of mid century progressive patriotism, showed that nationalism need not be martial..."My beloved nation … can well lead the way in [a] revolution of values,” one that would diminish “deadly Western arrogance” and end the age of imperialism.

King was a revolutionary. Liberal supporters immediately abandoned him. He said, "Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today -- my own government.hey must see Americans as strange liberators . . . So far we may have killed a million of them, mostly children,"The Vietnam War was part of a pattern of military intervention on the wrong side of the world revolution.
We must rapidly begin, we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

Do you know what L.B. Johnson said in the White House when he learned of the content of King’s speech? (Riverside address)
He said: "What is that goddamn preacher doing to me?"

At the time, racism -and an abyssal ignorance -were endemic in the White House, as it is today, in the Trump era...
See Nixon's references to blacks as "jigs" (Make sure there's is something in it for the jigs, Henry); or see Alexander Haig's penchant for mimicking drum beats on the conference table when committee meetings turned to African issues.
The National Security Decision Memorandum signed by Nixon in 1970 reads: "Blacks cannot gain political rights through violence. Change can only come by acquiescence of the whites".

In his speech, MLK King highlighted the fact that the war in Vietnam was being fought disproportionately by poor people and by black people.

In fact, Black lives matter... Agostinho Neto, (see previous post) in "Sacred Hope".

"...Tomorrow
we will intone anthems to freedom
we will commemorate
the date of slavery's abolition.
No man will silence us
no man will be able to prevent us
The smile on our lips is not out of gratitude for the death
with which they kill us.

With all Humanity let us

lay claim to our world and to our Peace".

In the poem "Aspiration" Neto assumes the voice of the "world negro"

It is the white man who gives the example in violence, as is evidenced in the following lines from the poem " A Birthday",

"In the world Korea bloodied at the hands of men
shootings in Greece and strikes in Italy
apartheid in Africa
and in atomic factories the bustle to kill
wholesale to kill more ever more humans
They cudgeling us and preaching terror".

[Menelik_I]

why did creoles wanted Independence from Spain?
-------
So, where we disagree?

They wanted power locally without interference from Madrid, in self interest

I Angola all local elites were involved in the independence struggle because the end of colonial rule seem inevitable in 1961 due to joint Soviet and American pressure on Portugal.

A cynical, unfair interpretation.Racism was prevalent inside some MPLA factions. Neto - doctor, poet and revolutionary- was depressed, demoralized, ready to quit politics and return to medical practice. His wife encouraged him to accept the nomination. Neto survived these difficulties, remaining committed to anti-racism.


I know. In the Spanish colonial empire, mestizos were rejected by all races that the colonial caste system considered...before the Portuguese revolution there were no mestiços or black Africans in the upper echelons of the Portuguese colonial administration.


I think you completely misunderstood what I said. In fact, why did creoles wanted Independence from Spain?
-------
So, where we disagree?

You said that Neto was victim of racism from white for having a white wife, I am telling you that Neto was much more victim of black racists for having a white wife.

How come? Zita was of Goan origin...she was brutally murdered.

You greatly misunderstand that was happening.

First the Fraccionistas had as an Operational Leader Nito Alves, whoses speeches and writings were very intense attacks against whites and mestiços inside the MPLA, to bring the black majority to "power" with him as Leader. The power behind him was Jose Van dunem, who was the husband of Sita Valles, who was seen as some sort of "cleopatra", plus they had support from the army Chief of Staff Monstro Immortal

Why were the 3 brutally butchered ? Because Jose Van Dunem and Nito Alves iniciated a coup that started wit the kidnapping and murder of 5 (look it up yourself) top MPLA member is a clear coup in motion, in revenge and to stop the coup they purged the ranks of any sympathizer

Now you need to be a special kind of dishonest person to tell me that there was no racist among fraccionistas because of the leaders is banging an indian, who doesn't fit into the white and mestiço class that is virulently attacked by the other leader of the fraccionistas.

1- Read the book - written by the Portuguese historian Dalila Mateus, Purga em Angola
2- Read the interview with Francisca Van Dunem, Portuguese Minister of Justice, sister of José Van Dunem. Francisca Van Dunem: “O meu presente é o mais ... - Expresso

please, I have Cabrita Book, all of Nito Alves Books, book from pro-MPLA guys and ing books on coups ... I am confident they Fracionistas initiated the coup, got what they deserverd.

Francisca is not impartial in this, she got a bunch of close family members killed in this, she has an axe to grind.

An hallmark of white racist right is the attempt to deal with the past making dissimilar events appear equal (I'm not referring to you, Menelik...I think)

1) Racist nationalistic right deny or grossly trivialize the uniqueness of transatlantic slave trade, the biggest deportation in history, in terms of the destructive impact it had on Africa, unique within the entire history of slavery due to its duration, its scale, and the legitimization accorded to it, including colonization, segregation, and apartheid, and praises the "civilizing mission" of a white, imperialist colonialism that disregards cultural pluralism.
Historically speaking, the Chinese were also deeply convinced of their own cultural superiority . But, to be fair, Chinese empire conducted no crusades, dispatched no missionaries and rarely supported forcible sinicization.From the Portuguese, Spanish, French, British civilization missions, to the American version ( the US informal empire), nothing really fundamentally changed in the nature of the imperialist design, when the US embarked on its civilization mission abroad, after the Mexican War, with the conquest of Philippines.

See TWC Are Africans better off now that they rule their own countries? TWCenter
But I can't stop thinking- from a positive perspective- reconstruction after the Civil war can be seen a laudable attempt to civilize the racist South after the end of slavery.

--------

2) Racist right always tends to trivialize the Nazi era, or even denies Holocaust. Instead of recognizing that the Jew has a unique place in the Nazi perversion, the white, nationalistic rhetoric right seeks to counterpose other crimes.( Stalin, etc...)
Did the Holocaust really happen? - TWCenter.net
Holocaust-Comparative trivialization - Total War Center Forums
Holocaust possibly blown out of proportion? - TWCenter

Open Borders for Israel and Free the Palestinian People.

[Menelik_I]

In fact, Black lives matter... Agostinho Neto, (see previous post) in "Sacred Hope".

"...Tomorrow
we will intone anthems to freedom
we will commemorate
the date of slavery's abolition.
No man will silence us
no man will be able to prevent us
The smile on our lips is not out of gratitude for the death
with which they kill us.

With all Humanity let us

lay claim to our world and to our Peace".

In the poem "Aspiration" Neto assumes the voice of the "world negro"

It is the white man who gives the example in violence, as is evidenced in the following lines from the poem " A Birthday",

"In the world Korea bloodied at the hands of men
shootings in Greece and strikes in Italy
apartheid in Africa
and in atomic factories the bustle to kill
wholesale to kill more ever more humans
They cudgeling us and preaching terror".

Neto poetry was only created to inflame racist anti-portuguese sentiment in the Angolan African population, because it was the only factor of unity

Had he really believed in it he would have lost the war, because support from white communist inside Portuguese Armed forces was essencial for his ultimate victory, the FNLA which comited massacres of white and black civilians of southern tribes, in contrast was seen as terrorists and mercilessly hunted them down, and when Independence was inevitable the Portuguese Army transferred all their weapons and military bases to the MPLA as a lat act of vengeance.

[Ludicus]

...snip..

There are racists everywhere.Nito Alves, the fractionists?? the motivation for the coup was social, not racial.Nito was accused of being simultaneously maoist and pro-soviet) Show me a racist text written by the fractionists.So, Neto was racist, Nito Alves was racist, to sum up, everybody was racist,the MPLA was racist.

But let's remember what happened: in 1960 the CIA recruited Holden Roberto, the leader of FNLA/UPA, who spent most of his life in the Congo. On 15 March 1961 in northern Angola, a group of bakongos of UPA engaged in a massacre of white and black Africans on a bloody scale rarely equaled, even in Africa. The massacre was planned by Holden Roberto, a tribal leader.

On the other side, UNITA regularly fought with MPLA. Military cooperation between UNITA, South Africa and colonial Portugal(!!!) strengthened in 1971/72. UNITA began to cooperate with the Portuguese around 68/69. Read the correspondence between Savimbi and the Portuguese army. "We have actively participated in weakening the MPLA in certain of eastern regions..."

To sum up. Even with its flaws, internal divisions and contradictions, the MPLA was the only authentic liberation movement with the sole aim of freeing Angola from Portuguese colonialism. Among the working class, MPLA was by far the most popular movement and drew support from intellectuals of all ethnic groups.

And no, Neto's poetry was not "to inflame anti-racist anti-portuguese sentiment in Angola". While violence may be necessary to the acquisition of independence (ask the USA!), the poetry of Neto is anti-racist and non violent.

Obviously, Neto assumes the voice of the "world negro". In the poem "Aspiration",

Ever my mournful song
and my sorrow
in Congo in Georgia in Amazonas . . .
Ever my spirit
ever the quissange
the marimba
the guitar
the saxophone
ever my rhythms of orgiastic ritual.
-------

support from white communist inside Portuguese Armed forces was essencial for his ultimate victory...when Independence was inevitable the Portuguese Army transferred all their weapons and military bases to the MPLA as a lat act of vengeance.

The Cuban expeditionary force was essential for the MPLA ultimate victory. That said, it is quite true that Portugal betrayed the Alvor Agreement, the proximate cause for the Angolan Civil War. But in the end, the war was inevitable.

You said that Neto was victim of racism from white for having a white wife,

No, I say that Neto was victim of black racists...as I said, "Neto survived these difficulties, remaining committed to anti-racism".

On a side note- in my opinion- there is an "over victimization" of the Angolan mestiços. Many MPLA leaders were mestiços, such as Mário de Andrade, Joaquim Pinto de Andrade Viriato da Cruz and Lúcio Lara. Read the Guardian's eulogy on Lara, Lúcio Lara obituary | World news | The Guardian

After Cabral’s assassination in 1973, Lara and Neto embodied the idealism and moral tone of the Portuguese-speaking African colonies’ fight.
In 1961, in a meeting in the House of Commons organised by the Labour MP Fenner Brockway and the historian Basil Davidson, the Portuguese colonies, still presenting themselves in a group as MAC, announced the beginning of “direct action”
..He was linked with the key African revolutionaries of the time, including Mehdi Ben Barka, Sékou Touré, Kwame Nkrumah, Félix Moumié and Frantz Fanon, the psychiatrist from Martinique who worked in Algeria. The anti-colonial movement had allies in Britain as well.

...But the shadow of racial politics, which was to be so damaging to Angola over the years, surfaced in 1963 with challenges to Lara’s position, and that of others in the leadership, because they were “mestiços” (of mixed race).
... But Neto stood firm against the pressures to oust mestiços from the movement’s senior ranks.

As you can see, Agostinho Neto was not racist. This conversation is quite interesting, but it's becoming offtopic.

Open Borders for Israel and Free the Palestinian People.

What is that supposed to mean? independence remains an elusive dream for Palestinians. JVP Action, a political advocacy group affiliated with Jewish Voice for Peace, rightly said, recently,
"Blaming Palestinians for their own oppression is an anti-Palestinian talking point and there is never an excuse for such explicit racism, let alone as the Israeli government makes blatant and illegal land grabs"

I have some news for you:Biden would resume humanitarian aid to Palestinians and re-open the US consulate in East Jerusalem.
Biden has said Israel's annexation of Palestinian territories in the occupied West Bank would "choke off" any hope of peace, criticism of Israel is not anti semitism (obviously), and added " the US should press Israel not to take any actions that jeopardize a two-state solution".

[Menelik_I]

There are racists everywhere.Nito Alves, the fractionists?? the motivation for the coup was social, not racial.Nito was accused of being simultaneously maoist and pro-soviet) Show me a racist text written by the fractionists.So, Neto was racist, Nito Alves was racist, to sum up, everybody was racist,the MPLA was racist.

But let's remember what happened: in 1960 the CIA recruited Holden Roberto, the leader of FNLA/UPA, who spent most of his life in the Congo. On 15 March 1961 in northern Angola, a group of bakongos of UPA engaged in a massacre of white and black Africans on a bloody scale rarely equaled, even in Africa. The massacre was planned by Holden Roberto, a tribal leader.

On the other side, UNITA regularly fought with MPLA. Military cooperation between UNITA, South Africa and colonial Portugal(!!!) strengthened in 1971/72. UNITA began to cooperate with the Portuguese around 68/69. Read the correspondence between Savimbi and the Portuguese army. "We have actively participated in weakening the MPLA in certain of eastern regions..."

To sum up. Even with its flaws, internal divisions and contradictions, the MPLA was the only authentic liberation movement with the sole aim of freeing Angola from Portuguese colonialism. Among the working class, MPLA was by far the most popular movement and drew support from intellectuals of all ethnic groups.

And no, Neto's poetry was not "to inflame anti-racist anti-portuguese sentiment in Angola". While violence may be necessary to the acquisition of independence (ask the USA!), the poetry of Neto is anti-racist and non violent.

Obviously, Neto assumes the voice of the "world negro". In the poem "Aspiration",

Ever my mournful song
and my sorrow
in Congo in Georgia in Amazonas . . .
Ever my spirit
ever the quissange
the marimba
the guitar
the saxophone
ever my rhythms of orgiastic ritual.
-------


The Cuban expeditionary force was essential for the MPLA ultimate victory. That said, it is quite true that Portugal betrayed the Alvor Agreement, the proximate cause for the Angolan Civil War. But in the end, the war was inevitable.


No, I say that Neto was victim of black racists...as I said, "Neto survived these difficulties, remaining committed to anti-racism".

On a side note- in my opinion- there is an "over victimization" of the Angolan mestiços. Many MPLA leaders were mestiços, such as Mário de Andrade, Joaquim Pinto de Andrade Viriato da Cruz and Lúcio Lara. Read the Guardian's eulogy on Lara, Lúcio Lara obituary | World news | The Guardian



As you can see, Agostinho Neto was not racist. This conversation is quite interesting, but it's becoming offtopic.


What is that supposed to mean? independence remains an elusive dream for Palestinians. JVP Action, a political advocacy group affiliated with Jewish Voice for Peace, rightly said, recently,
"Blaming Palestinians for their own oppression is an anti-Palestinian talking point and there is never an excuse for such explicit racism, let alone as the Israeli government makes blatant and illegal land grabs"

I have some news for you:Biden would resume humanitarian aid to Palestinians and re-open the US consulate in East Jerusalem.
Biden has said Israel's annexation of Palestinian territories in the occupied West Bank would "choke off" any hope of peace, criticism of Israel is not anti semitism (obviously), and added " the US should press Israel not to take any actions that jeopardize a two-state solution".

You are whitexplaining Angolan History to an Angolan

This is getting offtopic, lets stop it here.

[Ludicus]

You are whitexplaining Angolan History to an Angolan

This is getting offtopic, lets stop it here.

I agree. Only one last word.
My friend, there is no "white-explaining", or "black explaining".I'm completely immune to racial preferences. I knew Angola quite well. You can't deny that a large majority of black and mestiços/mulattoes supported the MPLA.
But the UNITA, come on...have you ever heard about the Operation Timber,the alliance between our army and UNITA? prior to 1974, UNITA was a fake liberation movement.They helped us a lot, giving information about the MPLA guerrilla base camps.In fact,the MPLA was completely obliterated in eastern Angola.And know this: in 1975,Savimbi raised funds from our portuguese settlers and spoke a lot about democracy and unity, but in a quite number of Ovimbundu villages in the south, he killed hundreds of individuals who refused to join the ranks of UNITA.
There are no immaculate heroes or true villains in this complicated story, that's all I'm saying.

[Knight of Heaven]

They lost their minds over in the UK. when i first heard of this, i thought it to be a parody....

"A 12-year-old boy has been arrested by police investigating racist messages sent to Crystal Palace forward Wilfried Zaha on social media."

"We were alerted to a series of racist messages sent to a footballer today and after looking into them and conducting checks, we have arrested a boy," read a WM Police tweet.
"The 12-year-old from Solihull has been taken to custody. Thanks to everyone who raised it. Racism won't be tolerated."

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/53381586

We were alerted to a series of racist messages sent to a footballer today and after looking into them and conducting checks, we have arrested a boy. The 12-year-old from #Solihull has been taken to custody. Thanks to everyone who raised it. Racism won't be tolerated.

https://twitter.com/WMPolice/status/1282341956199350272


Of course people riped the Police a new ones on twitter...

Imagine arresting a 12 year old over insulting a grown man...

[Infidel144]

I recommend a quick trial followed by a public execution...

[Ludicus]

Let's look at the other side of the coin.
History teaches us that anti-hate speech laws have been regularly have been used to oppress racial and other minorities, in the UK and other countries. I quote,

"Among the first individuals prosecuted under the British Race Relations of 1965, which criminalized the incitements of racial hatred, were black power leaders. Rather than curbing speech offenses to minorities, this British law instead has been regularly used to curb the speech of blacks, trade unionists, and anti-nuclear activists. In perhaps the ultimate irony,this statute, which was intended to restrain the neo-Nazi national Front, instead has barred expression by the Anti-Nazi League". Source, book, Speaking of Race, Speaking of Sex: Hate Speech, Civil Rights, and Civil, p.225.

They lost their minds over in the UK. when i first heard of this, i thought it to be a parody.

13-Year-Old Pennsylvania Boy Shoots And Kills Younger

When i first heard of it, I thought this was American parody.

The boys' father, Mark Snyder, later told police that he kept the guns loaded and unsecured "for home protection. Wright's parents are not facing any charges in relation to the incident,"

[Knight of Heaven]

Shooting and killing someone... and being arrested for twitting something offensive, has two different qualities to it.


The boy being tried as an adult doesnt make sense, how that even follows?

Just like doesnt make sense, overlooking the gross negligence of the parents. They are charging the wrong person.


Arresting a kid for saying something mean to a professional football player, in social media , is symptomatic of freedom of expression issues. And control of speech.
It is not a good sign for the future.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Arresting a kid for saying something mean to a professional football player, in social media , is symptomatic of freedom of expression issues. And control of speech.
It is not a good sign for the future.

This is the kind of encroaching control we can expect to see when false narratives become a matter of institutional reputation among leadership who have little else to stand on. Those dismissing concerns out of a faith in the strength of the political establishment or in a common Trumpian foe de facto acknowledge the cynical political calculus wrought at the expense of the Republic. Considering that Democrats just spent the last four years wrapping themselves in the flag to defend the sanctity of American institutions and the rule of law, the only guy so far who can and has found a way to throw away the political godsend that is the DNC/BLM in 2020 is Trump.

There’s not many ways one can sell to the public the “dramatic” defunding of police and military to prioritize the payment of racial indulgences, open borders, the indoctrination of American school children with known falsehoods, closing all federal prisons, conscripting convicted criminals into the voter rolls, directing public resources to the creation of workers soviets for convicts, free “lifetime education” and job training for illegal immigrants, and using tax policy to “dramatically increase racial economic equity.” The majority of people are consistently against those things, just as I’d imagine they’re against having trained Marxists write national policy.
https://breatheact.org/wp-content/up...F_FINAL3-1.pdf

So instead, a narrative about heroic activists battling a systemic global conspiracy of police brutality is foisted upon the public, and those who fail to toe the line are punished because they threaten that narrative and the political momentum riding on it. Note the regular and deliberate use of superlative adjectives as objectives in and of themselves. We are told there is an urgent crisis that can only be solved by these kinds of sweeping ideological measures that have little bearing on the party line given as justification. We as a society will and are paying far more for the new clothes the emperor doesn’t have than we ever did for the ones he does. This will continue to be the case as long as the elites on either side of the political aisle continue to demand the American people embrace radicals while the political establishment simultaneously attempts to save themselves from their own.

[Ludicus]

Just like doesnt make sense, overlooking the gross negligence of the parents.

The NRA certainly disagrees.Guns protect your home, your family! the sad irony.

Arresting a kid for...

racist abuse.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

And yet, nobody complains about the disproportionate rate at which black and minority ethnic boys are given a custodial sentence in England and Wales. We cannot have two weights and two measures.
----

https://breatheact.org/wp-content/up...F_FINAL3-1.pdf

I see nothing fundamentally wrong here."Defunding" police is a gross exaggeration.It doesn't mean disband policy. If I understood it correctly, they are simply asking for a sizable chunk of a city's budget is invested in communities, especially marginalized ones.Those seeking to disband police are out of their minds.

The backlash against the BLM movement doesn't surprise me one bit. To put it frankly, the US is a very young country, 60 years age. Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Definition, Summary & Significance
The domestic law in EU Member States does not define racial origin, the overwhelming majority of Member States do not have a statutory definition of ethnic origin and ethnic origin is not an organic legal concept in Europe. Already a long time ago, 1878, The Treaty of Berlin dictated conditions of national independence included the principle of non-discrimination vis-à-vis national and religious groups, including for instance the Jews. In Europe, generally speaking nationality usurped race. (let's keep nazism out of the discussion). Racism in Europe is bad, but racism towards black people in America has largely nothing to do with nationality or immigration. America's systemic racism starts with slavery and the various slave codes, black life has always been criminalized and dehumanized in America, and that's the reason why the BLM movement is welcome.

[sumskilz]

Already a long time ago, 1878, The Treaty of Berlin dictated conditions of national independence included the principle of non-discrimination vis-à-vis national and religious groups, including for instance the Jews.

That worked out pretty well.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Personally it’s dumbfounding to watch those who spent years insisting facts and truth matter seamlessly distort them for no other reason than to cover for “my team.” I’d say I feel ripped off, but then, I’m used to politicians failing to meet even my cavernously low expectations. Deflecting said facts and truth with lazy accusations of reactionary racism is cliche to the point of becoming an entire genre of memes. When the truth ceases to be a relevant arbiter of public discourse, it’s just that much easier for self described trained Marxists to infiltrate the political establishment and push their agenda unopposed, helped along by the useful comrades who dismiss their own words and actions as empty hyperbole. It’s a mirror image of the helpful, determined spin conservative media and politicians put on everything that comes out of Trump’s mouth to make it seem more coherent/less inflammatory. Back then it was called corruption and “craven enabler behavior.” Now it’s called “being on the right side of history.”

[Infidel144]

Bari Weiss, staff opinion editor, NYT:
Dear A.G., [Sulzberger, publisher, NYT]
It is with sadness that I write to tell you that I am resigning from The New York Times.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I joined the paper with gratitude and optimism three years ago. I was hired with the goal of bringing in voices that would not otherwise appear in your pages: first-time writers, centrists, conservatives and others who would not naturally think of The Times as their home. The reason for this effort was clear: The paper’s failure to anticipate the outcome of the 2016 election meant that it didn’t have a firm grasp of the country it covers. Dean Baquet and others have admitted as much on various occasions. The priority in Opinion was to help redress that critical shortcoming.


I was honored to be part of that effort, led by James Bennet. I am proud of my work as a writer and as an editor. Among those I helped bring to our pages: the Venezuelan dissident Wuilly Arteaga; the Iranian chess champion Dorsa Derakhshani; and the Hong Kong Christian democrat Derek Lam. Also: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Masih Alinejad, Zaina Arafat, Elna Baker, Rachael Denhollander, Matti Friedman, Nick Gillespie, Heather Heying, Randall Kennedy, Julius Krein, Monica Lewinsky, Glenn Loury, Jesse Singal, Ali Soufan, Chloe Valdary, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Wesley Yang, and many others.


But the lessons that ought to have followed the election—lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society—have not been learned. Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.


Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.


My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors regularly weigh in. There, some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are.


There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong.


I do not understand how you have allowed this kind of behavior to go on inside your company in full view of the paper’s entire staff and the public. And I certainly can’t square how you and other Times leaders have stood by while simultaneously praising me in private for my courage. Showing up for work as a centrist at an American newspaper should not require bravery.


Part of me wishes I could say that my experience was unique. But the truth is that intellectual curiosity—let alone risk-taking—is now a liability at The Times. Why edit something challenging to our readers, or write something bold only to go through the numbing process of making it ideologically kosher, when we can assure ourselves of job security (and clicks) by publishing our 4000th op-ed arguing that Donald Trump is a unique danger to the country and the world? And so self-censorship has become the norm.


What rules that remain at The Times are applied with extreme selectivity. If a person’s ideology is in keeping with the new orthodoxy, they and their work remain unscrutinized. Everyone else lives in fear of the digital thunderdome. Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the proper targets.


Op-eds that would have easily been published just two years ago would now get an editor or a writer in serious trouble, if not fired. If a piece is perceived as likely to inspire backlash internally or on social media, the editor or writer avoids pitching it. If she feels strongly enough to suggest it, she is quickly steered to safer ground. And if, every now and then, she succeeds in getting a piece published that does not explicitly promote progressive causes, it happens only after every line is carefully massaged, negotiated and caveated.


It took the paper two days and two jobs to say that the Tom Cotton op-ed “fell short of our standards.” We attached an editor’s note on a travel story about Jaffa shortly after it was published because it “failed to touch on important aspects of Jaffa’s makeup and its history.” But there is still none appended to Cheryl Strayed’s fawning interview with the writer Alice Walker, a proud anti-Semite who believes in lizard Illuminati.


The paper of record is, more and more, the record of those living in a distant galaxy, one whose concerns are profoundly removed from the lives of most people. This is a galaxy in which, to choose just a few recent examples, the Soviet space program is lauded for its “diversity”; the doxxing of teenagers in the name of justice is condoned; and the worst caste systems in human history includes the United States alongside Nazi Germany.


Even now, I am confident that most people at The Times do not hold these views. Yet they are cowed by those who do. Why? Perhaps because they believe the ultimate goal is righteous. Perhaps because they believe that they will be granted protection if they nod along as the coin of our realm—language—is degraded in service to an ever-shifting laundry list of right causes. Perhaps because there are millions of unemployed people in this country and they feel lucky to have a job in a contracting industry.


Or perhaps it is because they know that, nowadays, standing up for principle at the paper does not win plaudits. It puts a target on your back. Too wise to post on Slack, they write to me privately about the “new McCarthyism” that has taken root at the paper of record.


All this bodes ill, especially for independent-minded young writers and editors paying close attention to what they’ll have to do to advance in their careers. Rule One: Speak your mind at your own peril. Rule Two: Never risk commissioning a story that goes against the narrative. Rule Three: Never believe an editor or publisher who urges you to go against the grain. Eventually, the publisher will cave to the mob, the editor will get fired or reassigned, and you’ll be hung out to dry.


For these young writers and editors, there is one consolation. As places like The Times and other once-great journalistic institutions betray their standards and lose sight of their principles, Americans still hunger for news that is accurate, opinions that are vital, and debate that is sincere. I hear from these people every day. “An independent press is not a liberal ideal or a progressive ideal or a democratic ideal. It’s an American ideal,” you said a few years ago. I couldn’t agree more. America is a great country that deserves a great newspaper.


None of this means that some of the most talented journalists in the world don’t still labor for this newspaper. They do, which is what makes the illiberal environment especially heartbreaking. I will be, as ever, a dedicated reader of their work. But I can no longer do the work that you brought me here to do—the work that Adolph Ochs described in that famous 1896 statement: “to make of the columns of The New York Times a forum for the consideration of all questions of public importance, and to that end to invite intelligent discussion from all shades of opinion.”


Ochs’s idea is one of the best I’ve encountered. And I’ve always comforted myself with the notion that the best ideas win out. But ideas cannot win on their own. They need a voice. They need a hearing. Above all, they must be backed by people willing to live by them.

Sincerely,
Bari
https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter


Edit to Add
To Our Readers, From the Publisher and Executive Editor


NOVEMBER 13, 2016

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

When the biggest political story of the year reached a dramatic and unexpected climax late Tuesday night, our newsroom turned on a dime and did what it has done for nearly two years — cover the 2016 election with agility and creativity.


After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters? What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome? Most important, how will a president who remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he takes office?


As we reflect on the momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you. It is also to hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.


We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our readers. We want to take this opportunity, on behalf of all Times journalists, to thank you for that loyalty.


Sincerely,


Arthur Sulzberger Jr., publisher


Dean Baquet, executive editor