Are reeducation camps next?

Via email from Chet:

CNN: Trump Is Leader Of “Destructive Cult”; Using “Mind Control” On Americans

Stelter and guest say Trump supporters need ‘deprogramming’

The pair then remarkably suggested that Trump supporters need to be ‘deprogrammed’ by breaking them out of their ‘bubbles’.

Could there be a better example of the pot calling the kettle black?

The real cult is happening at CNN, where for four years talking heads and presenters have completely obsessed themselves with opposing anything Trump says or does, as well as a plethora of things he doesn’t say or do.

63 million Americans are definitely not part of a mind controlled cult. However, a few thousand CNN viewers certainly seem to be.

You knew there had to a reason why they don’t want you to have firearms. It makes it more difficult to herd you into the reeducation camps.

Quote of the day—Mike Elgan

An increasing number of societal “privileges” related to transportation, accommodations, communications, and the rates we pay for services (like insurance) are either controlled by technology companies or affected by how we use technology services. And Silicon Valley’s rules for being allowed to use their services are getting stricter.

If current trends hold, it’s possible that in the future a majority of misdemeanors and even some felonies will be punished not by Washington, D.C., but by Silicon Valley. It’s a slippery slope away from democracy and toward corporatocracy.

In other words, in the future, law enforcement may be determined less by the Constitution and legal code, and more by end-user license agreements.

Mike Elgan
August 6, 2019
Uh-oh: Silicon Valley is building a Chinese-style social credit system
[Via email from Chet.

I had a incident with the Boomershoot website and Google that lasted weeks (they claimed it was a phishing website) before I finally got them to stop showing a red screen when people visited using Chrome. The security certificate (https) is still suspended because of this and I need to get that fixed soon. It cost them virtually nothing to do that and it cost me many hours and who knows how much loss of traffic and reputation.

As further evidence of this line of thinking, people have made suggestions that banks should cut off credit card processing and other financial services from stores that sell certain types (as a prelude to all types) of firearms:

…assault weapons would be eliminated from virtually every firearms store in America because otherwise the sellers would be cut off from the credit card system.

Of course PayPal, Square, Stripe and Apple Pay already completely ban the sale of firearms via their services.

I’m not sure what the proper response to this sort of thing is. In principle, I’m against government telling how to run their businesses. Let the free market decide. But sometimes the outcome doesn’t seem just. Restaurants, apartment owners, and hotels refusing to do business with people with black skin is one such example. The free market response seemed inadequate to remedy the problem.

I’m in the process of moving to a different credit card processor for Boomershoot even though PayPal was much easier and cheaper. But even with many people reducing or ceasing their use of PayPal because of their anti-gun policies it doesn’t appear to be suffering any.

It’s wasn’t exactly a legal restrictions so it’s tempting to say this type of thing is an appropriate response:

Top Louisiana officials have blocked two large bank corporations from participating in a road financing plan due to their gun control regulations.

Perhaps. But it hasn’t seemed to been effective, it is a form of government telling a business how they should operate, and the banks could probably easily retaliate with greater effect against those states.

What would seem to me to be the best approach is for the corporate officers to be prosecuted via 18 UCS 241. It’s not telling them how to do business. It’s prosecution for attempting to deny people their specific enumerated rights. Yes, it’s walking a very narrow, perhaps imaginary, line. It wouldn’t take very long for banks to revise their business practices if a few banks lost all of their upper management to life sentences in prison.

That’s not going to happen in the next few years so what should be done in the mean time? Is there anything more we can do than attempt boycotts and document their crimes?—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tayacan

In order to obtain the maximum results from psychological operations in guerilla warfare, each combatant must be highly motivated to engage in propaganda face to face, to the same degree that he is motivated to fight.

Tayacan
1984
Sanitized Copy of CIA’s Psychological Operations in Guerilla Warfare
[Confrontation is what the political left does. If we are to win we must do the same.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeffrey Folks

At its heart, liberalism is a gnostic religion, and the essence of that religion is the believer’s faith that he possesses the means of changing the world for the better. The belief that the world must be changed requires there to be a mass of individuals whose lives are in need of change. Following this logic, it is the liberal, not those deplorables in need of change, who knows what must be changed. For liberals, there must be a mass of people in need of this knowledge for life to make sense.

Jeffrey Folks
February 24, 2018
Leftists versus the People
[Substitute “leftist” for “liberal” and “socialism/communism” for “liberalism” of course.

It’s a reasonable hypothesis that would appear, in the general case, to fit the available data. If true, we must conclude they despise the very concept of individual rights and respond appropriately.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Robert A. Heinlein

The police of a state should never be stronger or better armed than the citizenry. An armed citizenry, willing to fight, is the foundation of civil freedom.

Robert A Heinlein
1942
Beyond this Horizon
[This is the same character in the same book which made this famous quote.

Also, from here:
the-police-of-a-state-should-never-be-stronger-or-better-armed-than-the-citizenry

the-police-of-a-state-should-never-be-stronger-or-better-armed-than-the-citizenry1

This should be intuitively obvious to the most casual observer of the 20th Century. But somehow many people have not done much observing and/or have no interest in civil freedom.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Brandon Steele

If you’ve taken away that person’s ability to protect themselves, then it’s incumbent on you to protect them.

W.Va. Del. Brandon Steele, (R) 29th
October 14, 2019
W.Va. delegate seeks to hold ‘no-gun zones’ legally liable for shooting injuries
[H/T Glenn Reynolds.

The best defense is a good offense. This would appear to be a good offensive play against the anti-gun people.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ed Driscoll

The constantly shifting Orwellian language codes are important, because the insider-lingo allows leftists to feel a sense of smug superiority to their fellow man. Or as Jeffrey Folks wrote at the American Thinker last year, “For liberals, the distinction between the ‘dumb masses’ and their enlightened selves renders life meaningful.  Disdain for ordinary folks is not just an ancillary trait of liberalism.  It is fundamental to the its nature.”

Ed Driscoll
November 10, 2019
TESTING THE LIMITS OF THE NEWSPEAK DICTIONARY
[This reminds me of the attitude of the Nazis toward the “inferior races”. See also what I wrote about the Communist Manifesto. The most important part in this context is:

The Communist Manifesto tells its readers that supporters of Communism are the intelligent people. They deserve, are destined to, and the good of all human kind depends on them, being in charge. That they “understand” the benefits of Communism to the bafflement of others is probably proof to them that they are the intellectual superiors of those that think Communism is, at best, prone to abuse.

The political left enables people to feel superior to others. They are told they are more “enlightened”, more “tolerant”, and just better people. If their “inferiors” adapt beliefs and behaviors which close the gap the left must find a new basis to feel superior. It is fundamental to their nature.

Like a spoiled child we must set firm limits and enforce them. The alternative is to climb aboard the crazy train on its way to a special version of hell.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Chad Prather

Anytime someone talks about taking away your ability to defend yourself you’re in danger.

Chad Prather
November 11, 2019
Chad Prather: ‘Anytime someone talks about taking away your ability to defend yourself, you are in danger.’
[And, as frequently pointed out by pkoning:

Never forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anyone has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn’t let him do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians.

Alexander Hope
In the novel “Hope” by Neil Smith and Aaron Zelman.

And there are a lot of people talking about taking away our ability, and even right, to defend ourselves.

Respond appropriately.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

It is beyond comprehension—ambitious candidates of an entire party—are campaigning on things the Constitution bans, and getting cheering support.

I certainly don’t advocate violence. On the other hand, like my armed countrymen, I vigorously support self defense and am prepared to act if desperate immediate proximate criminal trouble were to arise, God forbid. I’ve been through intensive training, classes, reading, for decades. I’ve written ten books on the subject—so far.

What I haven’t done is consider the dire threat politicians present to the nation, when they stoke the flames of revolution by doing precisely what the British did that got us there those many years ago. They have announced they’re coming for our guns. It is not subtle. It is not limited. It is not allowed.

Alan Korwin
November 10, 2019
THEY’VE GONE TOO FAR
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ben Rhodes @brhodes

It’d be nice if one left of center billionaire recognized the glaring need for investments in progressive media platforms to counter the Fox-Sinclair-Breitbart-right wing propaganda machine.

Ben Rhodes @brhodes
Tweeted on November 7, 2019
[Delusions are often functional, but so are lies. Rhodes was part of the President Obama administration and knows how the “progressive media platforms” dominated and covered for their misdeeds.

Lies are an extremely strong indicator of evil intent. Respond accordingly.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Elizabeth Warren @ewarren

Thank you, @BlackWomxnFor! Black trans and cis women, gender-nonconforming, and nonbinary people are the backbone of our democracy and I don’t take this endorsement lightly. I’m committed to fighting alongside you for the big, structural change our country needs.

Elizabeth Warren @ewarren
Tweeted on November 7, 2019
[I wonder what color the sky is in her universe.

We have long had hints she has mental problems. She once had the delusion she was of native American heritage.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Kathy Zhu @PoliticalKathy

The only reason why the government would want to disarm you after 243 years is because they intend to do something that you would shoot them for.

Kathy Zhu @PoliticalKathy
Tweeted on November 7, 2019
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—bakerjrae

Dear Politicians,

We are not buying all these guns just to give them up.

image

bakerjrae
T-shirt design
[We live in interesting times.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Joy Behar

They should not tell everything they’re going to do. If you’re going to take people’s guns away, wait until you get elected — then take the guns away. Don’t tell them ahead of time.

Joy Behar
November 4, 2019
Joy Behar: Don’t tell Americans before you take their guns
[Behar was discussing failed 2020 presidential hopeful Beto O’Rourke.

Good advice. A little too late. But good advice.

But then, it appears that these days if a candidate has a ‘D’ after them name gun confiscation is their game plan so one should just automatically assume the worst regardless of how public they make their gun confiscation plans.—Joe]

Quote of the day—NitramLand @NitramLand

We are taking your guns. Period. The tide is turning rapidly. The NRA is toast. As soon as trump is gone, guns are gone.

NitramLand @NitramLand
Tweeted on October 27, 2019
[Who’s “we”?

And as if the NRA and President Trump were protecting gun owners from him and others like him. It’s more like he and his unindicted ideological coconspirators are being being protected from us by the presence of the NRA and a president who gives lip service to the 2nd Amendment.

Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Beto O’Rourke

My service to the country will not be as a candidate or as the nominee. Acknowledging this now is in the best interests of those in the campaign; it is in the best interests of this party as we seek to unify around a nominee; and it is in the best interests of the country.

Beto O’Rourke
November 1, 2019
Gun control advocate Beto O’Rourke drops out of US presidential race
[Certainly it’s in the best interests of the country if he never sees political power again. I would prefer that he be given a fair trial, convicted, then sentenced to hard labor. But this is good enough for now.

Although, I will kind of miss the opportunity to collect more “No one wants to take your guns” quotes.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Joseph G.S. Greenlee

The necessity for this Court to clarify the role of history in defining the right is illuminated by so many outcomes depending on whether the reviewing court considers history. Disregarding history and merely interest-balancing Second Amendment rights has allowed the Second Amendment to be singled out for special—and specially unfavorable—treatment. Many courts have boldly admitted doing so, offering justifications that this Court has previously rejected. Until this Court reinforces its precedents, lower courts will continue to treat the right to bear arms as a second class right.

Joseph G.S. Greenlee
Counsel of Record
Firearms Policy Coalition
October 30, 2019
BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, CALIFORNIA GUN RIGHTS FOUNDATION, MADISON SOCIETY FOUNDATION, AND SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS
[This is an Amicus brief before SCOTUS in Brian Kirk Malpasso, et al., Petitioners v. William M. Pallozzi, Superintendent, Maryland Department of State Police

Things are moving in the courts. It’s a good sign that gun owners are choosing the cases to back.

I believe this is our best chance for making progress on the gun owner rights front. I and, through matching funds to 501(c)(3) corporations, my employer donate thousands of dollars every year to FPC and SAF.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Eric Brakey

Extreme liberals like Nancy Pelosi and my opponent, Jared Golden, want to take away your guns.

But I want to give you one!

Eric Brakey
October 23, 2019
Eric Brakey for Congress
[Via email from Paul K. who provided this link.

The gun he is talking about is an AR-15 worth about $1200.

Without reading the fine print one might assume he wishes to use tax money to give away guns. One can constitutionally justify this much more easily than taking them away but that isn’t what he is doing. If you sign up to donate $5.00 or more a month to his campaign he’ll enter you in a drawing for the gun.

Fair enough.

I hope he wins and continues to tweak the noses of the gun grabbers.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Douglas Murray

Kanye had tripped over the same wire as [Peter] Thiel.

At some point minority political grievances transformed into minority political activism. And from there moved into just politics.

Claiming the existence of voting blocks along minority group lines benefits certain politicians looking for voter blocks. And it can benefit professional middlemen who present themselves as speaking for entire community in order to gain their own forms of preferment.

But this, is an exceptionally dangerous juncture. And one that each rights issue in turn has arrived at. It suggests, that you are only a member of a recognized minority group so long as you accept the specific grievances, political grievances, and resulting electoral platforms that other people have worked out for you.

Step outside of these lines and you are not a person with the same characteristics you had before but you have something differently from some prescribed norm. You have the characteristic taken away from you.

So Thiel, is no longer gay once he endorses Trump. Kanye West is no longer black, when he does the same thing.

This suggests black isn’t a skin color or a race. Or at least not these things alone. It suggest that black, like gay, is in fact a political ideology. This presumption goes so deep and is so rarely mentioned that is generally simply assumed.

Douglas Murray
September 17, 2019
The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity

[I am extremely impressed with this book. Murray researches and explains, with great clarity, some of the things I have been calling mass delusion (see also here and here). Amazon describes the book as follows and with the diagnosis of “mass hysteria”. Perhaps that is a more correct phrase than I use:

In his devastating new book The Madness of Crowds, Douglas Murray examines the twenty-first century’s most divisive issues: sexuality, gender, technology and race. He reveals the astonishing new culture wars playing out in our workplaces, universities, schools and homes in the names of social justice, identity politics and intersectionality.

We are living through a postmodern era in which the grand narratives of religion and political ideology have collapsed. In their place have emerged a crusading desire to right perceived wrongs and a weaponization of identity, both accelerated by the new forms of social and news media. Narrow sets of interests now dominate the agenda as society becomes more and more tribal–and, as Murray shows, the casualties are mounting.

Readers of all political persuasions cannot afford to ignore Murray’s masterfully argued and fiercely provocative book, in which he seeks to inject some sense into the discussion around this generation’s most complicated issues. He ends with an impassioned call for free speech, shared common values and sanity in an age of mass hysteria.

Along the same lines as in the QOTD above he reviews Rachel Dolezal’s claim, and agreement by others on the political left, that she is black because she “identifies” as black even though she is of German and Czech heritage.

He describes some of the many ways Google search results demonstrate some sort of bizarre bias. For example, do an image search for “white couples”. About half of the results will be interracial. A image search for “black couples” shows something approaching 100% black couples. Similar results occur when doing image searches for “heterosexual couples” versus “gay couples”. This has to be deliberate. And to what end? It has to some sort of insanity.

He describes the 2017 protest at Evergreen College in far more detail than I had ever heard before. Amazing stuff. Over the top, unbelievably bat-shit crazy stuff. The things the students were saying and doing would have had me drawing my gun and, had I been unable to withdraw from the insanity, shot my way out of it. Those people were, and probably still are, living in an alternate universe that only has peripheral connections to ours.

Via his research and analysis I find myself hopeful that we will soon have a critical mass of people which will stop the tide of near insanity washing over us and some semblance of normality will be restored.

I expect that when such restoration occurs it will take far less time than what it did to get here. Perhaps only months as the delusion fades into obscurity. Also expect people who had once appeared to be in full alignment with the insanity claim, “I always had my doubts and never really believed it.”

It could be said these are the “crazy years” Heinlein spoke of in his books To Sail Beyond the Sunset (although this was in a different timeline than what you and I are traveling through).and in passing in Methuselah’s Children.

I just wish I was reading a science fiction or even psychological thriller novel rather than current news stories. But such books would never be successful. In order to be mostly believable fiction has to make sense.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Cassandra Crifasi

The drum that they beat that if you allow any [gun control] policy to pass then they’re just going to take your guns away. Then when we have candidates that say yes, well I am going to take your guns away, that doesn’t send the right message in my opinion.

Cassandra Crifasi
Deputy director of the Johns Hopkins Center For Gun Policy and Research
October 23, 2019
From Toxic To Staple: Gun Control Is Now Front And Center On The Campaign Trail
[And nowhere in the article does she, or anyone else, say the goal isn’t to take guns away. So, it appears she is saying the “right message” she wants the candidates to send is something other than their true intentions.

Lying, it’s what they do. It’s an essential part of their culture.—Joe]