George F. Will’s Dementia Increasingly Hilarious

You have to read this hilarious thing in the Washington Post to believe it. In his first sentence, Will calls President Trump the “Crybaby-in-Chief.” In his next paragraph he accuses Trump of a “coarsening of public discourse.”

It gets better. After that Will scolds Republicans in the Senate for their “Vichyite collaboration” with Trump, thus comparing them to France’s Nazi collaborationist regime during World War II, and thus calling Trump Hitler.

Having called Trump Hitler and the Senate Vichy collaborationists, Will goes on to call Trump “unhinged.” Hey, George, someone in this scenario is unhinged, and it’s not Trump. Fun game: see if you can figure out who!

And in a demonstration that moving left politically requires one to have one’s sense of irony removed, Will says, “The nation’s downward spiral into acrimony… has had many causes,” among them, perhaps, calling people you disagree with Nazis.

But wait, there’s more!

The person voters hired in 2016 to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” stood on July 28, 2017, in front of uniformed police and urged them “please don’t be too nice” when handling suspected offenders. His hope was fulfilled for 8 minutes and 46 seconds on Minneapolis pavement.

LOL. Trump said, “don’t be too nice”… and a mere three years later, George Floyd was killed! Draw the line from A to B, man!

As a side note, this “essay,” if one can call it that, is a good example of the difference between style and substance. All the old Will style from the 1980s is here… well, except for cool understatement, obviously. The vocabulary, the references to Shakespeare and T.S. Eliot, etc. are present. But the substance— reasoned analysis— is gone, completely gone. All that’s left is the vaporous spew of a bitter old man who has forgotten the proper dosage on his medications.

President Trump drives his enemies insane. I usually identify as religiously agnostic, but the last few years tend to make me think God exists and is on Trump’s side. After all, Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad… and the anti-Trump crowd is bonkers.

What’s Going on with the Left?

Dumbass
“But summoning demons seemed like such a good idea!”

1. Partly – but only partly – there’s a unified plan: Attack Trump with a Xanatos Gambit; he’s either “weak and falling” or a “tyrannical dictator.” So far Trump has threaded this needle very well.

2. Another major factor is that the left’s thugs are out of control because they’re the kind of people who just like breaking stuff and beating people. Antifa is the obvious example here. They don’t much care who they attack, but the softer the target the better. Leftist mobs’ most recent victim as of this writing is a gay Democrat State Senator in Wisconsin. He was put in the hospital by a mob of thugs who he had thought, up to that moment, were “on his side.”

3. Another major factor is that they’re holiness spiraling.

4. What we haven’t seen yet, but may start to see soon, is the haute left fighting each other. Leftists know they can’t trust each other, so highly-positioned leftists will be very tempted to sort some factional stuff out now, in case they actually win against Trump. The internal power struggle has very high stakes, since lefties know they’ll kill each other for power, as they always have done for the last century. Indeed, they’ve been doing it since the French Revolution of the late 1700s, which is the origin of the saying “The Revolution eats its children.”

It all adds up to exactly what one would expect it to add up to: Increasing violence in general, and an amount of left-on-left violence in particular that must be surprising to someone who doesn’t know the history of the left.

Why not just work together? Remember, the entire point of leftism is betrayal of the broader group. And this is a personality type, not an ideology. Individual leftists don’t cooperate with broader leftism any more than they cooperate with the broader nation. (Leftist ideologies are just tacked-on epiphenomena that are invented to justify betrayal and smash-and-grab. No one believes the ideologies, least of all leftists.)

This is why leftism is most effective when it doesn’t require individual leftists to sacrifice for the leftist common goals. For example, leftist media narratives are pretty consistent across newspapers and networks because it doesn’t cost an individual leftist “journalist” anything to coordinate with other leftists.

Leftists are dangerous to everyone, but at least as dangerous to each other, especially once there is something big at stake like dictatorial power. Betrayers can’t work together.

If you’re an “elite” leftist, why not just exit the situation? Why not just quit politics, announce through channels to your fellow powerful leftists that you’re quitting politics, and move to another country to retire? That won’t work for at least two reasons:

(1) Your fellow leftists won’t believe that you’re quitting, because all leftists are liars and all leftists know that all leftists are liars. A false quitting announcement is exactly the sort of ruse a leftist would use to put his enemies off guard. In fact, Al Gore did exactly this the night of the 2000 presidential election, calling Bush to say he had conceded, while actually assembling his legal team to challenge the outcome while the Bush team was relaxing and celebrating.

(2) Moving to another country provides no safety, since whoever controls the US government reaches everywhere. You probably don’t know what happened to Leon Trotsky after the Soviet Revolution, because the left has decided it’s an inconvenient bit of history and memory-holed it. Short version: Maneuvered out of power by Stalin, Trotsky hopped from country to country, eventually ending up in Mexico. Stalin dispatched an assassin, who found Trotsky and killed him by chopping him through the skull with an ice axe.

Incidents like this are typical in 20th century leftist revolutions. Leftists are constantly riven by factionalism and killing each other. And leftists know it. You may not have known about Trotsky and similar incidents, but hard leftists study revolutions – they know. Their knowing it makes the situation even worse for them: Even if there’s a leftist who has no inclination to murder, he has to, pre-emptively, since he strongly suspects the other leftists will try to murder him. There is no honor among thieves… let alone murderers.

Look at this Reservoir Dogs photo from a previous post of mine:

ReservoirDogs
Is this situation game-theoretically stable?

If you’re in that situation and you know the other guy is a killer, you’d better shoot first.

I originally used that pic to illustrate the situation between Trump and the left. But this is also the situation powerful leftists now find themselves in with respect to each other.

(And Trump has been very good at resisting the left’s attempts to bait him into military action that they can use for propaganda purposes. That is, they are shooting at him, and have been for years, but he has been wearing a bullet-proof vest and dodging their bullets, as their attacks make their true nature obvious to more and more Americans.)

I do not think powerful leftists have started killing each other yet – if so, they’ve kept it out of the news – but they must be heading in that direction. (Update: How could I have forgotten Epstein?!) Antifa attacking the home of the leftist mayor of Olympia Washington, not to mention kicking the Democratic government of Seattle out of Seattle’s capitol area, are just a couple of recent examples. Already each “elite” leftist must be casting suspicious glances at other “elite” leftists around him, wondering who’s going to strike at whom first. “Will I be a target?” he wonders. And maybe starts thinking he’d better strike before he is stricken. Even as you read this, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and George Soros are wondering about each other…

Thoughts from a Random Sampling of Beyond Good and Evil

Nietzsche
A pic of Nietzsche from before his moustache grew to the point where it had its own detectable gravitational field.

Since I’ve read Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil a couple of times I allow myself the liberty of dipping back into it at random every now and then when I have some free minutes. Here are some reactions from a random sampling from June 2020:

1. Nietzsche as Frenchman

The opening of the Preface:

Supposing truth is a woman— what then? Are there not grounds for suspecting that all philosophers, insofar as they have been dogmatists, have been very inexpert about women? That the gruesome seriousness and clumsy obtrusiveness with which they have usually approached truth so far have been awkward and very improper methods for winning a woman’s heart? What is certain is that she has not allowed herself to be won— and today every kind of dogma is left standing dispirited and discouraged. If it is left standing at all!

My first reaction: Interesting opening. Unfortunately the book does not consistently live up to this opening, though it has its moments.

My second reaction: How very French! If you didn’t know N. was German, you’d probably guess that was written by a Frenchman. You can see why post-moderns like Nietzsche: For stylistic as well as substantive reasons.

Also, note the red pill knowledge here: The gruesome seriousness and clumsy obtrusiveness with which they have usually approached truth so far have been awkward and very improper methods for winning a woman’s heart. Indeed. The essence of seduction is obliqueness.

Speaking of French sensibilities, try this from Section 1:

The will to truth, which will still tempt us to many a hazardous venture, the famous truthfulness of which all philosophers have hitherto spoken with respect— what questions has this will to truth not laid before us! What strange, wicked, questionable questions! It is already a long story— yet it seems as if it had hardly begun. Is it any wonder if we at last grow distrustful, lose patience, and turn impatiently away? That we should finally learn from this Sphinx to ask questions too? Who is it really that puts questions to us here? What in us really wants “truth”?

Indeed we made a long halt at the question about the cause of this will—until at last we came to a complete stop before a yet more fundamental question. We asked about the value of this will. Suppose we want the truth: Why not rather untruth? And uncertainty? Even ignorance?

The problem of the value of truth came before us—or was it we who came before the problem? Which of us is the Oedipus here? Which the Sphinx? It is a rendezvous, it seems, of questions and question marks.

Not sure what the hell all that means, but it sure sounds profound if you don’t think about it too carefully. And oh so French.

This part again: The problem of the value of truth came before us—or was it we who came before the problem? That sounds like a low-brow person’s stereotypical image of “intellectual bullshit spewed by ivory tower eggheads.” Nietzsche’s not doing intellectuals any favors here.

Nietzsche employed his style… or did his style employ Nietzsche? Which is the artist here, and which the art? Or is this questionable question too dangerous to ask? Perhaps it will take harder men, sterner philosophers of the future, to look this question in the eye and (blah blah).

I had a friend who maintained that N. took himself way too seriously. I think not even N’s fiercest partisans can deny his guilt on that count. Here is a relatively mild sampling, from the end of the same section:

It almost seems to us as if the problem [of the desirability of truth] had never been put so far— as if we were the first to see it, fix it with our eyes, and risk it.

2. Nietzsche as Stereotypical “Nietzschean”

The first sentence of Section 29:

Independence is for the very few; it is a privilege of the strong.

That sounds like something that stereotypical Nietzsche would say. There actually is a lot of justice in Nietzsche’s popular reputation. What people like Otto from A Fish Called Wanda miss is that N’s interest in strength and independence were primarily about emotional and intellectual virtues.

3. Nietzsche as Post-Modernist

From Section 38:

The French Revolution… noble and enthusiastic spectators all over Europe have contemplated it from a distance and interpreted it according to their own indignations and enthusiasms for so long, and so passionately, that the text finally disappeared under the interpretation. So a noble posterity might once more misunderstand the whole of the past, and in that way alone make it tolerable to look at.

Or rather, isn’t this what has already happened? Have not we ourselves been that “noble posterity”? And isn’t now precisely the moment when, insofar as we comprehend this, it is all over?

In this passage, especially the emphasized part— the emphasis is in the original— one again can see why the post-moderns liked N.

4. Nietzsche as (Possible) Social Darwinist

From Section 62:

The hitherto paramount religions… are among the principal causes which have kept the type of “man” upon a lower level: they have preserved too much that which should have perished… when they had given comfort to the sufferers, courage to the oppressed and despairing, a staff and support to the helpless, and when they had allured from society into convents and spiritual penitentiaries the broken-hearted and distracted: what else had they to do in order to work systematically in that fashion, and with a good conscience, for the preservation of all the sick and suffering, which means, in deed and in truth, to work for the deterioration of the European race?

It’s not clear to me whether N. is actually talking about genetics here or purely cultural effects. But he is obviously saying that coddling the weak is bad.

5. Nietzsche as Intellectual and Would-Be Prophet

From Section 212:

The philosopher, being of necessity a man of tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, has ever found himself, and had to find himself, in contradiction to his today: his enemy was ever the ideal of today.

A fun perspective on intellectuality… but it has been the source of much mischief in the last 100 years. Think of Marxism, for example, with its hordes of genocidal disciples convinced they were leading humanity into the future.

Also, this quote exemplifies a hilarious theme in Nietzsche’s thought: he’s a real believer in progress! This from the guy who sees himself as a provocative Loki, running around questioning everything, kicking out the legs from the sanctified beliefs of his day by means of radical skepticism! In the passage I quoted from Section 1 he even goes so far as to question whether truth is valuable. Yet he believes it’s possible to anticipate the future’s major beliefs. (Or perhaps he saw himself as creating those beliefs.) The guy who sees himself as a sort of epater le bourgeois crusader, attacking with glee the cherished beliefs of his day as the horrified gentility look on— that guy couldn’t even see through the 19th century belief in Progress! My God, that is funny! That. Is. Hilarious.

N’s belief in progress is in fact a major theme of all his writing, manifest in his constant talk about new philosophers coming up. E.g. the end of Section 2: “One must await the advent of a new order of philosophers, such as will have other tastes and inclinations, the reverse of those hitherto prevalent—philosophers of the dangerous ‘maybe’ in every sense of the term. And to speak in all seriousness: I see such new philosophers beginning to appear.”

6. Nietzsche as Actual Prophet

Nietzsche, writing in the 1880s, looks forward to the twentieth century:

From Section 251:

I have never yet met a German who was favorably inclined to the Jews; and however decided the repudiation of actual anti-Semitism may be on the part of all prudent and political men, this prudence and policy is not perhaps directed against the nature of the sentiment itself, but only against its dangerous excess… That Germany has amply enough Jews, that the German stomach, the German blood, has difficulty (and will long have difficulty) in digesting even this quantum of “Jew” …is the unmistakable declaration and language of a general instinct, to which one must listen… “Let no more Jews come in!” …thus commands the instinct of a people…

A thinker who has the future of Europe at heart, in all his perspectives concerning the future, will figure the Jews, as the Russians, as above all the surest and likeliest factors in the great play and battle of forces.

Well! After World War II and the Cold War, that seems pretty damn prescient!

From Section 208:

I do not say this as one who desires it, in my heart I should rather prefer the contrary—I mean such an increase in the threatening attitude of Russia, that Europe would have to make up its mind to become equally threatening—namely, to acquire one will, by means of a new caste to rule over the Continent, a persistent, dreadful will of its own, that can set its aims thousands of years ahead; so that the long spun-out comedy of its petty-statism, and its dynastic as well as its democratic many-willed-ness, might finally be brought to a close. The time for petty politics is past; the next century will bring the struggle for the dominion of the world—the compulsion to large-scale politics.

This passage prefigures the Cold War and the European Union project!

One could also do a section on “Red Pill Nietzsche” or “Nietzsche on Women” or something, but that topic deserves its own blog post.

This is the Title of My 300th Post

(For more on self-referentiality, click here.)

It’s a momentous occasion, and it calls for something special. So I’m going to “take down the barriers” and let people see the real me, the sensitive Neuropoison that you always knew was in there somewhere. Here’s a little ditty I wrote, inspired by an old song from like medeival times or whatever. (The meadeiaval period is defined as the period so long ago that no one knows, or cares, how to spell “miedeivael” any more.)

Are you going to Scarborough Fair?
Parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme.
Remember Mita Whonhoo lives there.
She once was a true love of mine.

Tell her to make me a sandwich right now.
Parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme.
And if she delays, say, “Do it, you cow!”
Then she’ll start making that sandwich of mine.

Tell her to make it with sourdough bread.
Parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme.
And then when I’m done, she’s to give me some head.
Then she’ll be a true love of mine.

Tell her to lube up her asshole for me.
Parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme.
I’ll assfuck her hard, and I’ll do it for free.
Then she’ll be a true love of mine.

Then when we’re through she’s to fetch me a beer.
Parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme.
Then I’ll fuck her so hard that the neighbors will hear.
Then she’ll be a true love of mine.

Damn, I’m sensitive. Sometimes I’m so sensitive I almost make myself cry. I like taking long walks on the beach too. At sunset. It’s so good to be an enlightened, sensitive, twenty-first century man.

The Recent Moves Against President Trump

Probing the White House’s Passive and Active Defenses

In late May a mob (“protesters”) tried to storm the White House. Best guess: This was not a spontaneous demonstration that just happened to occur. It is the organized Left, an arm of the Deep State, trying to kill President Trump. I don’t mean the Deep State hoped the mob would kill the President: I mean the Deep State had assassins in the mob who were tasked with killing the President while using the mob as cover. This kind of operation it fits their M.O. and their desperation.

But no doubt that wasn’t their realistic goal. If they couldn’t accomplish that, and they had good reason to think they couldn’t, their secondary and more realistic goal was to probe the White House defenses. Now they know something about how White House security will respond to this kind of threat.

On the other hand, now White House security is on alert for this sort of operation, so this may be worse than useless, all things considered, from the enemy’s point of view. Of course the White House can’t maintain a state of high alert forever, but the threat assessment and preparation are now better: The President’s security knows this is a plausible attack and of course have already started drafting plans for dealing with it.

As the civil war accelerates and the stakes climb higher, why doesn’t the left just stop? I’ve been thinking about the left for decades and I still can’t see it. Why not just… give up and do something else? Really, just take up a new hobby. Like fishing. Sure, they’re holiness spiraling, but why not just exit politics and quietly enjoy your ill-gotten bribe money from all those years in Congress, reasonably secure in your gated community?

Of course, they’re soul-swallowingly power-hungry and they think they can operate in secrecy, so one might ask, Why not? They can keep trying forever, and at best they’ll succeed and at worst they’ll fail but will not be caught or punished. Right? Yet the prospect of four more years of Trump plainly has them terrified out of their skins. I’m old enough to recall Reagan Derangement Syndrome, and that was nothing compared to this. I think it has to do with the political power structure that gives them their current immunity to prosecution. If enough Deep State corruption comes to light, and if enough judges are Trump appointees, the bullet-proof status they currently have will be gone. This is the prospect that has them terrified, and therefore enraged.

Example: there are cameras everywhere now, but for the moment the bad guys can order local law enforcement, e.g., to keep their hands off camera footage. This became almost explicit after Seth Rich was murdered on a Washington D.C. street, and… no video? They might as well have issued a press release saying, “We control law enforcement and can order them to ignore camera footage.”

Could you or I make a run at the White House, or kill a man on a Washington D.C. street, and get away with it? It sure as hell wouldn’t be easy. It would be hard to get away from the surveillance in any city these days, but Washington? Near the White House? The cameras in that area must be as thick as flies.

The Left’s Propaganda Strategy

Surveying the news coverage of this and other recent events reveals the enemies’ propaganda strategy. Yes, they do have one, to an extent.

The plan is to get him with a Xanatos Gambit: They’ll say Trump is weak and falling if he doesn’t use the military to control rioters, and they’ll say he’s a “fascist dictator” if he does.

When Trump floated the possibility of using the National Guard to stop people from burning buildings down in Minneapolis, the odious Kamala Harris tweeted that that would be “the act of a dictator.” When Trump doesn’t do such things they say things like “Trump’s regime is falling.” (“Regime,” cripes. As if we’ve forgotten that he’s the legitimately elected President.) “Trump Shrinks Back,” the increasingly retarded New York Times drooled in a recent headline.

A related strategy is to address themselves more or less directly to the guys with guns and suggest that they physically remove Trump or actually kill him. A year or two ago, the Times ran a story in which one of President Trump’s security guards shoots him dead. It still infuriates me that the editors of the NYT stayed out of jail for such an overt threat against the President. It’s that lefty immunity again.

And in the last day or two Senile Joe Biden (remember him?) retained his ability to speak long enough to say that Trump plans to commit electoral fraud (leftist projection alert) and to suggest that the military quickly “escort” Trump out of the White House after that.

I noted in a recent post that it can be hard to tell boldness from desperation. In this case it’s desperation. Their electoral chances were dim even before the “lefties burning down cities” shitshow. Now even with electoral fraud helping them out, they’re estimating their own chances as very low indeed. This is great for us good guys, but remember, the left are now cornered animals. Until we beat them, they’re going to be very dangerous.

Unstable Dynamics

ReservoirDogs
Is this situation game-theoretically stable?

I’ve gotten sucked back into reading the comments at Jim’s blog. It’s hard to resist since it’s the only community that uses evo psych, game theory, and holiness spirals as standard parts of their analytical toolkit.

Today, a commenter said something really out there:

Color Revolution

Some of you guys think we’ll just be teleported instantly from brick-throwing commies and shoe-stealing apes to an ancap paradise of right-wing militias… Even if that’s the endgame – and there’s no guarantee that it is – you’ll have a transitional period that lasts years, maybe decades… In between the inept police departments of today controlled by clown-world genuflecting city officials and the well-regulated militias of the idealist future, you’re apt to get 20 or 50 years of the Red Guard and Khmer Rouge.

20 to 50 years? What the hell!? Uh, no! Given something like the Khmer Rouge, normality is gone instantly and we’re at full-scale, no-one-denies-it civil war.

The current situation is incredibly unstable. It cannot last, for all kinds of reasons, for one thing because the left is desperate, for another thing because they can’t control their thugs, and principally because of the tactical advantage of the first strike.

Trump knows that he either beats them or he gets imprisoned and Epsteined. He can’t back down, not if he wants to live.

And the left won’t back down; that’s not part of the genetically-hard-wired leftist personality profile.

Not to mention the fact that the left’s plan to genocide the Europe-descended population is becoming more explicit all the time: Cf. the graffiti written by rioters, “Kill all white people.” The media isn’t reporting this, but it leaks out anyway. More and more white normies are coming to realize what the left has planned for them.

Normality, meaning politics by something other than widespread violence, is not even going to last 2 years. It would not surprise me to learn that two hours from now, something seismic happens, for good or ill. E.g., the bad guys seizing an Air Force bomber and dropping a bunker buster on the White House, or Trump rounding up the leftist half of the Supreme Court and putting them incommunicado in a holding cell somewhere.

Even low-level, “background noise” civil war is untenable now; these things tend to accelerate.

So let me reiterate my very first post on this blog, from 2016, which was simply a quote from Bertolt Brecht that leapt to mind as I looked at the storm clouds that even then were visible on the horizon:

“Because things are the way they are, they cannot stay the way they are.”

Civil war: How we got here in 48 words

This is something I wrote a couple of weeks ago, before the Second Civil war had started. 48 words on how we got here:


1. The good guys will probably win if there’s an all-out civil war,

but

2. For that very reason the less insane bad guys, who know point 1, will try to prevent a civil war,

but

3. They can’t prevent a civil war because they’re caught up in a holiness spiral.

The Second Civil War has started

I’m calling it. Obviously the Second American Civil War started when the Deep State manufactured evidence to try to undo the Presidential election of 2016. However, some people keep talking about “when the civil war starts,” as if that’s still in the future.

Well, if you had any doubts, try this: Yesterday a member of the military command structure tried to order the National Guard out of D.C. in the face of danger from a violent mob. The blatantly obvious reason: To leave the President unprotected so that leftist assassins could kill him.

Barring that, so that the President would have to flee D.C., thus starting a “Trump’s regime is falling!” narrative.

That plan failed because it turns out the National Guard obeys the Commander in Chief, not someone below him.

As I was quite sure would happen, but still: Thank God.

But that doesn’t change the fact that they tried.

Anyone who now denies that the U.S. is in civil war is a loon.


BTW, I haven’t been posting the last few days not because there’s nothing to post about, obviously, but because every time I draft a post, it’s made obsolete by new events before I can freakin’ post it. The situation is changing so fast.

As Jim says: It happens slowly, then suddenly.

Random notes on all this, some important, some less so, but I want to get some thoughts down before the next big development hits:

(1) On Antifa strategy and tactics: https://themusingsofthebigredcar.com/antifa-strategy-and-tactics/

(2) LOL, AWESOME: https://twitter.com/SteveSkojec/status/1267887483989004288

Apparently some dude disguises himself as an Antifa type, then puts MAGA bumper stickers on actual Antifa thugs’ cars and their cars get vandalized as a result. If it’s not true, it’s a great idea.

(3) Imposter tries to pass himself off as a National Guard soldier. https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2020/06/02/report-lapd-arrests-man-armed-to-the-teeth-in-national-guard-uniform/
(As noted at the end of the article, the photo is not the guy who was arrested, who is one Gregory Wong.)

One guess is that this is part of a plan to create a false flag shooting of a “protester” by a purported National Guard soldier.

(4) May 2020 riots: Rioters attack the CNN headquarters in Atlanta.

LEFTISTS, YOU CANNOT CONTROL THE DEMONS YOU SUMMON.

Just accept that and suck it up.

And in Raleigh they destroy the offices of a local newspaper.

Whining newspaper employee: “I’m devastated. We are a progressive newspaper. Last night I was inside when the first brick was thrown” Awwww. Have fun eating the consequences of the hate mobs you leftists stir up. Also, maybe it’s time to let go of the bizarre delusion that if you just virtue signal hard enough, they won’t attack you. This is moronic. Did you really think that the rioters would pause before your offices, put down their bricks and matches, pull out their phones, Google your paper, see that you’re “progressive,” and leave you alone? OMG, you did think that, didn’t you? LOL.

The comments there are great, BTW; veritably 100% are saying, Enjoy your chickens coming home to roost. TONS of great comments. My current favorite: ‘I never thought leopards would eat MY face,’ sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People’s Faces Party.

(5) Then the AFL-CIO building in D.C.:

VIDEOS: AFL-CIO Building in Washington DC Ransacked and Set on Fire

As is noted at that article, “The International Union Of Police Associations is an affiliate union,” but I imagine the rioters don’t know that. I didn’t. Also noted in the article by a witness:

Handful of people breaking glass at the AFL-CIO, some have run inside to continue beeaking [sic] things, as others in the crowd react:

“Aw, man, not the union!”
“No, stop! Unions are good!”

(6) This is hilarious. Pussy wimp coward gives thumbs up to rioters through his window, gets a rock thrown through it. Shouts “We’re on your side!” out the window, gets another rock thrown through it.

For the million bakijillionth time: APPEASING THE LEFT DOES NOT WORK.

(7) The broader, “normal” left is in a position where they must either embrace or disavow the rioters. They don’t want to embrace them because that will reduce their already-dim chances of winning in November. They don’t want to disavow them because they’re the left, and that’s just not what they do. Leftists never criticize other leftists, at least not ones more radical then themselves. Pas d’ennemis à gauche.

So they’re doing what leftists always do: Looking for a way to have their cake and eat it too. In this case that takes of form of saying, “It’s really all just white supremacists!” LOL. That way they can say “The rioters are bad” without having to disavow leftism or admit that it’s possible for leftists to ever be the bad guys or to Go Too Far, etc. Of course it’s retarded. No one is going to buy that this is “white supremacists” except people who were already going to vote left in November anyway. And probably not most of them. Everyone knows this is Antifa and other left-affiliated groups.

They are also shooting themselves in the foot, because you can’t say the rioters are justified, and also say they’re bad guys. Indeed, in the left-wing world view “white supremacists” are the worst of all possible bad guys. Watching them trying to argue “This is blacks taking righteous vengeance for 400 years of white supremacism” AND “This is a bunch of white supremacists” SIMULTANEOUSLY is hilarious.

(8) Media Falsely Claimed Violent Riots Were Peaceful And That Tear Gas Was Used Against Rioters
https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/02/media-falsely-claimed-violent-riots-were-peaceful-and-that-tear-gas-was-used-against-rioters/

They were not peaceful; that’s an outright lie. They were throwing bricks, frozen water bottles, etc. at police and trying to seize their weapons!

And there was no tear gas, just smoke bombs (which do not contain chemical irritants).

(It’s also risible to listen to them say, “Trump cleared people, including media, out of Lafayette Park” and “Trump’s walk through Lafayette Park was a photo op stunt.” Let’s shorten that: “Trump cleared the media away from his photo op.” Heh. I know lefties don’t care whether their rhetoric is internally consistent, but come on!)

(9) Note on the enemy’s mental state: The left is looking either bold or desperate the last couple of days. Not that it matters since our ability to win this civil war depends mostly on factors other than the enemy’s fantasies of omnipotence/terror of just punishment. But I find it interesting that desperation and boldness look the same. Both can be summed up by the thought, “I can’t really lose by trying.” If you’re bold the sense of it is, “I’m bullet-proof!” If you’re desperate the sense of it is, “I’ve got nothing to lose anyway, so why not.”

In this case I actually think it’s both: The enemy is emboldened by the fact that they can commit the most outrageous crimes, like a treasonous attempt to undo the election of 2016, without suffering any punishment… yet. But it’s also desperation because they know that if Trump consolidates power with another four years, that immunity won’t last.

Furthermore, the more judges he appoints, the harder it will be for the enemy in the future to carry out an unconstitutional, anti-democratic coup under color of law. They’ve spent too long pushing the notion that “law” means “what some judge says.” Ginsberg can’t last forever, and a firm majority of honest judges on the Supreme Court will make it impossible to carry out a coup say three years from now, with the camouflage of a Supreme Court blessing that it’s all actually legal.

(10) Jesse Kelly: https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1268643969258393602

You get there by playing the long game.

That’s how they [the left] got us. A thousand tiny wins and a thousand Republican concessions cause “That’s not the hill to die on.”

Look around you. The hills are gone.