The news media is lies

I am always amused when people use Russian state TV as evidence to suggest that Western media is some sort of conspiritorial cartel. That would be Russia where alternative views from the state see you put in jail or dissappear.

That's funny because I could have sworn that political correctness where no dissent is possible arose in the west. If you dissent you get fired or are ostracised and ultimately you are imprisoned for "hate speech" if you may have "offended" someone.


Posted from TSR Mobile

You are getting confused between holding the government to account (frequently done in the UK and elsewhere by the press) and inciting hatred or violence. You will be hard pressed to find mainstream media outlets in Russia critisising the government. Those that do risk state sponsored harassment and or violence. There is quite a difference.

We stay political correctness these days but what we are actually taljing about is politeness and good manners.

Holding the government to account and inciting hatred and violence are supposed to be mutually exclusive areas. The execution of cultural Marxism by blurring areas and putting something into the wrong category is part of the tools used by extremists to fool people into prejudicing their enemy.

This starts in the 1960s when an American student criticised a homosexual play. The student is taken to the medical centre and is said to have psychiatric issues. The point was to conflate political opposition with mental illness to get the persons opposition to negate their views.

The next increment is in the workplace or education establishment, to use policies to negate certain opinions e.g. If a person refers to cultural Marxist double standards someone can just point to a policy and say that it's offensive. They don't even have to say who it offends or how it offends.

The ultimate degree of this is a state sanction. This is always done under the guise of offending someone or potentially offending someone. Ken Livingstone is a great example of the state apparatus silencing someone for an "incorrect" opinion.


Posted from TSR Mobile

I'm afraid I have idea what you are taljing about. But on Ken Livingston. He said what he said and came in for a lot of criticism by people who didn't like what he said. However, he wasn't arrested, nor has he been silenced in any way.

Any society or group has an unwritten order of what is deemed acceptable. Mostly this is reflected in our laws but also extends into what one might call common decency.

Have you ever noticed that the common theme for people who fall foul of these unwritten are those who seek to critisise or riducule identifable minoritied of people, usually without justification or grounds to do so.

So I pose this question to you. Why do you feel the need to voice derogatory opinions about parts of the population on the grounds of race, sexuality, gender or any other identifiable trait? Is the right to discriminate on visual or perceived differences really a progressive idea?

Ok let's say you're the head of a happy family, working away then one day you are suddenly suspended, the media is talki ng about you, you are "a Nazi" ahaaaaaaaaa, colleagues won't speak to you, friends won't speak to you. And it's because you made a historical comment... that happened to be true! And you say it's just criticism, you weren't silenced or arrested. It's called the unofficial arrest, witch trial and burning of the new crusaders.

Another example in the 1980s Salmon Rushdie was given police protection after writing The Satanic Verses. 20 years later Nick Griffin was put on trial for saying less than Salmon Rushdie (I consider saying that something is evil to be less of a statement than saying it comes from the Devil). So we went in 20 years from offering police protection to something, then the reverse, trying to jail for it. Does anyone notice anything here?

It's because these types of people have taken over in the pre-Trump world (and trump is the counterbalance to this):



So as soon as we make a comment about these people, they are a "minority" so how dare I. In fact any object of any statement might be said to be a minority and under cultural Marxism therefore the comment invalid. But of course the standard cultural Marxist double standard need to be applied:

- Bankers are greedy - valid under cultural Marxism even though bankers are a minority because it is Marxist aligned.

- The Jews are greedy - Not valid as it's a "protected group" and minority.

- Bible Belt Christians in the US are racist - valid under cultural Marxism even though Christina are a minority because under the theory they are the "traditional oppressors".

- Women like having babies - not valid and a terrible statement under cultural Marxism as it portrays "gender stereotypes" also knows as nature, even though women aren't a minority.

You end by talking about progressive ideas. What is progressive is very relative. The left have hijacked this term. I would call Trump progressive.




Posted from TSR Mobile

But why do you need to say this stuff in the first place? What are you trying to achieve? That is what I don't understand. Why not live and let live rather than prove a point of principal.

Livingstone is a big boy. He knew what he was getting into. You are also naive in suggesting there is some sort of conspiracy when in actual fact it was his political opponents that spied an opportunity to smear him via a sympathetic press.

And stop whittering on about Marx. I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Each outlet has its own agenda, its own spin. If all you read is The Guardian, for example, you're probably only getting half-truths on a lot of things, and maybe even some straight-up lies. But the same goes for the right-wing outlets.

Don't just follow whichever paper or news corporation satisfies your biases. Read several and reach your own conclusions.

I have to say this stuff because in 1919 an organisation called the Frankfurt School was formed with the aim of bringing about cultural Marxism (political correctness), and it came about using social, political and legal enforcement.

This is contrary to my natural rights and everyone else's natural rights to express themselves how they see fit. It is therefore my obligation to take part in bringing on a revolution against this abomination which is in the form of Trump / nationalism / the far-right etc.



Posted from TSR Mobile