Divisive privilege politics and intersectional totem poles naturally lead to one-Party totalitarian rule. Only the Party can say who the "good" members of a favored group are, and which are race, class, or gender traitors. The Party decides who sits highest on that totem pole.
As you can see from generations of Democrat race and sex politics, the Party decides who gets to enjoy group privileges, and it can rescind them with a snap of its fingers - THIS person is no longer "really" black, gay, a woman, etc. Absolute savagery is shown to outcasts.
The Party likewise rescinds all class-warfare arguments in favor of its own billionaire friends, mega-corporate partners, and absurdly rich politicians. THEY can enjoy wealth and luxury without criticism - jet-setting socialist Men and Women of the People with multiple mansions.
The more you immerse the public in hateful factional struggles and identity politics, the more certain identities become the ultimate social prize, the more a perpetually angry and confused public will seek the authority provided by the Party and its apparatchiks.
Should you revere this person of a certain race or gender - or should you heap the most vile scorn upon them, with all of Wokedom's elaborate speech codes suspended, so no insult is out of bounds, no level of verbal - or even physical - abuse inappropriate? The Party decides.
Anarchy is ALWAYS the herald of oppression. Those who sow anarchy and lawlessness are never actually seeking a future of chaotic liberty - they're just tearing down the old order, so their own vision can be imposed with brutal force and zero tolerance for dissent.
Every "anarchist" is a would-be dictator with an itchy whip hand. They're especially vicious in closing the avenues of disobedience, mockery, subversion, and provocation that brought THEM to power. They won't allow anyone like themselves to challenge the order THEY establish.
The anarchy of Wokeism and its maze of race, class, and gender privileges is no different. The goal is destroying the old society and its traditions, paving the way for militant, absolute rule. The Party wants an angry, frightened, confused populace that hungers for its guidance.
As soon as a society turns away from the great principles of equality before the law, presumed innocence, and inalienable rights, the stage is set for a totalitarian Party to seize power by nursing grievances and redefining "justice." It is an inevitable devolution.
And such a Party will never tolerate competition for power. One-Party states can preserve the illusion of "democracy" and hold farcical "elections" to burnish their legitimacy, but all of the important issues are decided by the ruling elites in advance, voters be damned.
If the Party defines justice, controls identity, and decides which groups are sacred - and which outcasts are profane - then other parties are an intolerable offense against "justice" by definition. Voters cannot be allowed to make "unjust" choices, seduced by "disinformation."
A single ruling Party provides a safe and carefully controlled playground for "democracy" with very high walls around it, allowing childlike voters to choose this or that apparatchik now and then, but always within the Party's parameters of justice and righteousness.
The people can occasionally be allowed to vote against individual politicians, but never against the Party's ideology or entrenched interests. Keeping the people at each other's throats ensures elections will never be about important issues, only process and personality.
That's how we arrive at a moment when biological reality is supposedly malleable without limit - but political "identity" is assigned by the Party and immutable. By all means, mutilate yourself with drugs and surgery - but you WILL stay in the box where the Party puts you. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The politicization of science to service the climate change industry was a huge canary dropping dead at the entrance to a coal mine the size of Moria.
A straight line can be drawn from that to the insane corruption of medicine to support transgender ideology.
Is there any "science" left that isn't politicized? Is there a single discipline we could rely upon to stick with firmly established facts, allow politically favored theories to be challenged, refuse to conceal inconvenient data, and be scrupulously honest with the public?
Public loss of faith in the authorities is regarded as a major reason the world had so much trouble dealing with the Wuhan coronavirus, and supposedly why authoritarian states had fewer deaths. (Another reason, of course, is that authoritarian states lie about such things.)
I love the new dumbass talking point that the people trying to prod Democrats into securing the border are inhumane. No, the open borders crowd are inhumane. Their system exposes millions of migrants to peril and abuse, and they care nothing for the suffering of U.S. citizens.
If giving a handful of people bus or plane rides to sanctuary cities finally shames our elites into doing their jobs and securing the border, the net gain to human health and safety on both sides of that border will be worthy of a Nobel Prize.
I know you open-borders loons try very, very hard not to think about how people are actually getting across the border, and what the gangsters who run human smuggling operations do to them, but reality doesn't go away because you refuse to believe in it.
It's a pity we have to drop busloads of illegals into the backyards of bubbled elites to get them to give a damn about the border crisis they created - but that's absolutely where we are. Decades of appealing to their sense of duty to the American people sure as hell didn't work.
For decades, the open-borders scam artists have acted like there is zero cost to dismantling border security, therefore anyone who objects to their policies must be an unthinking racist. They could not admit there was any downside to mass migration.
Remember Barack Obama sarcastically mocking people with concerns about border security, making dimwitted jokes about digging moats and filling them with alligators? That whole attitude was based on the idea that criticism of open borders was utterly irrational.
The political problem facing pro-lifers is that many in their movement have deeply sincere beliefs on an issue that most people would rather not think about. Genuine conviction is not easily factored into careful political strategy.
It's not difficult to see that much of the public is uncomfortable with the Left's abortion extremism, especially now that veils are dropping and they can see just how extreme it is - but they're also not comfortable with total abortion bans.
The compromise, medium, or equilibrium position is not hard to discern. It's close to the restrictions present in most of the Western world, with America under Roe a very extreme outlier until now. The "popular consensus" varies a bit from state to state.
I'm old enough to remember Dems telling people to get excited over a couple of dollars "added" to paychecks by raiding Social Security.
What could the American people do with all the billions routinely wasted and stolen by our corrupt, comprehensively inept mega-government?
It's a cliche of leftist daydreamers to imagine how the fortunes of billionaires could be divided among "the people" if they were seized and redistributed. Absurdly, they never account for the titanic amounts that would be siphoned off in "overhead" by the mega-State.
"If only we could seize this billionaire's wealth and divide among the people, everyone in America would get $X!"
Oh, yeah? How much does everybody get after your corrupt and incompetent mega-State grabs over half that wealth right off the top, then takes even more later?
A major imperative for legal reform: hate crime hoaxes MUST be treated as hate crimes themselves, with all attendant prosecution, including steep penalties for media organizations that abandon all editorial standards in the mad dash to promote them.
It's absurd to talk about "restoring harmony" to society or "bringing Americans together" as long as hate crime hoaxes are a zero-cost, zero risk proposition, with riches and fame as rewards, and no downside whatsoever for the perpetrators. We've incentivized endless strife.
And as we can see from this case, there's an entire media industry dedicated to sensationalizing and propagating politically correct hate crimes, without even the slightest pretense of journalistic standards. There will be no integrity until these propaganda mills face real risk.