September 16, 2014


About the Blogger | AmericaWakieWakie 
My name is Frank. I am biracial (Latino American), a Jackson, Mississippi native, and for the time being have transplanted from Portland, Oregon to the Bay Area. My political ideology oscillates between Anarchist Communist with a streak of Leninism, so usually you’ll find my standings within far left politics. That said, I’d rather not box myself in with some phrase or term as totally representative of my value system. I created and maintain this Tumblr with the intent of educating my youthful comrades, passing on what I have learned to anyone in our ranks. Looking forward, I hope it too will be a tool for connecting our struggles, creating for us a sense of tangible consciousness and living resistance.  
(Read my articles here) 

Oh hi everybody, it’s me :)



About the Blogger | AmericaWakieWakie 

My name is Frank. I am biracial (Latino American), a Jackson, Mississippi native, and for the time being have transplanted from Portland, Oregon to the Bay Area. My political ideology oscillates between Anarchist Communist with a streak of Leninism, so usually you’ll find my standings within far left politics. That said, I’d rather not box myself in with some phrase or term as totally representative of my value system. I created and maintain this Tumblr with the intent of educating my youthful comrades, passing on what I have learned to anyone in our ranks. Looking forward, I hope it too will be a tool for connecting our struggles, creating for us a sense of tangible consciousness and living resistance.  

(Read my articles here

Oh hi everybody, it’s me :)

September 2, 2014
Rape Culture

The Short Order: Rape Culture is a Symptom of disunited Citizens fighting against themselves rather than united against Our real enemy.

We can be united against Our real enemy or you can remain servants of The Liberals along with the rest of the people selling their bullshit

I’m going to start by telling you The Truth.

Few people in the USA are actually free

Liberal Democrats are the political progeny of Thomas Jefferson and his slave mongering States Rights Democratic-republican Party.

It’s one party. There are no two parties. And here’s how the deception works:

Conservatives declare their outrageous claims in order to create a Liberal ceiling over all of society; which in turn, allows Liberals to give lip service to social issues without ever having to actually do anything about them - viz., things that they claim they want to bring about are above their ceiling, which to them is their floor.

O yes brothers and sisters we want to Lift You Up, but …

O those all powerful Koch Bros., with their 14th Amendment, their “corporate wealth”, their Citizens’ United !! why they just go around and buy just enough elections, so that you are thereby deprived of the social justice we want to deliver unto you. So get out the vote !! help us succeed !! and then our success will trickle down, and lift you up, brothers and sisters, The Democratic-republicans help “he” who helps himself.

And they’re always, just one vote, short

The result of this canard is readily seen on Twitter, Tumblr and possibly on other “social media”: A number of people attach their mental functions and way of thinking to what appears to be “The Liberal” cause. Elect us as a majority !! while others having the sense that something about this whole thing doesn’t seem quite right, but having no where else to turn, attach their mental functions and their way of thinking to the totally outrageous positions promoted by those tagged as Conservatives, teabaggers, racists, whatever. Well at least they’re not Liberals or at least they’re not Conservatives.

People get paid to promote either position or maybe even moonlight and get paid to promote both.

The remnants, are the people that believe it’s real. It’s a distraction or more precisely, it’s a gambit, either way, it’s some other route than the hard road to defeating Our real enemy. Their bullshit is willfully and intentionally designed to lead you down the wrong path, to lead you away from the solution because the solution is inimical to their power.

You’re either them or you’re everybody else.

Until the Social Security Administration was ordained and established, the greater number of people in the USA were wage slaves (the reason you won’t find any statistics to show you this is directly attributable to the fact that economists and The Party don’t care). What I mean by “wage slaves” is that instead of them being provided with shelter and subsistence they were merely paid for their labor with barely enough money (if that) to purchase their subsistence - that is - to purchase their “right to life”;

Otherwise they weren’t any different than actual slaves. And neither are we. And then with Social Security, the wages slaves became transubstantiated from wage slavery into indentured servitude - that is, servants to business but now, “for a limited time only” - that is - until we reach an age, which The Party determines is right and proper and to which we are worthy, we might then be paid back money the Democratic-republicans took away from their wages in order to help fund Liberal world wars.

Liberals and conservatives are two sides of the same coin: heads they win, tails we lose.

But if you want to believe that all of these assurances, like the song says, “Let Freedom Ring” are worthy enough to become an actuality, then the only way to do that is by reclaiming Our government from the Democratic-republican Party and using Our means and resources to provide to every citizen Free Of Charge (A) Clean water (b) good subsistence food (c) adequate shelter and (d) fuel for heating and cooking, and in order to protect and maintain these vital resources, all under reasonable regulation.

Then you can sit at your table after breakfast and look thru the newspaper and maybe there will be a job advertised that you actually want to do and if there isn’t then you don’t starve to death or succumb to the elements if you say no to a job that you don’t want to do; that’s Freedom; as opposed to O dear God, anything, just so I can pay my bills (to private business) pay my taxes (to the Party for their world wars) and maybe have enough left over to buy food (from yet some other business) so that I’ll have enough energy to drag myself up out of bed (or off the floor) and make my way to another day in a life of indentured servitude, which so far is still around 47 years

And until a dubious freedom, at best.

“For the very idea that one man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life at the mere will of another seems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself” — Yick Wo v Hopkins 118 U. S. 356, 370.

So what happened between this foregoing US Supreme Court decision and now?

After the Democratic-republicans’ “Manifest Destiny”, of murder the natives and Go West Thomas Hart Benton’s “chosen people”: Wage slaves were imported and packed into barrack style neighborhoods to work in factories that no longer exist; only their progeny does and in geometric proportion.

If the copies of “Gales and Seaton” still exist read about the 1st Naturalization Bill in Congress and see what the land requirements for obtaining citizenship were and then consider the Liberal bullshit broadcast via MSNBC.

But at several momentary lapses within this history, paper money inflationists devised the proposition: that when the balance of trade was in USA favor, that the increase of gold reserves led to The Banks ability to increase lending i.e., increase the money supply which post hoc ergo propter hoc led to robust domestic growth and prosperity; but then after a short time this situation would reverse to what we now euphemistically refer to as a "recession".

So from that time, following the greenback recession, to this very day, you have these neo-mercantilists (cf., physiocrats) “put[ting] forth the proposition” that this or that “adjustment” of interest rates, money supply &c will somehow bring about this elusive state of economic growth and prosperity and/or alleviate or mitigate “recessions”, which would otherwise require businessmen to lower their prices and realize less profits than desired - o dear, how awful.

In the meantime, what do we do about all of these people religiously trained to People Israel or else overwhelm the surviving Natives with free farm help ? The Democratic-republican solution? Throw them to the Lions e.g., if you don’t pay in, a certain minimum amount, to the social security trust fund whatever you do pay in is lost and you get nothing when you “retire”.

So for a long time you had this sort of Populist Physiocrat Ideal - e.g., the family farm - which was eventually overwhelmed by economic growth via industrialization and enhanced with Party attempts to maintain a favorable balance of trade (e.g., use of tariffs, which evolved into outright import quotas)

But then, as all of this mass industrialization inevitably petered out, we are left with a population born into diminishing industrialization which society became dependent on for [i] taxes [ii] servant positions (jobs) and [iii] exports.

O dear all of these people are wandering about on the streets, surely they’ll either rob the Physiocrats of all of their food or commence a Bolshevik revolution and eat the heads of the neo-mercantlists !!

We need more crimes and more prisons !! everyone must be punished, wha choo

The 1st thing that was eventually realized was the total erosion of the USA balance of trade.

During the time of RayGun, the USA became a debtor nation and then unemployment progressively increased; but because The Party Policy of inflation and deficit spending was the sole means to protect business profits and private debt service, another version of the same New Deal policy was proposed - increase war spending and cut taxes, which was originally coined by Pappy Bush as “Voodoo Economics”, which is now the auto pilot fiscal policy course The Party has the nation set on and will continue as such until we get rid of The Party or at least reduce their number and hold them in a minority position.

Inflation is the worst thing that can be done to the sort of society we have and The Party knows it, so they redistributed deficit spending proceeds and then built their ramparts high with increased “security” spending. The proceeds of deficit spending was directed with interest rates as high as 20% on government bonds - this is how The Party spends more money than it collects in taxes, it borrows it through the issuance of Treasury bonds. Consequently if you were one of “The Worthy” and had say $1 million dollars you’d have a tax free income of $200k per annum for the next 30 years along with tax cuts for any other income along with tax cuts for the Middle Class - i.e., the Middle Class being people like Obama, the Clintons, Judges, Doctors, Lawyers all the guys your daddy wants you to marry. And if you were one of those then a mere $100k would produce a $20k income for the next 30 years.

How many of you reading this even have money like that now? And even if you did the interest rates are next to zero. So it was VIP invites for the pleasure cruise, ok fellas all aboard. Captain Sir, “The Worthy” are all up on deck (above the Liberal ceiling), pull up the gang plank and cast away. Which was completed at the end of Clinton’s 1st term.

So if you are beneath the ceiling, and still listening to the bullshit, the boat is gone and it ain’t coming back. You’re one of US and that’s all those charts are telling you.

Everything Has a Price

Personally, I’m satisfied with subsistence and getting to jerk off via the internet. I can’t afford sex and even if i could it’s way too much work and trouble. Why?

Because all of the Daddys living inside of the Liberal paradigm still want to take care of their little girls and accordingly she’s got to marry a successful man or at least a successful Lesbian.

This is what most of many womans’ time is spent on. Looking for, “the one”, which becomes even more desperate if she took Party advice and had the child instead of using birth control or having an abortion.

This places an immediate pressure on men that consider themselves to be Heterosexual or are shamed into being Heterosexual. You have to be succe$$ful or else settle for either a woman you don’t want or else a man you don’t want either.

This is why there is always “prostitution”.

But Democratic-republicans don’t want Citizens below their ceiling, leasing sex partners, so prostitution is illegal, which places a further pressure on men - where do I get sex? And since it’s illegal, like drugs, how am I ever going to afford it? Now I have to settle even with sex partners that I still have to pay for, might even get busted for doing and the whole deal is “for a limited time only”.

This is where the quick fuck was born.

What does this look like from a woman under the Liberal ceiling?

Daddy wants me to marry a succe$$ful man, so I met this fat bald guy with a little dick and he doesn’t beat me but man some of these guys I see …. So it’s a similar settle - viz., I settle for a guy I don’t really want or take Lesbian/bi Lovers, which most men accept, as long as they get to participate at some level; and if not, they’re still most likely willing to settle as long as their wife is a trophy to them.

Yet, still, a sense of monogamy persists.

For men it’s a little different because it’s less likely that a woman would accept that her husband took a male lover[s] unless she knew about it before they entered into monogamy or unless he’s really hot and she gets to participate too.

Obviously there are various degrees to these archetypal positions and various exceptions.

The thing that women don’t seem to realize is that men experience a greater competitive tension among themselves, that more often devolves to violence, than similar tensions do, for women. Which adds to the social pressures imposed on men:

(1) I have to be succe$$ful if I want to be able to have Heterosexual relations with people I actually want to have heterosex with;

(2) I have to behave in a certain manner around other men or they will beat the shit out of me.

The solution to this, for men, is to be filthy rich and have body guards. Which is exactly how succe$$ful men are presented by the media, in motion pictures &c

But there is also a fallacy to this, which is that I have to look like some kind of stud in order to get the kind of women I think I deserve to have sex with; and that takes a lot of time and trouble and something men don’t have the best taste regarding just like some women.

Consequently, if the guy isn’t succe$$ful he gets frustrated - e.g., hey bitch I fucking want you and I’m good enough for you and he forces himself on her. Plus, the women tends to be weaker than some guy that could potentially kick his ass, so he kills two frustrations with one stone.

Or if he’s on line he doesn’t actually have to commit a physical act but can fantasize his frustration out with words.

These sorts of things become more emotionally uncertain online. But the Liberal solution is simple, make it a crime, online, censor speech and other online activity, which a considerable number of women appear to be in favor of.

But how many of those women are professional salespeople for the Liberal cause can only be guessed and the same is true for the purported male agitators and vice versa.

And then there’s the ones that believe the bullshit.

The difference online is that women are spoiled in re attention.

If I put pix of myself on line no one’s going to look at them unless they make people suspect (1) that I have money and (2) that i might give them some and (3) they won’t get hurt. Then they might get curious and fantasize.

But if a woman posts pix on line tens of thousands if not millions of men will chk them out regardless of who they are or what they look like.

Men seem to take it for granted that women realize not only this but the degree of contrast regarding the lack of attention given to most men by other women. Although it may be argued that women ought to be aware of this and they are in fact on notice now, they aren’t aware and I’d be surprised if any woman will even read this

Consequently, certain things which men take for granted cannot be known to women and vice versa - eg., just now accessing a popular adult site, there are 855 men online and 11 women - i.e., each woman has 78 or more men to contend with depending on how “hot” she is while each man has 78 or more men to compete with for her attention.

What do you think would be more effective? Popeye the Sailor Man eats some Spinach and kicks ass or an ok looking guy has cash and can prove he’s willing to spend?

There is no solution to this under The Liberal paradigm other than devolving to the old standard - women are placed on a pedestal by the Patriarchy

It’s time to leave this paradigm. Unfortunately, I think most women are unwilling to do that but let’s welcome those that are willing.

The Liberal paradigm is obsolete in providing for the necessities of life and it’s especially obsolete in regard to human sexuality, trapping people into it is what leads to these problems.

But “Rape Culture” is a misnomer at best it merely describes a symptom.

August 15, 2014

August 15, 2014
The Purpose of Celebrity is Subservience.

For a while I decided to give up writing.

Various rules are imposed upon writers, by the publishers that collect and hold the money. O sure we’ll give you an amount our peers deem fair, just like the blue book price for a car; now put out for me, bitch, and this is how I want it.

You gonna slap me around a little, to show me who’s boss, or would you rather I just do that to myself.

Hey it’s fucking show biz, hun … an’ if you want the bucks …

So that one was easy - no need to snort snort glug glug - because I don’t write for the bucks.

I write to keep myself from going crazy.

But then the Liberals have their

Wage and Price spirals. And if you don’t get your ass out there and scrounge like a rat, they will bury you.

The Liberal-conservative solution: the Liberals say, wait, don’t kill them yet (see structural violence) give them money to consume; the conservatives say, kill them now and have the remainders make more (ban birth control and abortions) the fittest will consume better and on their own, it’s cheaper. Two sides of the same coin.

So how do you write about that to relate to “Americans”? $5 Big Macs? A Chicken in a Cup for everyone ?

Be like Henry Ford and pay those Liberal economy, assembly line, foot soldiers of food, enough money so they can buy what they slap together. This is the conventional wisdom and perpetual proposition of The Liberals, that way, “we” can cut breakfast, lunch and supper time even more. Not only will our slaves, erm workers, be more productive, they’ll have more time and money to consume !!

Does this seem familiar yet? Do they actually even think of US as human; or for that matter:

Are they even conscious of what humanity is?

Drive thru in the suburban, with wife and kids, drop in the Big Macs like this lQQk give um the money bitch and then similarly poop them out at home. Don’t forget to wash your hands and Hey kids, guess what, tommorow? We get to do the same thing !!

O yea !!

$5 Big Macs cf last years’ prices and by trend line analysis from Acme Econometrics and “staying the course” with the Liberal-conservatives, this could quadruple over the next several decades !! Maybe sooner !!

All we need do is appoint more City managers to turn off the drinking water from these annoying "citizens" so that The Worthy meat milk and eggs "producers" could put it to a good Christian use:

‘If there was ever a chosen people it is the White Christian Farmer because He does with the land what the Good Lord intended, he cultivates it’

Paraphrasing Thomas Hart Benton in his “Manifest Destiny” speech.

So Robert Reich says pay fast food workers more money !!

And if that’s the case then you’d better get to Fracking too because the chief value added input of the Meat Milk and Eggs diet, via the Koch Bros requires lots and lots of Natural Gas to make Nitrogen Fertilizer

Because it’s the only way to grow enough grain to feed enough animals to produce enough Meat Milk and Eggs to go around or be thrown away; and don’t forget Monsanto:

You didn’t think Thomas Hart Benton’s chosen people were actually going to pay immigrants enough money to weed by hand, did you?

And then, the Liberal

Full Growth Economy This is how ‘they’ keep the taxes low, keep the prices high and still have enough transactions to tax to pay weapons suppliers for the means to start offensive wars on the other side of the earth.

Maximize price, minimize cost and dupe the masses with “religious beliefs”

So the next time you hear or read about the Fed - eg. it’s the gotdam Jews !! They control the Federal Reserve Board !! this is what these Thomas Hart Benton people - ie, Liberals and Libertarians - are bitching about - i.e., the legend is, that The Fed turns off the money supply spigot and thereby willfully and intentionally deprives the Liberals of their irrefutable proof that their Full Growth Economy theory is actually the panacea to Life on Earth as well as the very existence of the planet itself. Talk about misers; so to distract you, they blame it on “the Jews” and then ‘even it out’ with the unconditional support of Israel.

But now, awaiting in the wings, the Celebrity Return, of

'The Clintons of The Hamptons'.

Surely Hallmark has a made for TV miniseries already in the works. O the life of luxury. We were once bourgeois hicks, but Liberal grants sent us to some foreign land, qualified us for the White House, and now, here we are. Yeah, here they are, another couple of Liberal cog widgets from the RayGun parvenu. I do declare. The perfect celebrity pair, for the White House.

The whole Country is subservient, Right? (aside it certainly isn’t Left).

What a thing to expend your celebrity on especially when all you aim to do is just occupy and “stay the course”.

So what’s the damage from all this? How bad has all of this Liberal propaganda and imposed insanity affected The Citizenry, or is it just the MSM that creates that impression? Here’s one example of me attempting to be reasonable and patient with one of these cult members:

1st off - they don’t know the difference between Left and Right, because they don’t know what Left is

“@MDSebach well I don’t know what “Left” you are referring to but it certainly isn’t the one I come from. I agree with your gist but not your application of the appellations.

If you want to talk about Inalienable rights then we’re talking about water, food, fuel and shelter; the essence of totalitarianism would be to deprive people of those things, it’s irrelevant whether you do it by a majority, which is relative anyway eg, the majority of the US Supreme Court is 5 people but that majority is certainly a minority in other comparisons.

Generally Left and right (also relative) are distinguished by property e.g., in terms of capitalism vs feudalism the Landed Gentry were the Conservatives, the Merchants and capitalists were the revolutionaries or some would argue the lumpen proletariat.

So for example, the Landed Gentry had limited ownership of the land (In England the Monarch was/is Lord of the Land) and certain privileges (property rights) were granted to them by the Sovereign power eg, Blackstone remarks that property like money are the inventions of mankind.

The basis of Communism is Natural Law, the human entitlement to those inalienable rights, which is Left of what is established, which is an arrangement between the sovereign power and propertied individuals which allows the latter to assume ownership of these things as well as the means by which these things are made available. The last remaining vestige in this regard is water which has generally in recent times been provided for publicly with the remainders such as food fuel and shelter held in private hands that may only be acquired on terms dictated by the owner

When people don’t know what something is it’s easier for “the powers that be” to just brush it off. Leave it to the experts. And then when they persist, hey wait a minute we keep seeing this referred to, so what is it? That situation makes it easier for “the power that be” to de facto redefine it. And that is what has happened. The Liberals did it.

The Discussion continues

“The following assertion was made by @MDSebach:

“Inalienable rights are all philosophically negative, @blazintommyd, they are rights to ACTION(s), not to positive goods of any kind”.

The following was/is my partial response in re “positive goods”

“Water, earth, wood and fuel naturally occur as products of earth not of humanity”.

The idea that anyone does not have the right to these aforesaid products of earth implies that some other individual does, which at the very least implies the right to possess to the exclusion of others, which is the basis of private property, which is clearly the invention of people

(you were saying something about majorities and minorities?)

If you wanted to be technically correct in re inalienable rights what Jefferson &co referred to is stated as follows - viz., Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness; the latter is substituted for property in the 3 categories of rights protected under the common law - viz., the recognition of rights by evidence of court decisions

Keeping your comments within the gist of what we’ve been discussing there is nothing you’ve offered to distinguish between the person as an individual or the person as a corporate body - e.g., a municipality - owning these things, as I already noted, the example of water.

Obviously, the products of earth which all humans require in order to subsist are not the same as things like Ferraris, wall crawlers or google glasses and there is nothing of this earth that requires them to be considered as the same, particularly since you can’t subsist on these so called “positive” products.

What you seem to be struggling with is how to go about convincing enough people to comprise a majority that some past majority got it all wrong; and if that’s the case you’re not doing a very good job because you can’t Do a good job with an impossible task.

On the other hand all that I’ve been doing, thus far, is simply pointing out that the ultimate arbiter of the basic proposition of whether

(1) a government shall determine who has the right to own the earthly necessities of life to the exclusion of others or

(2) that a government shall own these things for the general welfare of the citizenry - can only be secured by force or popular approbation

And people get tired of war

These people are disconnected from earthly reality by all of this Liberal Eco 101 bullshit

I watched this documentary on Netflix called “Particle Fever” about these young adults that look and act like High School sophomores, eating Cherios and junk food attempting to apply observations regarding physical principles within earth (air, earth, water &c) and apply them to events in outer space to discover what they think might be the origins of the fucking Universe. Why not hire them to count a billion dollars or a billion stars. Same thing. But someone paid billions of dollars to build a super collider that is supposed to somehow satisfy or disatisfy their personal curiosities.

What could be a more perfect example of “American” elitism?

Meanwhile people are selling themselves for subsistence and rather than The Party doing something about that? This is the sort of shit they allocate resources to and for, instead, that is, whatever is left over after some Internationalist war somewhere on the other side of earth and they’re done eating.

But what the fuck do I know? I’m not a celebrity.

August 15, 2014

Still from "Cristo Rey"

August 15, 2014
The Paradox of Violence

america-wakiewakie said: Negative peace versus positive justice, makes me think of that. I read your piece you sent me. I kind of responded but it got so long I posted it to my page, about intersectionality.


I take it you are referring to this

You’re Always welcome. As a Progressive Communist I have no need to continue prejudices regarding the lumpen proletariat, which at best, I am; the same applies to apologies for Patriarchy (see my discussion here in re Betty Millard ff excerpt). Doing otherwise would be like imposing the Roman Law after it’s considered dead.

But I am also a Nationalist and believe in a strong National government.

In that regard there are things that government can do practically - ie, provide clean drinking water, good subsistence food, adequate shelter and fuel, free, to every citizen, because every human being needs those things to subsist. So it is therefore a matter of The General Welfare as opposed to particular welfare.

On the other hand people don’t need chicken in a cup, Big Macs, the meat milk and eggs diet in general, iPhones &c, so if they want those things they’d have to get them themselves. You have to start somewhere and not allow yourself to become overwhelmed by particulars. I believe that the basic purpose of government for the citizenry is sound as long as it’s used in a general manner rather than for the furtherment of particulars.

As far as your Critique of communism, goes, there is no honest denial that the basic observations of Marx are irrefutable - viz., under the present “Liberal” arrangement, people that have no production property have only the sale of their labor to maintain their survival. Everything springs from that fact. While a lack of resources available to the government may have been a valid excuse in 1789, it no longer is; neither are International Wars

What I really liked tho is your recent piece on peace which I take this opportunity to address in an improved (edited) form:

“…. I see it as an analogy between ‘now’ and 1 step forward, which is ‘the future’.

USA Police are generally violent even when they are “at peace”; their peace is relative: it is potential violence and it is expressed as such in their uniforms, gear, implements and stance; and then when they take 1 step forward, into the future, potential violence becomes violence in action.

Their violence is what keeps “the others” peaceful. They “enforce” the peace.

But that mere confrontation itself should never happen and it is in it’s simplest form the overt expression of dis-unity because COPs are citizens too. This confrontation of citizen against citizen indicates a failure of those in power to unite the people

Because the role of The People in this Liberal arrangement is to be ruthlessly exploited by the profit class.

So instead of unity, they resort to violence. Disunity is perpetuated by violence, paradoxically, peace perpetuates this violence and this disunity.

So when someone says that violence achieves nothing they’re either stupid or else they’re being a hypocrite.


August 15, 2014

ArtofDan - Scotch


ArtofDan - Scotch

July 31, 2014
From “Women Against Myth” by Betty Millard (1948) p 13 

“Even many otherwise progressive men cling to their vested interest in male superiority, and many women are so committed to the seeming security of their inferior yet ‘protected’ position that they echo the voteless, property less, completely dependent women of a century ago who declared to Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony that they already had ‘all the rights they wanted”.

This is the key to the solution, which Liberals are gutless to face let alone address: so they will pander to these women and men, to preserve, protect as they, dare not ‘disturb’, this ‘social static’.

8:20am  |   URL:
(View comments
Filed under: gutless 
July 24, 2014


Origami Love

(Source: thesearepeoplefucking)

July 21, 2014
The Woman’s Movement: does one really exist?

It’s either a canard or if such thing is organized then my several criticisms regard the symptoms of it co-opting or the propagandist invitation to co-opt with Hillary the Liberal for USA President

In other words, the smoldering Liberal, cloven hoof prints, are all over it.

There they go again - The various posts I see regarding “The Women’s Movement” via Twitter and Tumblr indicate to me that the same Liberal template used for Blacks - i.e., Black men - in the so called Civil Rights movement - is now being used as the template for women

And this is why that’s bad:

(I) Plugging Symptoms to Obfuscate the Cause

The Liberal template, as alluded to above was willfully and intentionally designed to obfuscate the fact that many if not most of the symptoms, which Liberal propaganda attributes to discrimination and/or disparagement allegedly based on hate - e.g., racism and misogyny are actually based on class; and is generally a symptom of the Liberal slave monger Hierarchy and their consumer inflationist “economy” - e.g.,

Hitler exterminated Jews because they were the least formidable group. The less people there are the more there is for, “the worthy”.

Consider the fact that as soon as MLK began to address these issues he was assassinated because this fact is inimical to the Liberal cause and their Modus Operandi:

(1) Make everything in life dependent on money and price, which enables the Liberal-conservatives to control everything via the money supply viz., easing, tightening, raising taxes, lowering taxes; and

(2) Duping people into believing that there is some hope or salvation in voting for these fraudulent assholes.

(II) If the socio-economic arrangement in which women purportedly want equal opportunity, was created by men, why would you want to keep it?

Why would you want to be involved in a system that was designed to exclude you?

The same is equally true in regards to Black men.

Obama was made President to drag you - the Black man with the Black woman obediently following behind - into the Liberal status-quo socio-economic arrangement, created by White men and willfully and intentionally designed to exclude you.

The Liberal Handbook for colonizing and re-subjugating the Black Man

And now they’re going to do the same or at least try with women. All that this does is create the impression with men (both white and black) that you are in an inferior position and want to be them. That you’re envious; that you want to assume their role, their gender.

(1) Even if you wanted to create a matriarchy, why would you want to create it, in the image of men?

What this tact is designed to do is trick you into supporting the Biblical/Jewish gender arrangement from whence arose the Spermists - viz., The Earth in Genesis is lifeless, like a female egg, until god shoots his jizz on it. Or that a woman was created out of a man

Awww Tracy and Hepburn, how McLiberal can you get !! you have to go along with it now, “Right”? Sure why not have some bacon and a glass of milk too.

In other words, women are soulless creatures designed to be used by men and you are or would therefore be confessing, conceding knuckling under and submitting to the idea that women are incapable of creating anything, but most especially incapable of creating a social arrangement in which you at least share an equal role with people that happen to have a penis, testicles a rather shapeless uninteresting body unless it is strenuously worked (if so looking monstrous if it makes old age) and covered with more hair.

This Liberal economy, society or whatever some technocrat has tagged it, has created sexual gender roles, which have assigned to them particular characteristics:

(a) Men use weed eaters around appurtenances to create a military like nit cut look to everything;

(b) women plant flowers.

Does Hillary seem like the sort of woman that would plant flowers?

Keep your eyes peeled.

Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »