Archive for the ‘Liberals’ Category

In Knives Out, both liberals and conservatives are the villains – Washington Examiner

Knives Out, an Agatha Christie-style whodunit that will likely snag some Oscar nominations soon, is not really political.

You can enjoy the film as a pretty standard murder mystery without unpacking its characters beliefs, from the Trumpism of one character to the open borders rhetoric of another. One of the most interesting things about the film is the way its able to lampoon both.

Liberal magazine Sojourners described the movies perspective as a merciless skewering of white privilege. More fundamentally, its a critique of hypocrisy.

Hollywood liberals took a beating this week when Ricky Gervais blasted their double standards: touting moral lessons about society while cozying up to Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein. Knives Out follows suit.

The film is about a rich, white man and his rich, white family, who hope to inherit his wealth after his mysterious death. During a discussion at old Harlan Thrombeys birthday party the night before he dies, his son-in-law and daughter-in-law get into an argument.

Richard, whom daughter-in-law Joni pejoratively refers to as red-hat wearer, echoes the pull yourself up by your bootstraps rhetoric of the GOP. Immigrants should be rewarded for entering the country the legal way, etc.

Joni, an Instagram influencer who meditates and spouts platitudes in a way that would make Gwyneth Paltrow jealous, responds that the government is putting kids in cages.

To settle the argument, Richard calls in Marta, Harlans Latina nurse. She did it the right way, he explains. But Marta has a secret: Her mother is undocumented.

Marta becomes the unofficial protagonist of the film, leading detective Benoit Blanc through the idiosyncrasies of the family and ultimately to the truth of the murder. And while the film had a chance to present the liberal, excessively pro-immigration side as heroes, it turns them, as well as the right-wingers, into villains.

No one in the family can remember which country in South America Marta is from, and at least three different options are mentioned throughout the film. (Brazil? Paraguay? Educador?) When it is revealed (spoiler alert) that the unselfish Marta will receive all of Harlans fortune, the Thrombey family goes ballistic.

In an effort to wrest the fortune back for themselves, they threaten to expose Martas mother as an undocumented immigrant unless Marta gives them what they see as their rightful inheritance. All of the characters, from the MAGA ones (one of whom calls Marta an anchor baby) to the woke liberals, are in on the scheme. That talk about caring about immigrants seems pretty empty when one immigrant becomes an obstacle to a huge wad of cash.

Instead of using the political tension in the film to stir controversy, Knives Out plays off it for humor, particularly in the scene where the family begins fighting and hurling insults from alt-right troll to SJW student.

Everyone kind of sucks, except Marta, who, like many young immigrants in America, grew up in a difficult situation that she did not choose. The film refrains from overly politicizing her plight, but it does offer this commentary: Neither conservatives nor liberals are really on her side.

The film's director, Rian Johnson, has said Knives Out is not a "message movie." But, he told the Associated Press, it was important that the film seem modern.

"Right now, if you have dinner with your big family and you have a few glasses of wine, and you start arguing, guess what you're going to be arguing about?" he asked. "It's the same stuff we're all arguing about. And so hopefully the movie portrays that in a way where you can go with your family and you can all kind of laugh at yourselves a little bit."

View post:
In Knives Out, both liberals and conservatives are the villains - Washington Examiner

The Insulated Life Of Liberals – Townhall

MSNBC personality Lawrence ODonnell made a mistake in liberal land this week he told the truth. Allowing peeks behind the curtain in the land of left-wing politics is a no-no, audiences are not allowed to see how the sausage is made. Larry, a rich white guy, accidentally not only pulled back the curtain, he set it on fire.

Larry told disgraced former Senator Al Franken, forced to resign after multiple women came forward to accuse him of unwanted sexual advances (including unwanted touching and forced kissing), that MSNBC doesnt even bother having anyone on who is pro-Trump. Thats one of the reasons why Trump kind of wants you to watch CNN instead of MSNBC, ODonnell said. Because he knows on MSNBC there will be no one defending him. Because we dont bring on liars. I dont bring on a liar. I wont do that.

What ODonnell admits there is his employer is not a news organization, its an activist for-profit TV network. When asked if you have to lie to defend the president, Larry was unequivocal, saying, Yes, absolutely you do. How else do you defend a liar, a pathological liar who lies about everything? You have to lie.

Larry does not watch MSNBC or even listen to the words coming out of his mouth, apparently. Was there more than a day in the past three where he hadnt declared the president colluded with Russia in the 2016 election? What hasnt ODonnell and his fellow travelers at the peacock cable outlet accused someone named Trump of doing? Murder, maybe, but thats only because its just about the only thing the family hasnt been accused of yet. (Give it time.)

Its been a rough time for the old, white, on-air personalities at MSNBC, so you can understand why Larry would try to stand out and create some buzz for himself. The truth-teller had to eat a huge steaming pile ofum, crow after he lied on air about Russians close to Vladimir Putin co-signing for loans for Donald Trump. It was such a bald-faced lie that it didnt even meet MSNBCs standards, which is saying something.

Imagine being a 68-year-old narcissist, a self-proclaimed socialist with expensive tastes, single (his wife finally bugged out after two decades of dealing with him), and facing rumors of losing his show at the end of the year the thing from which he seems to derive meaning in his life. Is there a market for an unemployed, over-the-hill has been, incapable of loving anyone as much as himself who hates hammering?

You begin to see why maintaining the echo chamber he works in is so appealing to him if he loses his staff, who else would want to be around him?

Someone the Daily Beast described as an insider at MSNBC said the heads of ODonnell and Chris Matthews could be on the chopping block this year. According to the report, it all depends on what happens with the election. You could see either or moving on to other endeavors or staying for another round.

When your fate is up in the air, you need all the buzz you can generate.

But there wouldnt be speculation about anyone leaving the network if things were going well. MSNBC lost 25 percent of its viewers aged 18-49 in 2019, coming in 26th on basic cable and well behind the Lifetime network. That means their audience is old, and getting older. Not what companies want, especially when your numbers arent huge to begin with.

Also reportedly on the chopping block is none other than Chuck Todd. They cant fire him, hes the face of their news division, but they can demote his show Meet The Press Daily. The anchor Todd is an anchor on ratings as well, apparently, as he is a low point for MSNBC, mostly because Todd is laughably biased and a horrible, arrogant host himself. He took the MTP brand and embarrassed its legacy even more than former host David Gregory did, which is saying something.

Theres talk of moving Todds show to 9:00 am, a major demotion that has Ginger Avenger and his staff upset. No one likes being told they arent liked, but its better to find out in a way that keeps your job than it is to find out by losing it.

Todd famously announced hed no longer have anyone who disagrees with liberal orthodoxy on climate change on his show, setting the tone for the network. Hes extended that to anyone who disagrees with him on pretty much anything, which, as Larry confirmed, has also metastasized to the rest of the network. His decisions made ripples throughout the organization and they were all bad.

All of this comes as a surprise only if you live in an insulated world where everyone tells you how great you are, how smart you are, and how wonderful you are. Unfortunately for the personalities at MSNBC, they surround themselves with people who agree with them and people who depend on them for their livelihoods. Whos going to tell them no? Turns out, viewers.

Derek is the host of a free daily podcast (subscribe!), host of a daily radio show onWCBM in Maryland, and author of the book,Outrage, INC., which exposes how liberals use fear and hatred to manipulate the masses.Follow him on Twitter at @DerekAHunter.

Read the original here:
The Insulated Life Of Liberals - Townhall

E.W. Jackson: U.S. Liberals Are Totally the Same as the North Korean Regime – Friendly Atheist – Patheos

Progressives in America are just as bad as the North Korean regime at least according to E.W. Jackson, the right-wing radio host and former candidate for Lt. Governor of Virginia.

Jackson has been reading The Aquariums of Pyongyang, the story of a man who spent a decade in North Korean prison camp, which inspired him to declare that he doesnt see any difference whatsoever in substance between the North Korean regime and liberals in the U.S.

They are interested in hurting people, Jackson said. We Christians are not interested in putting people in jail because they dont agree with us. Were not interested in destroying peoples lives because they dont agree with us. Were interested in praying for them and ultimately persuading them and trusting that God will touch their hearts and theyll see the light. We know that God loves them and so do we.

I also dont recall Kim Jong-un fighting for justice reform, demanding a living wage for workers, or urging the government to provide all people with affordable healthcare.

But besides anything relevant, Im sure both groups are alike.

(via Right Wing Watch)

Originally posted here:
E.W. Jackson: U.S. Liberals Are Totally the Same as the North Korean Regime - Friendly Atheist - Patheos

Liberalism and Fascism: 5 ways in which liberals are exactly the same as Nazis – OpIndia

The 20th Century witnessed two of the bloodiest wars in the entirety of human history. More than seven decades have passed since the end of the second world war and as it happens very often, much of what was known, or should have been known, has been forgotten. However, there are certain patterns that can be deduced through observation alone. And it is those aspects that we shall focus on here.

In the second world war, unlike what has traditionally been believed, there were three totalitarian ideologies competing for supremacy, arguably at a global scale. The three primary actors, certainly the three most powerful ones, were the flagbearers of these totalitarian ideologies. One of the ideologies was vanquished in the second world war, another at the end of the cold war. The one that emerged victorious on both these occasions still survives and expectedly, it is not considered totalitarian in the 21st century.

The first, of course, was Nazism and the second was Communism. The third, which emerged victorious against both these ideologies, was, needless to say, Liberalism. Nazism ceased to be a serious political force with the end of Hitlers Germany. Communism suffered the same fate with the dismemberment of the Soviet Union. Liberalism, however, is the state ideology of the worlds only superpower: The USA.

- Ad - - article resumes -

People may argue Liberalism is not totalitarian in nature and everyone has human rights and freedom of speech but one must also reconcile themselves with the fact that people who live in a totalitarian regime do not consider the regime to be totalitarian. For instance, its extremely unlikely that in the world George Orwell created in 1948, the residents perceived the state to be totalitarian. For them, a totalitarian society was normal. Similarly, people who live in a liberal society are unlikely to consider it tyranny. Its only from the outside that it looks totalitarian.

Read: Fascist Modi or Over Tolerant Modi: When Modi pardoned Muslim men for sending him threatening letters

In the 20th century, the similarities between these three ideologies wasnt so apparent as these three ideologies were at war with each other. However, in the 21st Century, as Liberalisms stranglehold over power became nearly complete backed by military prowess of the US military, the similarities have become more than apparent. Today, we look at some of glowing similarities between Liberalism and Fascism.

Adolf Hitler, as we are well aware, was obsessed with the supposed superiority of the Aryan Race. In his bid to secure the future of the Aryan Race, he committed the genocide of Jews in Germany. Similarly, liberals in the West are obsessed with race too. In fact, they are so obsessed that a strong candidate for the Democrat nominee for US Presidential elections in 2020 lied about her race and claimed that she is Native American despite the fact she is not in order to gain political benefits.

Furthermore, prominent liberals in the US can be regularly found to be engaged in anti-White rhetoric where they can be seen cheering for White Genocide, all the while denying that such a thing exists. In India, liberals are obsessed with the Aryan-Dravidian race theory despite the fact that it has been regularly debunked by scholars and academics. But that hasnt stopped Indian liberals from continuing to further the race theory. The obsession that liberals have with race is very similar to that shared by Nazi Germany.

In India, the rhetoric that liberals employ against Brahmins is akin to the one employed by Nazi Germany against Jews. In mainstream Dravidian politics, which is cheered on and encouraged and sustained by liberalism, the propaganda against Brahmins are is completely alike that fueled by Nazis against Jews.

In Nazi Germany, the media served as the propaganda wing of the fascist government. We see a similar pattern in the liberal world. The media was an extended arm of the Nazis. In the USA, we see the mainstream media act as the propaganda wing of the Democrat party. The collusion that was observed between news networks and Hillary Clinton was for all to see. The liberal American media has even justified violence by Antifa goons against their political opponents.

In India, we see the mainstream media serve as the propaganda wing of the Secular parties. There is extreme collusion between the political establishment and the media. The Liberal media demonizes the opponents of secular political parties and their supporters, exaggerates minor events in order to benefit secular politicians and whitewashes and buries news that could adversely impact secular parties. Its an incestuous relationship between Liberal Media and Liberal political parties and they work together in the same fashion as the media and politicians in Nazi Germany.

However, there is one distinct difference between the media-politics nexus in the world of liberalism and Nazism. In Nazi Germany, no efforts were made to hide the relationship. But liberalism, in order to be more effective, claims to be independent and neutral even when they are clearly not and buries the incestuous relationship under layers and layers of carefully constructed diversions.

The relationship between the Media and politicians in Nazi Germany and in the Liberal World stems from the ideological unity between them, the material benefits that are gained are only a second-order requirement. Loyalty to ideology is the main motivation.

In Nazi Germany, the Academia served the Nazis greatly and even helped shape their ideology and provided them with ideas and techniques to help them achieve their nefarious objectives. We see a similar pattern in the liberal world. The political parties rely on academia for acquiring footsoldiers and legitimizing their evil agenda while the latter relies on the former for patronage.

The Academia also provides Liberal politicians with footsoldiers and innovative techniques in order for them to achieve their political goals. Here, again, we see a complete unity of ideology between the Academia and Liberal political parties. It is the same in the US as it is in India. The liberal parties work in tandem in order to indoctrinate the youth and achieve ideological objectives.

In Nazi Germany, there was complete coherence of ideology between the political establishment, the Media and Academia. A similar pattern is also observed in the world of Liberalism. The three departments, together, with complete ideological unity between them, form the Liberal Establishment in the 21st century. The arms of the Liberal Establishment then work in tandem, like Nazi Germany, to crush dissent and entrench itself in the corridors of power.

The Liberal Establishment crushes dissent, demonizes its opponent unfairly and unceremoniously removes them from power all the while accusing their political opponent of being fascists, despite the fact that it is the structure of their politics that is completely akin to Nazi Germany. No stones are left unturned in order to secure their power. In India, the Liberal Establishment has also engaged in the genocide of Hindus and Sikhs, in Kashmir and in 1984 respectively.

The three arms of the Liberal Establishment attack and defend together. Whenever the power of one arm is under threat, the other arms immediately comes to their defense. For instance, when there is a threat to its political power, the academia and the media immediately rushes to their defense in order to defeat its political opponents. When political rivals attempt to remove stranglehold of liberals in academia, political parties and the media rushes to its defense. When the monopoly of liberals over media is threatened, the academia and political parties rush to provide cover. And together, they fight to ensure that the Liberal Establishment continues to thrive.

Simultaneously, the opponents of the Liberal Establishment are crushed by the three arms together and its ensured that opposing ideologies never get a foothold in these institutions. If someone or some entity succeeds in gaining legitimacy in these three arms, then they demonized and every effort is made to tarnish their reputation and destroy their lives. In many instances, people actually lose their lives and their death is brushed under the carpet as an insignificant statistic. And on and on it goes.

The most distinguishing feature of a totalitarian society or a totalitarian ideology is that the power structure isnt merely interested in what an individual says or how he acts but also how people think. It is not enough to merely say or act in a certain way, a person must also believe the ideology completely. Otherwise, the person can be accused of a thoughtcrime and persecuted accordingly.

In George Orwells 1984, thoughtcrime describes a persons politically unorthodox thoughts, such as unspoken beliefs and doubts that contradict the dominant political ideology. We see a similar pattern playing out in the liberal world. Merely accusations and allegations combined with certain suspicious behaviour is enough reason to completely destroy an individuals life.

For instance, a person does not have to be a homophobe or misogynist in order to have his life completely destroyed and ruined, mere accusations are enough. Furthermore, anyone who does not endorse the most extreme positions of the Liberal world is branded homophobe, misogynist, regressive or whatever the latest buzzword maybe and then it is demanded that his professional career be destroyed.

Mere differences in political opinions are treated as thoughtcrimes and efforts are undertaken to crush the individual. Everyone who disagrees with a liberal is Sanghi and fascist against whom even violence is justified. Jai Shri Ram slogans and chants of Vande Mataram are deemed as provocations.

While it is fancy, these days, for people to accuse the political opponents of Liberalism as fascists, in reality, Liberalism and Nazism are cousins and the fight between them is one of sibling rivalry. The reason why liberals paint all their political opponents from diverse political backgrounds as fascist is that fascism is the ideology they are most well acquainted with and intimate with.

Read: From fake Jai Shri Ram hate crimes to CAA: Five big battle of narratives that the Liberal Establishment lost in 2019

The tactic of labeling the political opponents of Liberalism as fascists is also a way to hide the fact that Liberalism is the one ideology that shares the most similarity with Fascism. Its also a way to distract people from the fact that it is the conduct of liberals that resembles that of Nazis the most. Most dangerously, however, the footsoldiers of liberalism religiously believe the accusations they level against their opponents and the indoctrination they have suffered makes them unable to see the intricate similarities between Liberalism and Fascism. However, if they look into the mirror with honesty and integrity, they will discover that the two ideologies are mirror images of themselves in a great many essential respects.

Black Coffee Enthusiast. Post Graduate in Psychology. Bengali.

Read more:
Liberalism and Fascism: 5 ways in which liberals are exactly the same as Nazis - OpIndia

Protests over citizenship law in India prove liberal elites only like democracy if they agree with the results – RT

Protests in India over a controversial citizenship amendment law have curiously exposed the duplicity of liberals when it comes to their commitment to democracy.

Left-backed student unions and Muslim groups have been up in arms over a law that they perceive to be anti-Muslim. Backing up this protest movement, liberal Indians have revealed their cards.

For the youth to resist the charms of revolution to be angry without a cause and bask in the romance and idealism of protests is fine. Such a phenomenon is common across the world and examples abound in Indias own past. Pragmatism is usually a post-facto realization for the young.

As British conservative thinker, polymath and philosopher Roger Scruton said of the 1968 student agitation in Paris, an event that shaped his political thinking: What I saw was an unruly mob of self-indulgent middle-class hooligans uttering ludicrous Marxist gobbledegook.

Sir Roger died on Sunday, but he would have taken a forgiving view of student activism: Reason will dawn on them.

In contrast, liberal anger against Modi is cynical. It is politics by proxy. Led by the power brokers and elites who had been at the heart of Indias power structure for decades since Independence but now have been cast aside.

As author Pankaj Mishra describes in Bloomberg: Deeply united by caste (uniformly upper), class (upper to middle), education (mostly Western), marriage and profession, this elite was originally entrusted with the task of modernizing Indias peasant society by Jawaharlal Nehru Then, under the patronage of his daughter Indira Gandhi, the community came to accumulate more cultural and intellectual capital than any self-interested group in the country.

This group now feels threatened by the rise of Narendra Modi. They feel disempowered by the way a Modi-led BJP government has ended their grip over Indias corridors of power. A blowback was inevitable, and it has come in the form of questioning the very tenets of Indias representative democracy that elected Modi. The protests provide a useful context.

This is where the phenomenon becomes global. The condition in India mirrors whats happening in the West where Donald Trumps rise in the US through a democratic process has been called the end of liberal democracy.

Whether in India, the US or the UK that voted for Brexit, this elite derision against popular opinion stems from a liberal disaffection with democracy whenever the electoral pendulum swings away from them.

The liberals believe in the legitimacy of democracy as long as it throws up results that they like. If not, the unwashed masses, middle class voters or working classes are castigated as intolerant fools, white supremacists, racists or bhakts, Hindutva goons, and xenophobes who are taking India back to thedark age.

In the US, where Trump is facing a doomed impeachment move brought by desperate Democrats, we frequently hear comments about Trumps base.

Who are these people? Are they not hardworking, ordinary Americans trying to get on with their lives and believe in exercising their franchise? To call them bigots or racists is to be condescending of their choices. This call-out culture that dominates American Leftist identity politics and alienates ordinary people from the insufferable woke generation, is now visible in India too. People who voted against the recommendations of self-righteous liberals are now at the receiving end of their ire.

In the Hindustan Times, historian Ramachandra Guha, a vocal critic of BJP, writes: Had not the abolition of Article 370 already done a great deal to satisfy the BJPs hardline Hindutva base? Had not the Supreme Courts verdict in the Ayodhya dispute satisfied them further? Is the greed of the base really so insatiable that this third bone had to be thrown their way so soon after the other two?

It is instructive to note the language that he uses to describe those who voted for BJP and Modi. Greedy base who need more bones to satiate their hunger. This use of animal metaphors to describe ordinary people whose political views are different from theirs, typifies the arrogance and intolerance of this tribe.

We see the same rhetoric employed by a leader of the Congress party, an outfit that symbolizes dynasticism and the old elites incestuous grip over power. Shashi Tharoor writes in a magazine that worlds fastest-growing free-market liberal democracy seems to be giving way to a violent, intolerant, illiberal autocracy.

It is difficult to understand how India, the worlds largest representative democracy that concluded a massive electoral exercise in 2019, has turned overnight into an autocracy. The BJP, that forms the federal government at the Center, has suffered recent reverses in state elections to further underline the vibrancy of Indias democracy.

If liberal democracies around the world are facing a threat, it is not from populist leaders but liberals themselves who are unable to come to terms with reality. A little humility may help.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Originally posted here:
Protests over citizenship law in India prove liberal elites only like democracy if they agree with the results - RT