Antifascism, a worthy cause


by Tabitha Korol and Kevin O’Neil

We can all fight for a cause, but “The function of wisdom is to discriminate between good and evil. – Marcus Tullius Cicero

They began as idealists, working to save the French-Jewish army Captain Alfred Dreyfus who’d been falsely accused of conspiring with the Prussian army.  The Dreyfus Affair of the mid-1890s and early 1900s was the impulsion for people to unite in support of the rights of the individual before a military authority that was rightly seen to be draconian and dismissive.  A worthy cause, yet the case divided France into the anti-Dreyfusards, fascist, Jew-hating ultranationalists, and the “Dreyfusards,” the anti-fascists who formed associations and humanitarian consensus to gain his exoneration.                

Today’s anti-fascists, “Antifa,” miss the point if they see themselves as successors to the Dreyfusards.  The latter were inspired by love of the individual, a positive inspiration, whereas Antifa is motivated by negative hatred for the establishment and the abuse of the individual who happens to disagree with them

Defining the term fascism has proven notoriously difficult.  There were German antifascists in the early 1900s who joined the Jewish working class to fight for dignity and better wages, and Italian antifascists who fought against Benito Mussolini’s Fascist Party and Hitler’s growing influence.  There were also Spanish antifascists both before and during Spain’s civil war, with writers Orwell and Hemingway among their ranks.

But there are sufficient differences between the various fascist regimes that make it virtually impossible to identify a commonality.  However, most leading scholars agree that all fascists support the violent revolutionary overthrow of the state’s entire government to be replaced with a totalitarian system that diminishes the value of the individual to a mere component of the whole.  Any difference of opinion is seen as fair game to be silenced.

Antifa are a burgeoning collection of discontented militant-leftist groups who, convinced that white supremacism was responsible for chattel slavery and the Holocaust, are allied in their attempt to overthrow “white” western government by any means available, including violence.

British political theorist Roger Griffin, author of “The Nature of Fascism,” wrote, “Fascism is a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is … palingenetic,”  which means that a “rebirth” would follow the demolition of the existing political order.  By this scholarly definition, Antifa’s own methods and goals fulfill the criteria – not of anti-fascism – but of Fascism!

After interviewing 61 current members in 17 countries, Mark Bray, author of “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook,” asserts that militant antifascism is a “reasonable, historically informed response to the fascist threat that persisted” after World War II and into recent years. They argue that every fascist or white-supremacist group has the potential of being the start of Mussolini’s original hundred or Hitler’s first fifty-four members of the German Workers’ Party.  Hence, they believe they have a righteous obligation to stop what they regard as fascist “violence, incivility, discrimination, and speeches that stimulate further white supremacy, oppression and genocide.”

      And fascism, real fascism, must be opposed.  Edmund Burke’s statement was never more apposite, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

In “The View from My Window:  The Ethics of Using Violence to Fight Fascism,” Elie Wiesel recalled familiar riots while he was watching one play out below his fifth-floor window in Berkeley.  It brought to mind the millions of people who fought fascism throughout Europe and he suitably wondered at what point resistance to fascism may be justifiable.

A very sobering question!  And whatever the “point” is at which action is justified, one thing is certain: we must be able to define fascism and be convinced that the group we oppose is truly fascistic.

Not only had Wiesel witnessed real fascism at work, but had suffered from it, and lost both parents and a sister to the Nazis.  He recalled the brave month-long resistance of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto when the Nazis came to liquidate it, April 19, 1943.   Move than fifty-six thousand Jews were killed, very few escaping.  This is the face of real fascism.

America is not Warsaw; neither is it remotely similar.  We are not ruled by an authoritarian power, and our laws are not for the subjugation of the individual but for his/her protection.  Antifa must ask themselves if they are even capable of actually recognizing true Fascism.

Columnist Mark Thiessen wrote in The Washington Times (6.30.17) that Antifa was the “moral equivalent of neo-Nazis.”  The statement may or may not be prescient, but it will not be the first time in history that a movement that began as an ideological liberator abandoned reason and descended into violence and incoherent rage.  In the famous words of Goya, “The sleep of reason produces monsters.”

If Antifa truly aspire to being worthy successors to the antifascist groups of history, they must urgently learn the meaning and methods of fascism and be prepared to come to some very disturbing conclusions.

abitha Korol

https://tinyurl.com/y7e6z63d

 

Immoral Choice? Study Shows Fetus Feels Abortion Pain Earlier Than 24 Weeks


152K subscribers

The Patriot Post is America’s News Digest. Find out why: http://bit.ly/2RztXJh —— A Journal of Medical Ethics study, written by a consultant to Planned Parenthood, now says that a fetus in the womb can experience pain much earlier than 24 weeks of gestation — as early as 13 weeks. Does this change the moral calculation of the pro-choice message, and third-trimester abortion? Here’s a link to the article Scott Ott mentions, by Amy Hall at Stand to Reason: http://bit.ly/FetalPain Bill Whittle Now with Scott Ott is a production of our Members. Join them today https://BillWhittle.com/register/

Berning Academia and the Warren College Education: Loans Forgiven via Transgender Kids


152K subscribers

If we elect as president either Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders, they promise to forgive almost all student loan debt, a move guaranteed to make college unaffordable, . Warren takes her brilliant education policy a step further by promising to allow a 9-year-old transgender student to vet her nominees for Secretary of Education. Right Angle — with Scott Ott, Bill Whittle and Stephen Green — is a production of our Members, who enjoy backstage content, the power to post to our Member blog, a vibrant comments system, Member directory and private messaging. Join us today, and find your people at https://BillWhittle.com/register If you’d like to get to know the hosts of Right Angle up close and personal, come with us on a Caribbean cruise May 15-18, sailing from the port of Miami to the Bahamas. We’ll stage live versions of our shows, engage in lots of Q&A and casual conversation over meals and drinks, among the Members and fans. Learn more and book your cruise today [TIME IS ALMOST UP TO REGISTER] at http://bit.ly/StratoCruise2020 Listen to audio versions of our shows on your favorite podcast app: http://bit.ly/BWN-Podcasts Tell Alexa: “Play Bill Whittle Network on TuneIn Radio” Watch us on Amazon’s Fire TV: https://amzn.to/2Pa1mI3

The Danger of an Idea – Just Change the Label to Environmentalism


COMMENT: The totalitarian need for and use of the new idea.
First, after the French Revolution, the idea was Marxism . which led to Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, Neocons and so many totalitarians.
Today, Marxism is sort of worn down a bit, and suspected, so the new necessary idea is environmentalism, in celebration of which; the hoi polloi will vote themselves into chains.
The idea conquers all logic. So, conclusion—– climate change never happened before.

DC

REPLY: I find it curious how this idea of taking other people’s assets is one of the prohibitions in the Ten Commandments, meaning that it is a very old idea that keeps resurfacing. You are correct, it is always the same solution. When it is discredited like Marxism, then change the label and call it “socialism” to oppress others. When that becomes old, they call it “progressivism.”

Even Teddy Roosevelt, who was a Republican, began his Progressive Party based on Marxism without ever using the label. We now have Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders calling themselves “Progressives” trying to avoid the word “Socialist” with the same platform.

Once again, they change the label but the solution remains the same — seize private property because the government should run everything, and use regulation to oppress the behavior of people to destroy the Industrial Revolution and send everyone back to a commune style life.

 

Religious & Climate Change DRAFT


Armstrong Economics Blog
Re-Posted Jan 27, 2020 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Good morning Mr. Armstrong!

Thanks for always opening our eyes! Could you please explain to me what natural phenomenon of cataclysmic proportions could alter the world and even change religion and who and how would they benefit today? What role should universities play in this scenario? What and how should we teach in classrooms to prepare our students so they can face this future?
Regards!
CB
Professor … University

ANSWER: That is a very interesting question. Historically, religion seems to go through changes that are driven by economics. However, in many instances, economics has been driven itself by often climate change that has resulted in mass migrations.

There were two major climate change periods which drove the populations from the north to invade the south. The first was the Sea People who invaded moving from Europe south into northern Africa. That was the collapse of the Bronze Age. Virtually every civilization collapsed with the exception of Egypt. The next major mass migration was the invasion of the northern tribes into the Roman Empire.

Even the migration from Europe to the United States in mass took place during the Little Ice Age. Remember, there were no income taxes. The tax burdens were indirect and property taxes. The weather, however, was very cold. Most likely the combination sent many to flee to the United States.

The Great Irish Potato famine began in 1845 and had a severe social impact for some six years which sent waves of Irish migrating to America. Ironically, those who keep claiming that the population will run out of food using the theory of Thomas Malthus, miss the entire point of what motivated him behind coming up with that theory – it was climate change and the Little Ice Age – not global warming. The environmental dangers behind Malthus and his six essays on population were published between 1798 and 1826. This was the Little Ice Age.

If we look at the fall of Rome, historians have reached a consensus that the line is drawn with the death of Marcus Aurelius in 180AD. He is followed by his son, Commodus, who is so ruthless that he was assassinated on December 31, 192AD which unleashed civil war in Rome. The Praetorian Guards were so corrupt, they put the office of Emperor up for the highest bidder after assassinating Commodus.

While the victor was Septimus Severus who began the Severan Dynasty, a member of that line was Elagabalus (218-222AD) who important his god from Syria and compelled the people to worship a black meteorite he claimed was the stone from god. He issued coins displaying the meteorite in a chariot he would parade around the city. He was assassinated in 222AD and his body was dragged through the streets.

So religion has often played a key role in events caused by economics driven often by climate change.

The Climate Change – Al Gore & Jennifer Morgan’s Fraud


All of the data that these climate activists have been using is an absolute fraud. It is untrue that 97% of scientists agree to any of this nonsense. They create that myth to then bully scientists who dare disagree with their agenda.

This is actually criminal behavior and the agenda is Marxism behind the entire plot. They use children like Greta and then Jennifer Morgan proclaimed at Davos that Greta is a climate expert, which is really just absurd at the age of 16.

Nobody will dare even question the climate change activists. They are NEVER asked to prove anything they have to say. They are NEVER asked to even produce a list of scientists who can be verified who have agreed with this catastrophic doom. Exploiting a 16-year-old girl so no one will publicly challenge her because of her age is all part of the scheme.

To argue global warming is dangerous is absurd. Just ask yourself: When is the flu season? Summer or Winter? Claiming this is all human-induced is a major fraud in and of itself when measuring the warming coming out of the Little Ice Age. It certainly appears that this is part of the economic decline of Europe that is underway. Then we have economists like Rogoff arguing to tax the West to hand the money to China. That is just an example as to why the West is declining and our computer will be correct — China is emerging as the next Financial Capital of the World. American politics has entered its Dark Age and its inevitable collapse.

 

97% Scientists Do Not Agree with Climate Change or the Solution


In 2009, the University of Illinois sent a survey online to about 10,000 scientists with the following two questions:

QUESTION #1

Do you agree that global temperatures have generally risen since the pre-1800s?

QUESTION #2
Do you think that human activity is a significant contributing factor?


Only 3146 responses were received of 10,000, and of that 31%, 90% said yes to the first question but 82% said yes to the second question.


This is how the fraud was carried out by people who have used this survey. They narrowed down the responses and found that among Meteorologists who responded, only 64% said yes to the second question, so about 1/3 said NO!

Then disregarding all the others of the 3146 responses, they focused on only 77 who described themselves as “climate experts” without any proof of their credentials and found that only 75 said yes to the second question.

Therefore, when we divide 75/77 we get to their claim of  97% of all scientists in the world say there is a climate emergency that warrants raising taxes and seizing property.

This was only 2.3% of those who bothered to respond and I doubt that they would agree with the solution which is COMMUNISM!


0.0075%

If we take the 75 responses of 10,000 scientists surveyed, that means that 0.0075% agreed that there is climate change with some human causality. Why are they lying to the entire world? Because behind this movement is the destruction of capitalism and the resurrection of communism. And people wonder why our computer has been forecasting that the financial capital of the world is moving to Asia? Climate Change Activists are trying to recreate the Marxist experiment all over again.

 

Rogoff’s Global Carbon Tax – Give the Money to China


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; What do you think about Harvard Professor Kenneth Rogoff who advocates a global carbon tax and then takes that money and hand it to China to subsidize them ending coal to generate electricity?

I think he has lost his mind.

HC

ANSWER: This is why major institutions have ZERO respect for academics. They have no concept of the real economy because they have never had to actually roll up their sleeves and deal with a crisis. They have never seen firsthand how capital actually moves. They also see people as an endless source of taxes. Just unbelievable.

When You Thought You Hit A Dog


QUESTION: You are wrong as usual. We just had the hottest decade. This is all about fossil fuels. There was never a CO2 problem until fossil fuels.

KJ

ANSWER: This entire climate change is nonsense! The first clean air act was passed by the Emperor Justinian in 535AD. Humans have burned wood long before coal. Perhaps you slept through science class, but burning wood produces CO2. This nonsense that the climate has changed ONLY because of humans and fossil fuels is ridiculous. They used fake data only since 1850, refuse to discuss the climate cycles pre-1850, and they fail to address the fact that we were coming out of the Little Ice Age for 200 years before the invention of automobiles and a 100 years before they invented trains.

Believe what you want to believe, but you are a victim of organized propaganda. You go right ahead and destroy Western society, lose your job, and live without heat or air conditioning. I will move to Asia where this nonsense is being rejected. And by the way, 1934 remains the hottest year on record with 1998 being number two.

There just so happens to be a 43-year cycle. The year 1934 was a major cycle inversion and remains the record high. Then 43 years later, 1977, that was the Deep Freeze where it snowed in Miami and they were talking about climate change back then too turning back to an Ice Age. Again, 43 years later and it is back to the 40s in Miami and there are warnings about falling iguanas because it gets so cold they are still alive but pass out.

You people are taking credit for everything. The Australian fires and California droughts are all because of CO2? I hate to tell you that just because the press only wants to sell newspapers they are willing to print your garbage to get people talking about this nonsense. There have been droughts in California that have lasted more than 200 years! Nobody will address the cyclical evidence pre-1850.

The co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, Roger Hallam, in his Common Sense for the 21st Century, claims mass disruption, mass arrests, and mass sacrifice are necessary to prevent extinction. He calls for acts of civil disobedience, bypass political theory, and urges people to rise up to a non-violent revolution against society. He calls for the confiscation of private property. Your spokesperson is an outright communist. Nothing he has put forth proves anything. (see Spiegel, November 22, 2019)

So what you are saying is the Little Ice Age should be the norm and all this global warming is entirely because of fossil fuels? Enjoy yourself. Give up your car. Do not heat or air condition your home. If you cannot walk or ride a bike to work, quit! And how dare you use electricity to send me an email. If you want to be a climate activist, then adapt what you are yelling about instead of blaming everyone, of course, except yourself.

A Technical Study in the Relationships of Solar Flux, Water, Carbon Dioxide and Global Temperatures, December 2019 Data


From the attached report on climate change for December 2019 Data we have the two charts showing how much the global temperature has actually gone up since we started to measure CO2 in the atmosphere? To show this graphically Chart 8 was constructed by plotting CO2 as a percent increase from when it was first measured in 1958, the Black plot, the scale is on the left and it shows CO2 going up a bit over 30.0% from 1958 to December of 2019. That is a very large change as anyone would have to agree.  Now how about temperature, well when we look at the percentage change in temperature from 1958, using Kelvin (which does measure the change in heat), we find that the changes in global temperature (heat) are almost un-measurable. The scale on the right side had to be expanded 10 times (the range is 40 % on the left and 4% on the right) to be able to see the plot in the same chart in any detail. The red plot, starting in 1958, shows that the thermal energy in the earth’s atmosphere increased by .30%; while CO2 has increased by 30.0% which is 100 times that of the increase in temperature. So is there really a meaningful link between them that would give as a major problem? The numbers tell us no there isn’t.

The next chart is Chart 8a which is the same as Chart 8 except for the scales which are the same for both CO2 and Temperature. As you see the increase in energy, heat, is not visually observably in this chart hence the need for the previous chart 8 to show the minuscule increase in thermal energy shown by NASA in relationship to the change in CO2. Based to these trends, determined by excel not me, in 2028 CO2 will be 428 ppm and temperatures will be 15.0o Celsius and in 2038 CO2 will be 458 ppm and temperatures will be 15.6O Celsius. This is what the data shows no matter what the reasons are, so I have no idea how the IPCC gets to predict that the world will end in ten or even twenty years.

The full 40 page report explains how these charts were developed and why using NASA and NOAA data that are used without change to prove that The New Green Deal is not required and any attempt to complete that plan will be a worldwide disaster.

Click on the link below for the full report that you can download.

BLACKBODY TEMPERATURE 2019-12