Tag Archive for: BLM

Comparing the Bolshevik Revolution with Today’s Antifa and BLM Movement

/in , , , , , , /by

By Wallace Bruschweiler & William Palumbo

Ever since George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police on May 25th, the United States – and to a lesser extent the Western world – has been up in arms, so to speak, allegedly about racial disparities and police brutality.

Now that the public has had nearly four months to observe their activities, we know that the so-called “protest movement” is an utter sham.  More precisely, the “protests” are a cover for something else.  The rampaging duo of Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifascists (Antifa) – the two most identifiable “protest” groups – prove with each passing night that they are purveyors of hate and architects of destruction, murder, general chaos, and political boots on the ground.

Let us examine today’s “protesters” and compare them to other movements in modern history.  In reality, these “protesters” are a fifth column whose only discernible ideology is Marxism-Leninism.

The “Protesters” of the Past

In February 1917, a revolution that had been brewing for decades entered its final stage, as the Bolsheviks (and other allied communist groups) forced the abdication of Russian Tsar Nicholas II.  For the next several years Russia was engulfed in a civil war, pitting the Communists against the “White Russians” (traditionalists who supported the monarchy).  Following Communist victory, it took until 1991 – more than 80 years – for the Soviets to finally rid themselves of the “workers” regime.  In the meantime, Communism killed and enslaved tens of millions worldwide.

Bolshevik Revolution – 1917-1923

  • Belligerents: Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, etc. (Communists/Marxist-Leninists) vs. White Russians.
  • Outcome: Communist victory, followed by collapse of Soviet Union in 1991. White Russians and Jews escaped following defeat to three escape routes: Berlin, Thessaloniki, and Shanghai.
  • Modus Operandi: Civil war, secret police, show trials, murder, GULAGs, exile to Siberia, forced labor, ethnic cleansing, torture, etc.
  • Comments: Following Communist victory, Vladimir Lenin consolidated power to become first leader of the USSR. The Soviet regime reached the height of its domestic terrorism during the Stalin era (d. 1953), when during the Great Purge of 1937 approx. 1 million “undesirables” were eliminated.

Yet the allure of Marxist-Leninism is strong.  Indeed, Russia’s descent into the darkness of dystopian tyranny was not enough to prevent European malcontents from attempting to replicate the Soviet Union in western Europe.  During the 1970s and 80s, Europe was plagued by Marxist-Leninist terrorists intent on revolution.  Each country had their own “distinct” terrorist groups, although authorities later realized that they were not only connected to each other, but actively cooperating strategically.

European Terrorism – late 1960s – early 1990s

  • Belligerents: Italy: Red Brigades, Prima Linea, Potere Operaio ; Germany: Baader-Meinhof (aka Rote Armee Fraktion); France: Action Direct ; Spain: ETA ; UK and Ireland: IRA vs. European nations, and intelligence (BKA, MI5, MI6, SISMI, SISDE, etc.).
  • Outcome: Only after the European nations agreed to tackle the terrorism problem in unison, working across borders, was the bloody insurrection defeated.
  • Modus Operandi: Italy: kneecappings, kidnapping, bombs, etc. ; Germany: kidnaping, hostage taking, airplane rerouting, etc. ; UK and Ireland – killing, bombs, bringing down army helicopter.
  • Funding: The Soviet Union via Bulgaria funded European-based terror groups through local Communist newspapers. Also provided support to Palestinian/Arab terrorism. Muammar Gaddafi supported the IRA and ETA through direct bank-to-bank transfers and with weapons.
  • Comments: Political and intellectual support for the violent terrorist groups came from Communist parties in each country, who were often part of the government and intelligentsia.

Timing is Everything

For those unhappy with society for whatever reason, the Marxist-Leninist ideology is perennially attractive. Today’s violent Left – socialism – animated by Marxist-Leninism, shares many parallels with its predecessor movements.

“Protest Movement” – Present time

  • Belligerents: BLM, Antifa, Democrats, and media vs. the police, the public, Trump and Republicans
  • Outcome: TBD – Nov. 3, 2020 (or later)
  • Modus Operandi: Rioting, looting, assault, destruction of public property and monuments, blocking roads and highways, murder, arson, inflicting blindness
  • Support: Soros: funding “racial justice” organizations ~$220 million, the selection, election and support of local DAs ; Media: selective coverage ; China, and also Iran: known to support BLM.
  • Comments: China is America’s main geopolitical foe, and billionaire George Soros is a primary financier of the Democrat Party and global left. Both view President Trump as a threat to the globalization movement.

For the record, both China and Soros back Joe Biden.

Where do we stand at this point in history?  It’s said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  Ignoring the harsh and brutal reality of Communism in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution, terrorists tried to topple Europe and establish their own “workers’ republic.”  But for the dedication of European governments they would have succeeded.  Today, a modern-day socialist, Marxist-Leninist movement has metastasized throughout the US and its political system – we have to stop them in their tracks!

©All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: BLM Leaders in Their Own Words – PragerU.

PODCAST: Antifa-BLM Violence Intensifies as Biden Fades

/in , , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

JEROME R. CORSI

Jerome R. Corsi, New York Times Best Selling Author, Investigative Journalist and Political Analyst. He worked as a Senior Staff Reporter for WND.com. Since 2004, Dr. Corsi has published over 25 books, seven of which were New York Times Bestsellers, including two #1 New York Times best-sellers. In 2018, NewsMax published Killing the Deep State: The Fight to Save President Trump, a New York Times bestseller. He has written a first-hand account of his experience with the Mueller Office of Special Counsel in his book Silent No More: How I Became a Political Prisoner of Mueller’s ‘Witch Hunt,’. His most recent book, Coup d’État: Exposing Deep State Treason and the Plan to Re-Elect President Trump, and is available also in audiobook and eBook formats.

TOPIC: Antifa-BLM Violence Intensify as Biden Fades

JEFF CROUERE

Jeff Crouere is the host of, “Ringside Politics,” which airs weekdays on WGSO 990-AM in New Orleans. He is a political columnist, the author of America’s Last Chance and provides regular commentaries on the Jeff Crouere YouTube channel and on www.JeffCrouere.com.

TOPIC: Trump Deserved Higher Honor Than Nobel Prize

©Conservative Commandos Radio. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Other Half of the Jacob Blake Conversation

A Retired Deputy Sheriff’s Perspective on the Jacob Blake Shooting

The Democrats’ War on Blacks

/in , , , , , /by

When hearing talk of Democrats’ war on blacks, some may think of the 92 percent of black homicide victims murdered by other blacks mainly in Democrat-run cities. Others may ponder the 300,000 black babies killed yearly in the womb with the approval, sometimes tacit, sometimes more overt, of many white liberals. Yet there’s another front in this war, one more recently opened and far more insidious.

When President Trump early this month ordered an end to mandatory “Critical Race Theory” (CRT) training in the federal bureaucracy — which sometimes involved compelling white male employees to write letters of apology to “marginalized” people — he was, predictably, called a “racist.” But if ending this destructive program is “racism,” well, then whatever racism is, we need more of it.

The CRT “training’s” anti-white nature is obvious. As Heritage Foundation fellow Christopher Rufo wrote last month, reporting on the CRT indoctrination at Sandia National Laboratories, the trainers insisted “that white males must ‘work hard to understand’ their ‘white privilege,’ ‘male privilege,’ and ‘heterosexual privilege.’”

Of course, such privilege exists like unicorns do. But insofar as blacks and other non-whites will believe it does and that they’re (perhaps fatally) disadvantaged, we should ask: How does making people more hopeless and bitter improve their prospects for success?

“Acting White”

It gets far, far worse, however. The trainers also claimed that “rugged individualism,” “a can-do attitude,” “hard work” and “striving towards success” reflected “white male culture,” which they said leads to “lowered quality of life at work and home, reduced life expectancy, unproductive relationships, and high stress.” I guess slacker bums who can’t put food on the table (when they have a table) have no stress.

But this Loser 101 indoctrination isn’t limited to Sandia or even the bowels of federal buildings. It’s in schools (and corporations) as well, where teachers are being told that hard work, planning for the future and punctuality are “white norms.” Try telling that to Asian-descent Americans, who, apparently, are just like white people — only more so.

(One race theory activist, Glenn Singleton, does tell them that, saying that Asian-descent Americans are a “majority” group because of their “white” habits. Honorary white people, I guess.)

Ironically, this is the very attitude black educators lamented, and combated, just a generation ago. Back then it was slacker, criminally inclined black youths (usually driven by jealously, mind you) accusing their higher achieving peers of “acting white.” This was universally recognized as destructive social pressure that militated against the embrace of success-breeding habits. Now the attitude has been lent the respectable veneer of educational theory and the endorsement of academic authorities.

This does violence to an already struggling black underclass. It’s man’s nature to glom on to convenient excuses, and American blacks have long been fed a diet of low expectations for performance and high expectations for copping out. Now pseudo-intellectual social engineers are exacerbating the problem.

Consider race-theory-demeaned punctuality. The saying goes that “80 percent of success is just showing up”; I’ll add that 90 percent of success is showing up on time. Yet as black writer T.J. Holmes lamented in 2014, failure to do so characterizes the black community.

In “It’s Time to Quit Operating on CP [Colored People’s] Time,” Holmes writes that our “challenges with starting or arriving on time are often dismissed with humorous complacency.” “You know how we are,” is what he hears from other blacks. “But this week,” he wrote, “CPT totally stopped being funny to me.”

After relating instances in which he’d been bitten by CPT, he stated, “This hurts to admit, but I often pause when considering doing business with black people or black companies, based on my experiences.”

Now, will activists call this black man a “racist”? They’ll more likely brand him an Uncle Tom. No amount of name-calling alters reality, however, which is this: We can institute all the affirmative action, quotas and set asides we want, but the last 50 years have proven that the wider society’s indulgence cannot compensate for a community’s fundamental virtue deficits. The pork barrel can keep people on a certain plantation, though.

Of course, as we’ll often hear regarding social ills, “It all starts at home.” It’s well known, too, that fatherlessness/family dissolution plagues the black community today, with 72 percent of black children born out of wedlock.

Now the Democrat Left aims to worsen this problem, too, with Black Lives Matter openly stating that one of its goals is to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement.” In this structure’s place, BLM wants blacks to care for each other, as it writes, “collectively.”

A popular race-hustler notion, the aforementioned Glenn Singleton called “collectivism” a black norm while BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors admitted “We are trained Marxists” (collectivists) in a 2015 video. And in pushing socialism on blacks, they are in a way working toward equal outcomes — for the vast majority of the 100 million souls thus far murdered by Marxist governments have been white or Asian.

The notion that blacks somehow require a different economic/moral framework (collectivism) than whites do gets at a truth: The CRT’s largely unrecognized philosophical foundation (philoso-babble, really) would have to be the relativism sweeping our time. The idea is that, as Louis Farrakhan put it, “A White Man’s Heaven Is a Black Man’s Hell” (I believe Hitler expressed a similar sentiment, by the way); that whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, women, etc. all have different “needs.”

The truth, however, is precisely the opposite. As Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson has put it, the black community’s problem is “immorality.” Often called sin, this is a universal plaguing everyone and causes most human woes. Now, the remedy for immorality is, obviously, morality. To be specific, if morality came in a jar, on the ingredients label would be virtues.

These are “good moral habits,” examples being hope, honesty, charity, fortitude, justice, temperance, prudence, chastity, patience, kindness, humility and love. Another virtue is diligence, which relates to punctuality and industriousness. Yet another is forgiveness, which forestalls the bitterness and hatred that can cause a person to focus on tearing society down instead of building himself up.

The point, however, is that virtues aren’t “white” or black, Hispanic or Asian, male or female.

They are divine.

They’re also universals. All people need them to live happy, prosperous, moral lives — there are no exceptions.

Anyone counseling against virtue — as the race activists do — is the worst enemy a people could have. In fact, this is why Rev. Peterson called BLM “worse than the Ku Klux Klan”: It’s doubtful that even the most clever white supremacist would think to, or could, convince blacks that virtue is vice.

But Democrat-enabling, and enabled, organizations — teachers’ unions, BLM, academia, etc. — are doing just that. And why? Well, since poor, dependent people vote Democrat by wide margins, a cynic could think that the Democrats would want to make the poor and dependent class as large as possible.

What’s for sure is that virtuous people rarely support leftists. So if I were an amoral modern Democrat lusting after power, I’d peddle vice, too.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Gab or Parler (preferably) or Twitter, or log on to SelwynDuke.com.

©Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

PODCAST: BLM — Made In China!

/in , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

DR. RICH SWIER

Dr. Rich Swier is a “conservative with a conscience.” Rich is a 23-year Army veteran who retired as a Lieutenant Colonel. He was awarded the Legion of Merit for his years of service. Additionally, he was awarded two Bronze Stars with “V” for Heroism in ground combat, the Presidential Unit Citation, and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry while serving with the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam. Dr Rich now publishes the the “DrRichSwier.com Report”. A daily review of news, issues and commentary!

TOPIC: BLM — Made In China!

ROBERT CHARLES

Robert Charles is also a spokesman for AMAC, as well as former Assistant Secretary of State. He also served in the Reagan and Bush 41 White Houses, and counsel to the U.S. House National Security subcommittee for five years. Additionally, he ran a major portion of the U.S. House Oversight Committee for five years during which time he ran the joint committee in the Waco investigations. He’d be ideal for speaking to what’s next after impeachment and the congressional craziness or handicapping Bernie and the other Dems’ chances. He can also speak to how seniors will have a disproportionally large impact in the 2020 election and what that means.

TOPICS: With Crime Exploding, Democrats Become Anti-Police!

GEORGE PARRY

George Parry Contributor to The American Spectator, The Federalist, and the Philadelphia Inquirer. George is a former federal and state prosecutor. George served as: Special Attorney for the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section, U.S. Department of Justice ; Unit Chief, Investigations Division, Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office ; Special Organized Crime Prosecutor, Blair and Cambria counties (central Pennsylvania) ; Legal Analyst, KYW-TV ; George now has a private trial practice in Philadelphia.

TOPIC:The Politics of Life and Death!

©Conservative Commandos Radio. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

VIDEO: BLM’s Leftist Agenda Has Little to Do With Black Lives

/in , , , , , /by

The The Heritage Foundation posted the following video titled BLM’s Leftist Agenda Has Little to Do With Black Lives on its YouTube channel.

WATCH:

The Heritage Foundation states:

Many good intentioned Americans have updated their social media status and purchased products to show support for #BlackLIvesMatter. But do they really know the radical leanings of the official organization? We take you along to meet the self proclaimed marxist founders of Black Lives Matter and unpack some of their extreme leftist views.

Please follow The Heritage Foundation on YouTube: https://bit.ly/2otKliy … Follow The Heritage Foundation on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/heritagefoun… Follow The Heritage Foundation on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Heritage … Follow The Heritage Foundation on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/heritagefou…

©All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEETS:

PODCAST: Far Left Similar to Communist Movement, Former Student Radical Says

/in , , , , , , /by

Disconcerting similarities exist between the modern progressive left and the communist movement. Take it from someone who knows.

Tony Salinski, once a student radical and now an expert on communist ideology, identified as a communist for several years during the Vietnam War era. Salinski joins the podcast to explain why he was drawn to communism as a youth and to identify similarities between communism and socialism.

Also on today’s show, we read your letters to the editor and share a good news story about a school principal who is using his skill as a barber to mentor his students.

Listen to the podcast below or read the lightly edited transcript.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? Learn more now >>

“The Daily Signal Podcast” is available on Ricochet, Apple Podcasts, Pippa, Google Play, and Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

Virginia Allen: I am joined by professor Tony Salinski, a former student radical in the communist movement. Tony, thank you so much for being here today.

Tony Salinski: You’re welcome. Thank you for having me.

Allen: The topic of communism and socialism is certainly getting a lot of attention in the current political and social climate. And when you were a student, you were a part of the communist movement. Can you just begin by telling us a little bit of your story? How did you come to identify with the communist movement?

Salinski: Well, I was actually for the war. This was back at the time of the Vietnam War. And I started out for the war and, like everybody, debating whether they wanted to enlist or wait until they got they got called, drafted.

And during that time, [President] Lyndon Johnson did a TV special. They call it a special, but he was on TV. He was arguing against the Republicans, who had wanted to get in and get it over with, and get out.

One of the things he said was, “We’re going to stay in there. We’re not going to invade the North. We’re just going to stay in there until we stop them. And it could take 50 years.” I thought to myself, “Fifty years? Fifty years of guys just getting killed to finally just out-kill these guys.” And that started me to think, “This is not for me. I don’t want to do this.”

Push comes to shove later. I was looking into means of getting out legally of the draft and went to a meeting house, where a number of different groups were present. And one of them was a communist group.

I was interviewed briefly by the people sponsoring the event. And they asked me if I would have fought in World War II, and I said, “Well, yeah. Absolutely.” And they said, “OK, that’s not what we’re looking for. We’re looking for people who wouldn’t fight at all.” And they motioned me over to the communists, and I went over and gathered some information.

Later, I just sort of drifted into them. The resistance was going because there was no other resistance. There was no resistance to what the communists were saying anywhere on the media. There was no Rush Limbaugh. And I was a blue-collar kid and didn’t know anything about “Firing Line” or William F. Buckley or anything like that.

So there was no counter to what the communists were putting out about the war in Vietnam. And I got convinced that it was illegal and that it was immoral. And … one thing led to another. …

I was in a rock band at that time. And that was the big draw that drew the communists to me. We were doing pretty well and getting good audience responses around the city of Pittsburgh. And eventually we started doing some shows for them. And one thing led to another and I was involved.

They asked me, probably on three separate occasions, to join the party. And I told him the same thing every time, I said, “Nixon’s got a list, an enemies list, and I don’t want to be on that list. But I can work with you and help you out, as we go here, without being a member of the party itself.”

And we came to that agreement and they stayed with that. And from then on, it was just a matter of just going to the events that they put on and helping them with this and that, and the other thing, and bringing the band.

Allen: I find that interesting. You didn’t join the party, but you were in the movement for a number of years, in the communist movement. What was so appealing about the communist movement to you, that kept you in it, that kept you saying, “I’ll support you all. And I’ll be a part of what you’re doing”?

Salinski: Basically the idea that they were doing something. They were active. They knew what their motives were. They knew that they wanted out of the war. And I agreed with that, at first.

They were organized. They could bring out a crowd like nobody’s business. It was amazing to see how they were able to put a lot of people together, to come out and make their point.

But I was never fully into the idea of destroying the United States of America. That was a problem for me from Day One. And they got around that by saying, “We don’t want to destroy the United States. We simply want to improve it.” And I bought it. I was 19 years old, 18 years old, at the time, and I bought it.

But that was it. Ideologically, I didn’t get really aware ideologically until near the end. And things started to become clearer and clearer and clearer. And I realized that from the very beginning, everything they had said was in one way or another a lie. And I just finally couldn’t stand that.

I kept confronting them, asking them, “What about this? What about that?” And I kept getting variations on the same answer. “You’re just not ready for the whole story yet.” And I, being 19 years old, I knew everything, anyway. I thought, “Well, yeah, I am ready for the whole story. Why don’t you just tell me?” But it just kept going on and on and on like that. And finally, I just dropped away.

Allen: They were almost kind of teasing you along, giving you little bits of information, but never totally upfront and candid, it sounds like, about, really, what ultimately their mission was.

Salinski: Right. And they did that to everyone, except the people who walked up and said, “I want to join the Communist Party USA.” Those people got moved to the head of the line, so to speak, but the rest of us were just drifting in varying degrees of commitment, varying degrees of understanding. And yeah, they sort of reeled us in gradually.

Allen: So fast-forward to today. And what do you know of the communist movement’s activity today? I mean, some of the unrest that we’re seeing in the streets, can we directly link that back to communism?

Salinski: Well, when I got out of the movement, … I didn’t want any parts of any of it. My wife at the time said, “If you’re drafted, are you going to go to Canada?” I said, “No, if I’m drafted, I’m going to go to Vietnam.” OK? I had just gotten sick of the whole thing. And after getting away from it for a little while, … I got into the Democratic Party.

I was … semi-active as a Democrat and paid attention to all the news and everything like that. And I realized, “Wait a minute, these people are the communists on slow motion. They’re active. It’s the same thing. What they want is the same thing. They just don’t want to do it as fast.”

The communists, they were in the process at that time of switching from Leninist tactics in the street, in-your-face revolution, to Gramsci. And the idea of a gradual movement into a revolutionary pattern that wasn’t in your face wasn’t on the street.

… That really put me off because I just wanted to get it over with and get things straightened out, as they said.

But yeah, from the Democratic Party then, I’m moving on and watching these people. And what happened was, … it took a very short time, a year or so, before I just started watching them, watching everything they were doing.

I felt strange because my dad used to always say, “Oh, that’s communist.” I’d say, “Oh, dad, yeah. I know there’s a communist under your bed.” Well, there was, they were everywhere. And whether they call themselves communists or not, they were, in my estimation, communists because the goals were the same. The tactics were a little different, but the goals were the same.

One of the last things that they did that really pushed me away was they come up to us one day on the street. And this had come down from, not an activist, an agent, actually, a KGB agent, who had been identified to me on the streets several times. He was, I guess, code named Andre.

Andre had passed on this information that we were going to completely change our tactics. And I said, “What are we going to do?” “Well, you’re going to stop calling yourselves communists.” I said, “Really? Well, what are we going to call ourselves?” “We’re going to call ourselves liberals, progressives, socialists, anything but communists.”

Allen: Wow.

Salinski: So from that point on, if you identified yourself as a liberal, I just said, “Okay, check one communist. Progressive, check another as communist.” And what I’m seeing today, in my mind, validates that.

Allen: Wow.

Salinski: Well, Antifa is and Black Lives Matter is more a return to Leninist tactics. They’re out in the street, obviously burning things down, and pushing people around, and so on and so forth.

But the main communist movement is behind them and is still chugging along with their idea of … moving the country gradually over the past, what is now 50 years since this all happened. I’m watching it. Never, never stop moving to the left. It’s always moving left.

Allen: So walk us through how exactly the Communist Party does go about enticing people. I mean, how have they essentially infiltrated the left to where we are seeing this kind of radical takeover and this radical progressivism push forward, that is very different from what I think the left used to look like?

Salinski: Well, their motive has been all along to identify areas that certain groups, certain constituencies, and when it gets down to it, certain individuals, like myself, are interested in.

They had a gold mine there during Vietnam because they had a war that nobody wanted to get into. And they used that to pull people in. But whatever it is, housing, jobs, anything that they can name that a group is interested in, they will use, even if they’re counter to each other. …

They’re promising one group this, promising the other group that, and this and that cancel each other out. But as long as those two groups don’t figure that out, they’re drawing people in.

Allen: In your own experience, how open and honest are communists actually about their goals?

Salinski: Depends on where you are in the program. Up at the top, yeah, they’re free and easy with talking about what they want to do, destroying the United States, as we know it. And then ultimately destroying all nations, and all boundaries and borders. But below the top level, it’s just what you’re given to know, what you’re supposed to know, and you move on from there.

But the word “honest” and the word “communist” should never be used together in a sentence because they’re not honest.

Allen: Interesting. You have explained, during previous presentations, that the Communist Party really sees themselves as being at war when they’re spreading their ideology. Can you just explain that a little bit more, what you mean by that?

Salinski: Well, yeah. And this was early on too, I didn’t get this late in the program, this was upfront. “We are at war.” Now, I didn’t tumble to all that that meant, but the phraseology was, “We’re at war. And that means anything goes.”

Marx said that the definition of morality is that which advances the revolution. And I found that to be true with them. That’s what morality is. …

One of the things that really frustrates me, when I’m dealing with people who are not real knowledgeable about this stuff, is that idea that they think we’re playing by the same rules that we’ve always played by.

There’s a Democratic Party, there’s a Republican Party, everybody’s agreed on the fundamental principles of right and wrong, but that’s not where the communists are.

They are at war. They are going to do anything, anything it takes to win. There’s no ground for agreement or crossing the aisle or any of that stuff. It’s just, they’re going to take advantage of every situation that offers itself. And they’re going to use that situation to win. It’s the end justifies the means, in every case.

Allen: Well, I find it fascinating that you say that because I think increasingly in the nation, that’s what we’re seeing. You’ve been through things like cancel culture, that there’s no room for disagreement or difference.

Salinski: Right.

Allen: And we’ve seen, sadly, this real interest among young people in socialism. In your opinion, what separates socialism and communism? Does one naturally kind of deteriorate into the other?

Salinski: Well, I agree with Lenin, the end, the result of all socialism is communism. There are arbitrary demarcations drawn along the historical line, but they’re arbitrary and … the moment they can be pushed aside, the moment they can be disposed with, they’re going to be disposed with.

This is an argument I have with so many people in our own movement, “Oh, well, he’s not really a communist.” No, not yet, but he’s headed there.

There’s a difference between their conception of economics, and communism is an economic system in the end. They believe in what’s called a closed economic system. There’s X amount of dollars, or whatever we want to refer to the resources as, and that’s it. You have to move that around to people in the fairest possible way, ideally, absolute equality.

But capitalism is based on an open economic system. You don’t have enough wealth? Well, go create some. And that’s what we do. … I learned that in college, that was long, long, past the communist phase of my life.

But when I learned that, it became crystal clear to me why some people are drawn to communism or socialism or any ism that says it’s going to share the money. Well, yeah, because there’s only so much, and if you have too much, then I have too little. But that’s not reality. I mean, wealth is always being created.

Allen: You mentioned in college, that was where your capitalist views kind of were cemented. And that’s wonderful, that for you that was your experience. But I do find that sad, that today, we see the exact opposite, that young people go to college and they are somewhat radicalized. They are introduced to socialist and communist ideas. And maybe that capitalist background that they grew up with is kind of lost to the wayside.

What do you think is the responsibility of educators, parents, mentors, to actually be speaking to the younger generation, honestly, about the realities of socialism and communism?

Salinski: Well, I think that their responsibility is to go there and do that and open up that conversation. But at this point, you’re going to lose … Well, even back then, it was the case. But now, it’s even more the case. You’re going to risk losing your sons and daughters because they’re bought into it.

And I should add that I was not educated in capitalism in college. I drew that from the opposite of … Everything they said was bad, I thought, “Well, that sounds pretty good to me. That actually doesn’t sound bad at all.”

So it was not that they were out there promoting capitalism at that time. I just drew that from what they were promoting. Because I had already been there, I had seen the whole communist thing up close, and thought, “Yeah, yeah, yeah. That’s not true. What you’re saying there won’t work out.”

And certain times you could speak that out and say, “Well, my experience is this,” and you’d get support. And other times, you just learn to keep your mouth shut, if you want to get that grade and get out, where you can do some real damage, which I did.

Allen: Yeah.

Salinski: I ended up teaching college, and in my classroom they got the truth. You know when I say they got the truth, they got both sides, they got a fair treatment of communism and a fair treatment of capitalism.

I have to tell you, once it’s laid out like that, I used to finish the course with just a little … Well, other things that they had to do. But one of their tasks at the end of the course was to write me a two-page paper on what they thought of the material in the course, regarding communism and capitalism, and 90% of them plus went for capitalism when they realized what the difference was.

Allen: Well, I think, unfortunately, few college students today have a professor like you that will clearly lay out both sides.

So are there any resources that you would recommend for young people who, they’re in college, they’re facing, essentially, being indoctrinated with these ideas and they just want to hear both sides of the argument. Are there certain books that you would recommend or individuals, maybe, to look up on YouTube?

Salinski: … First of all, the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, they should become familiar with that. And the history behind it, that in itself is quite a task, but they need to do that. But writing’s more directly concerned with it.

What started me off was W. Graham Sumner. I don’t know if you ever heard of Sumner, but he was an anti-socialist back in, I think he died in 1910 or something like that, in 1912. So he was in the Progressive Era and he was noted as an anti-progressive, but he frequently got onto outing socialism and just laid out the differences.

Salinski: Let’s see, [Antonio] Gramsci, or not Gramsci. Well, they should read Gramsci. They should read something of Gramsci because that tells them what they’re hooked up in now. They should read “Rules for Radicals,” if they haven’t already. Which is, again, a Marxist source, but it lays out what they’re being asked to do and why.

Any of the writings from [The Heritage Foundation]. OK? Any of the writings from people like Pat Buchanan, back in the ’90s, especially. There’s a lot of material out there. They have to look it up though.

Allen: Absolutely. How can our listeners follow your work?

Salinski: Through ACAT, mostly. And I do some things around here. I’m doing a speech on the 29th about communism. Well, it was originally in a library, but then this coronavirus came along and shut the library thing down. So they’ve moved it across the alleyway to a church over there.

You could look me up online. I’m trying to think of whether most of my talks are still up there. I know we took a lot of them down, but they have a way of getting back up there. So you could just look up my name and see what comes out in that, but always through ACAT, Anticommunist Action Team. That’s where I’ll be.

Allen: Great. Thank you. So that’s the Anticommunist Action Team.

Salinski: Yeah.

Allen: We’ll be sure to link that in the show notes today. Tony, thank you. We just really appreciate your time and you coming on and talking about your own personal experience, really fascinating.

Salinski: Well, thank you very much for having me.

COLUMN BY

Virginia Allen

Virginia Allen is a news producer for The Daily Signal. She is the co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast and Problematic Women. Send an email to Virginia. Twitter: @Virginia_Allen5

RELATED ARTICLES:

Looking Back: Combating Tyranny, Waste, and Economic Devastation of ‘Green’ Agenda With Free Enterprise

The State of Race in America Today and Yesterday

ICYMI: 10 Examples of Defensive Gun Use Underscore Second Amendment’s True Purpose

A Note for our Readers:

Democratic Socialists say, “America should be more like socialist countries such as Sweden and Denmark.” And millions of young people believe them…

For years, “Democratic Socialists” have been growing a crop of followers that include students and young professionals. America’s future will be in their hands.

How are socialists deluding a whole generation? One of their most effective arguments is that “democratic socialism” is working in Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway. They claim these countries are “proof” that socialism will work for America. But they’re wrong. And it’s easy to explain why.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation just published a new guide that provides three irrefutable facts that debunks these myths. For a limited time, they’re offering it to readers of The Daily Signal for free.

Get your free copy of “Why Democratic Socialists Can’t Legitimately Claim Sweden and Denmark as Success Stories” today and equip yourself with the facts you need to debunk these myths once and for all.

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW »

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Ex-Terrorist Bill Ayers [and Obama Pal] Says Civil War Has Already Started

/in , , , , , /by

Ayers should be rotting in prison. Instead the left has made him a god.

Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama’s first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers’s home.

From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists.
Bill Ayers.
AP

The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama’s first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers’s home.

The CAC’s agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers’s educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism. In the mid-1960s, Mr. Ayers taught at a radical alternative school, and served as a community organizer in Cleveland’s ghetto.

[…]

CAC translated Mr. Ayers’s radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with “external partners,” which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn).

Mr. Obama once conducted “leadership training” seminars with Acorn, and Acorn members also served as volunteers in Mr. Obama’s early campaigns. External partners like the South Shore African Village Collaborative and the Dual Language Exchange focused more on political consciousness, Afrocentricity and bilingualism than traditional education. CAC’s in-house evaluators comprehensively studied the effects of its grants on the test scores of Chicago public-school students. They found no evidence of educational improvement.

CAC also funded programs designed to promote “leadership” among parents. Ostensibly this was to enable parents to advocate on behalf of their children’s education. In practice, it meant funding Mr. Obama’s alma mater, the Developing Communities Project, to recruit parents to its overall political agenda. CAC records show that board member Arnold Weber was concerned that parents “organized” by community groups might be viewed by school principals “as a political threat.” Mr. Obama arranged meetings with the Collaborative to smooth out Mr. Weber’s objections.

 (Read the rest at the WSJ)

Ex-Terrorist Bill Ayers Says Civil War Has Already Started

By Tyler O’Neil Sep 11, 2020 12:03 AM EST

As violent and destructive antifa and Black Lives Matter riots continue to ravage American cities like Portland and Kenosha, a self-described communist who plotted to blow up the U.S. Capitol in the 1970s suggested that America’s second Civil War has already started.“Am I the only one, or do you feel eerily that we’re living in Kansas, 1859, and that tensions are boiling over, but only years later will people say, ‘Yes, the Civil War began there and then?’” Ayers posted on Facebook. He posted the same statement on his website, BillAyers.org.Ayers, who co-founded the Weather Underground in 1969, took part in the bombings of the New York City Police Department headquarters in 1970, the U.S. Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972. Since the FBI used illegal tactics against the Weather Underground and the New Left, the government dropped key charges against the Weather Underground and Bill Ayers.

After his radical career, he settled into academia, where he taught at the University of Illinois. When he retired in 2010, the university denied him emeritus status. The university’s board chair, Christopher G. Kennedy (son of assassinated Senator Robert F. Kennedy), condemned Ayers for dedicating a book “to the man who murdered my father.” Kennedy referred to a 1974 book Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism, which Ayers wrote with other Weather Underground members and which the authors dedicated to manny revolutionaries, including the man who assassinated Robert F. Kennedy. Ayers denied dedicating a book to the assassin and suggested that right-wing bloggers started a rumor to that effect.

As for Ayers’ “eerie” feeling, he was referring to Bleeding Kansas, a lesser-known precursor to the American Civil War.

In the decade leading up to the Civil War, Southern Democrats fought to extend slavery north and west. The Founders had forged a grand bargain to allow the evil institution of slavery while restricting its spread. In 1820, Congress drew a line, saying that any state north of the line would enter the Union as free while states that entered below the line could have slavery. Yet Southerners started defending slavery as a positive good and arguing for “popular sovereignty,” the notion that white landowners in states north of the 1820 line would vote on whether the state would be slave or free. Abraham Lincoln grew to prominence by opposing this notion.

Has the Second American Civil War Already Started?

The South held tremendous sway in the federal government. In 1854, Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, opening up Kansas and Nebraska to “popular sovereignty.” Pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers rushed into Kansas, seeking to tip the balance toward their side. The settlers fought and killed one another in a prelude to the Civil War known as “Bleeding Kansas.”

With the benefit of hindsight, Americans see “Bleeding Kansas” as a precursor to — if not the very first tremors of — the Civil War. In one sense, the Civil War had a “soft opening” in 1854, before the main event in 1861.

Ayers was suggesting that the antifa and Black Lives Matter riots in Portland, Kenosha, Seattle, Chicago, and other cities may be a prelude to a much larger conflict, a full-blown civil war. Others on the Left have suggested something similar.

The Portland antifa ally suspected of shooting a Trump supporter said a civil war was “right around the corner.” Former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta war-gamed the 2020 election and suggested that Joe Biden may cry foul if he loses, starting off a chain reaction resulting in secession and a civil war. Far-left groups recently came together to prepare for a civil war.

Given Ayers’ violent revolutionary history, the fact that he would suggest that a civil war is brewing seems particularly significant. During his academic career, Ayers gained “stature and high esteem” in the field of education. The American Educational Research Association elected him vice president for curriculum studies. Some of the radical Marxism in academia today traces back to his efforts.

Like Abraham Lincoln, Donald Trump represents a long-overdue backlash to a radical Democratic movement seeking to transform America and break the Founders’ compact, the U.S. Constitution. This is not to say that Trump necessarily has the stature of Lincoln — but he does represent the same kind of backlash.

While the Southern Democrats before the Civil War sought to expand the institution of slavery and railroaded the Founders’ grand bargain, leftists today seek to undermine the Constitution and remake America in the name of intersectional “social justice.” Activists demonize Americans who hold conservative views and seek unlimited federal power to champion abortion, same-sex marriage, and transgender identity, to deprive Americans of their Second Amendment rights, and to foist leftist ideas in education in the name of diversity.

Trump champions the Constitution while Democrats actively campaign against it, calling for the abolition of the Electoral College and the Senate in order to push their radical agenda. Perhaps for this reason, even liberals like John Podesta suggest that states will secede and spark a civil war on behalf of Joe Biden. Democrats have used American institutions to push their ideas, but now that a backlash against their radicalism has been building, they no longer want to abide by the terms of the agreement.

The South arguably brought the Civil War on itself, and the antifa and Black Lives Matter riots suggest the Left may do something similar. That makes Bill Ayers’ comment all the more chilling.

Let us pray it does not come to that.

HAVE A TIP WE SHOULD KNOW? YOUR ANONYMITY IS NEVER COMPROMISED. EMAIL TIPS@THEGELLERREPORT.COM

RELATED ARTICLES:

WILDFIRE ARSON: Four Arrested for Arson on the West Coast, One a ‘Regular Attendee’ of Anti-Cop Rallies in Seattle

Navid Afkari: Iran executes young wrestler despite global outcry

Ex-Terrorist Bill Ayers (and Obama Pal) Says Civil War Has Already Started

NFL Ratings Crash over 16% for Woke Season Opener

Joe Biden Appears to Reflect Teleprompter Text During TV Interview

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

How the NBA Can Recover From Declining Ratings: Refuse to Promote BLM Propaganda

/in , , , /by

The National Basketball Association (2.71) and other professional sports organizations like the National Football League (2.00) have forgotten their main duty is to provide fans with entertainment – not cater to radical left-wing groups like Black Lives Matter (2.01). BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors openly admitted the organization is led by “trained Marxists,” and the group’s official website even calls for abolishing the “Western-prescribed nuclear family structure.” The NBA is only alienating their audience when they support this anti-American agenda by prominently featuring players kneeling for the National Anthem and wearing politically-themed jerseys. Fans can’t even expect to relax and watch a scheduled playoff game anymore without the NBA postponing it to show support for social justice initiatives.

The NBA needs to return to devoting airtime to the sport people watch them for, as fans are beginning to notice how the NBA is putting political activism before their audience.

The basketball league is suffering from declining ratings and they’re going to have to try hard to win people back. Since the NBA season restarted, ratings are down 40 percent on the TNT network, 20 percent on ESPN, and 45 percent on ABC. A recent Harris poll found the NBA becoming “too political” is responsible for the drop in ratings. Only 28% of poll respondents said they were choosing not to watch because the games were “Boring without the fans,” and 19% said it was because of the NBA’s ties to China. A stunning 38% of fans admitted the NBA’s focus on politics instead of basketball was their main reason for not watching games as much.

Conservatives and people who aren’t that invested in politics are not watching the NBA to see their groveling endorsement of BLM. The NBA’s loss of viewership should encourage them to listen to the majority of their fans who do not want to see disunifying messages. 2ndVote consumers can make their voices heard by refusing to watch the league and by emailing the NBA directly. Let them know how what you think about mixing politics with sports. Hopefully, this will remind the NBA their job is not to act as a one-sided political platform, but to provide neutral, quality entertainment.

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Trump Campaign Hands Out ‘Peaceful Protester’ Signs To Crowd At North Carolina Rally

/in , , , , /by

President Donald Trump’s campaign handed out “peaceful protester” signs to rally-goers in Winston-Salem, North Carolina Tuesday evening, the campaign confirmed to the Daily Caller.

The president told the crowd that he has “decided to call our rallies peaceful protests,” The Guardian reported Tuesday. In addition to calling the rallies “peaceful protests,” the campaign handed out signs with the phrase.

Trump has been outspoken regarding rioting that has occurred in various parts of the country since the death of George Floyd in May. The president accused Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden of giving “moral aid and comfort to the vandals repeating the monstrous lie that these were peaceful protests” during a press briefing on Aug. 31.

Biden, amid unrest, condemned “violence no matter who it is” during an interview with WGAL News 8 released Sept. 7. He also noted towards the end of August that “protesting brutality is a right and absolutely necessary” but “burning down communities is not protest, it’s needless violence.”

Trump elaborated on his use of the phrase Tuesday and said that it is, in part, because of maximum capacity mandates in North Carolina. Protests have been largely exempt from maximum capacity rules set by each state due to COVID-19.

“Because they have rules in these Democrat-run states that if you campaign you cannot have more than five people,” Trump said according to The Guardian, which noted gatherings in North Carolina have a maximum of 50 people and masks are necessary.

“You can’t go to church, you can’t do anything outside,” Trump continued. “If you are willing to riot, running down the main street, if you want to riot and stand on top of each other’s face and do whatever the hell you want to do, you are allowed to do that because you are considered a peaceful protester.”

COLUMN BY

SHELBY TALCOTT

Media reporter. Christian Datoc contributed to this report.

RELATED TWEETS:

RELATED ARTICLES:

New Narrative: Democrats, Media Team Up To Blame Trump For Riots

HART: Hiden’ Biden Pokes His Head Out Of The Basement

‘Talk About Extortion!’: Greg Gutfeld Blasts Biden Ad Blaming Trump For Violence

$4.5 Million In Grants Will Go To Law Enforcement Mental Health Services, DOJ Says

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Study: America Hit By Roughly 550 Violent Demonstrations In Three Months

/in , , , , , /by

Data gathered in a Thursday study suggested that the U.S. experienced nearly 550 violent demonstrations since May 26, the day after the death of George Floyd.

The vast majority of U.S. states have experienced riots in the past three months with Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Mississippi, West Virginia, Hawaii and Alaska being the only ones unscathed by violence, according to data gathered by The Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED).

There were a total of 7,750 Black Lives Matter-linked demonstrations in the U.S. in 2,440 locations across all 50 states, according to ACLED’s data.

Ninety-three percent of these demonstrations were peaceful, but that indicated that approximately 543 events were violent, according to ACLED’s statistics.

Violent demonstrations have largely been contained to 220 locations with Portland being the hardest hit location, the data show.

There have been 38 incidents where riots damaged or brought down historical statues. Law enforcement deployed non-lethal munitions in 54% of the demonstrations where they were present, ACLED reported. A total of 5% of BLM protests have been met with force from officers, data showed.

ACLED also claimed that 50 incidents across the country in the past three months have featured armed individuals, and BLM protests have been recorded in South America, Africa, Asia and several violent demonstrations have been reported in Europe.

COLUMN BY

JAKE DIMA

Contributor.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘A Gut Punch,’ ‘We Just Feel Abandoned’: Police Union Execs Sound Off About Lack Of Morale That They Say Is Resulting From Politicians

Rioters In Rochester, New York Descend On Restaurant, Cause Patrons To Run Away

Police Suggest Michael Reinoehl Tracked Trump Supporter Before Fatal Shooting

Unfit To Print Episode 68: Pelosi Personifies Liberal Elitism With Salon Visit

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

VIDEO: Meet Joe Biden’s Supporters

/in , , , , /by

©All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

Here’s How Democrats And The Media Have Responded To The Months Of Civil Unrest Following George Floyd’s Death

/in , , , , /by

The United States is engulfed in ongoing civil unrest as major cities across the country have faced protests and riots following the death of George Floyd while in Minneapolis police custody May 25.

The majority of demonstrations have been peaceful but waves of violence and looting have generated mass chaos.

Some Democrats have inflamed and encouraged the riots in many cases with statements either denying the violence or shifting the blame to President Donald Trump and his supporters. Here is a timeline of major riots that have taken place in American cities and how Democrats have responded to them.

May

A Facebook video uploaded May 26 depicted Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin placing his knee onto Floyd’s neck during an encounter that took place one day prior and led to Floyd’s death.

Civil unrest began to grow May 27 as protestors took to the streets of Minneapolis. Democratic Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey requested National Guard support May 28 after violence and looting destroyed parts of the city. A police precinct was set on fire and by mid-June the Twin Cities had seen at least two deaths, 619 arrests and $500 million in damage to 1,500 properties according to the Star Tribune.

Left-wing commentators almost immediately offered their support. Filmmaker Michael Moore called the rioters “good citizens” and said police headquarters “must be demolished” in a tweet May 28.

MSNBC commentator Zerlina Maxwell demanded that the media stop calling the situation a “riot” in a tweet May 29.

Frey said Trump “knows nothing about the strength of Minneapolis” in a statement May 29 after the president slammed the mayor for not controlling the riots. Democratic Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren accused Trump of “calling for violence” in a tweet May 29 after the president said he would deploy the National Guard.

A peaceful demonstration in front of the U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C. turned violent May 30 as rioters gathered at Lafayette Square Park in front of the White House. Several monuments on the National Mall, including the World War II memorial and the Lincoln Memorial, were vandalized May 30 and the historic St. John’s Church was set on fire May 31.

Democratic Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser suggested that Trump was hiding and said he was afraid of a handful of “peaceful protesters” after the White House went into a lockdown May 29.

June

Clashes occurred between protesters and police June 1 in the Seattle neighborhood of Capitol Hill. Democratic Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan said the unrest was “instigated and perpetuated by white men.” The Seattle Police Department withdrew from the East Precinct building June 8, paving the way for demonstrators to declare the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ) June 11.

Durkan told CNN host Chris Cuomo in an interview June 11 that the CHAZ had “more like a block party atmosphere” and likened it to the “summer of love.” A resident living in the area told the Daily Caller in an interview June 13 that he heard “gunshots every single night.” Four shootings were reported between June 20 and June 29 with two people killed and four injured.

WATCH:

Mostly peaceful demonstrations in Portland in early June led to escalating civil unrest throughout the month. The Portland Business Alliance estimated that riots and violence in Portland by late June had cost small businesses $23.2 million and the Portland Police Department lost $6.2 million in related costs.

July

Durkan ordered the Capitol Hill neighborhood to be cleared out July 1 and CHAZ was officially brought to an end.

Rioters in Portland reportedly lit fires inside a police union building and swarmed the Mark O. Hatfield federal courthouse in the first week of July as unrest in the city escalated.

Democratic Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler initially told the Trump administration that he did “not need or want their help,” according to Oregon Public Broadcasting. Federal officers arrived anyways in order to protect federal property and engaged with rioters over the next week with tear gas and other riot dispersion tactics.

Democratic Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden downplayed the risk of violence and instead turned attention to the Trump administration, stating that federal officers were “acting like an occupying army” in a tweet July 12.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi referred to federal officers as “stormtroopers” and accused them of “kidnapping protesters” in a tweet July 17. Pelosi also downplayed the riots by claiming that federal involvement was “in response to graffiti.”

Democratic New York Rep. Jerry Nadler minimized the violence in Portland and told political commentator Austen Fletcher that antifa violence was a myth in a video released July 27.

WATCH:

Democratic Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal minimized the riots during a CNN appearance July 29 where she referred to the riots as “some protesters at some building in Portland.”

WATCH:

Police data compiled by The Oregonian found that 15 people had been killed in Portland in July, with a total of 24 people killed since the demonstrations kicked off in the city in late May and early June.

August

Hundreds of people rioted and looted stores in Chicago between August 9 and August 10 after a man was reportedly shot by police.

Democratic Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot refused federal assistance and said she would not allow “Donald Trump’s troops” to “terrorize our residents.”

More than 100 people were arrested and 13 officers were injured in Chicago during multiple days of rioting. Lightfoot later changed her tune and defended banning protests near her residence, telling reporters she had a right to make sure her “home is secure” during a press conference August 20.

A wave of unrest in Seattle led to six police officers injured and 18 people arrested as demonstrators hurled explosives at law enforcement outside a police building August 18. Rioters reportedly tried to seal off the East Precinct building and light a fire outside August 24, according to the Seattle Police Officers Guild.

The Trump administration negotiated a withdrawal of federal troops in Portland by late August but the violence continued in the city even after federal forces pulled back. 15 riots were declared in the month of August according to the Portland Police Department.

Wheeler repeatedly said “no thanks” to recurring offers from the Trump administration to send federal officers back into Portland, KGW8 reported. The mayor also blamed the president for inciting violence and told him to “stay away” one day before a Trump supporter was shot and killed August 29.

Kenosha experienced riots and fires August 24 after footage emerged of a police officer shooting Jacob Blake seven times in the back August 23. A resident cleaning up after the riots called the city a “complete war zone” after businesses were looted and a number of buildings were destroyed.

September

Seattle continued to see unrest as members of a crowd threw Molotov cocktails at the East Precinct building September 1.

Rioters in Kenosha damaged more than 100 buildings, 40 of which were destroyed, and caused up to $50 million in damage through September 2, according to ABC 7. Democratic Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers told Trump not to come to the city and accused him of creating “divisiveness” in a letter.

Michael Forest Reinoehl, a self-identified Antifa supporter, was identified as a suspect in the fatal shooting of Trump supporter Aaron Danielson in Portland August 29. He told Vice in an interview set to air September 3 that he “had no choice.” Reinoehl was later killed during a shootout with federal forces that same day.

COLUMN BY

VARUN HUKERI

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

New Narrative: Democrats, Media Team Up To Blame Trump For Riots

How Minnesota’s Procedural Rules Almost Guarantee Derek Chauvin Is Going To Jail

Police In Some Riot-Torn Cities Won’t Say How They’ll Protect In-Person Voters In November

Kenosha Riots Have Destroyed $2 Million In City-Owned Property

‘That’s A Myth’: Democrats Downplay The Violence In Portland

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

When Democrats Say ‘the People,’ They Mean ‘the Government’

/in , , , , , /by

In his inaugural address, Donald Trump announced that,

“today we are not merely transferring power from one Administration to another, or from one party to another — but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C., and giving it back to you, the American People. For too long, a small group in our nation’s Capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished — but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered — but the jobs left, and the factories closed. The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country…. That all changes — starting right here, and right now, because this moment is your moment: it belongs to you.”

These were stirring words, but they were the sort of thing presidents have said for ages. Back in his first inaugural address in 1913, Woodrow Wilson decried the fact that “the great Government we loved has too often been made use of for private and selfish purposes, and those who used it had forgotten the people.” In his first inaugural address in 1953, Dwight D. Eisenhower asserted that “we, the people, elect leaders not to rule but to serve.” And in his January 1996 state of the union address, Bill Clinton declared: “We know big government does not have all the answers. We know there’s not a program for every problem. We have worked to give the American people a smaller, less bureaucratic government in Washington. And we have to give the American people one that lives within its means. The era of big government is over… Our goal must be to enable all our people to make the most of their own lives — with stronger families, more educational opportunity, economic security, safer streets, a cleaner environment in a safer world.”

However, as Rating America’s Presidents: An America-First Look at Who Is Best, Who Is Overrated, and Who Was An Absolute Disaster explains, Trump’s declaration that he was transferring power back to the people actually heralded a move away from big government, not toward it. Trump’s words didn’t herald a push to expand government power under the guise of working for the people. On the contrary, he was determined to expand the freedom Americans enjoyed and roll back government power. A new era had begun in American politics: for the first time in over a century, the rule of “the people” did not mean the rule of the government.

This equation has been taken for granted since the election of 1896, when a key issue was currency. The Republican platform committed the party to the gold standard, which prevented the production of so much currency as to lead to inflation. A minority of Republicans and a significant majority of Democrats, however, supported the free coinage of silver, which would lead to inflation and thereby make it easier for farmers to pay off their debts. That rapidly rising prices were rendering the life savings of Americans essentially worthless did not trouble the silver advocates, who cloaked their case for what was essentially the government’s assumption of the debts of private citizens in the language of support for the plight of the common man. Forgotten in all the controversy was that when the government does something, it is the taxpayers who pay for it.

President Grover Cleveland supported the gold standard, but toward the end of his second term, he was deeply unpopular, and the silver forces among the Democrats were restive. At the Democratic National Convention, a handsome and vigorous thirty-six-year-old congressman from Nebraska named William Jennings Bryan electrified the delegates with a speech in favor of the free coinage of silver that is one of the most celebrated pieces of oratory in American history. “You come to us,” Bryan declared, “and tell us that the great cities are in favor of the gold standard; we reply that the great cities rest upon our broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country.”

Rating America’s Presidents explains that Bryan sounded notes of class warfare that would become ever more common in American politics: “We do not come as aggressors. Our war is not a war of conquest; we are fighting in the defense of our homes, our families, and posterity. We have petitioned, and our petitions have been scorned; we have entreated, and our entreaties have been disregarded; we have begged, and they have mocked when our calamity came. We beg no longer; we entreat no more; we petition no more. We defy them!” In conclusion, he thundered: “You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”

In a frenzy of enthusiasm over this populist appeal, the Democrats nominated Bryan for president. This marked a sea change for the Democratic Party, as the party that had always favored a limited central government now began to advocate for a massive increase of federal control over the economy, under the cloak of a concern for the common man.

Bryan lost, and lost two more times, but his ideas took hold. By the time of the presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the Democratic Party, and a significant and growing portion of the American public, took it for granted that taking an industry or sector of the economy out of private hands and placing it under government control was tantamount to giving it to “the people.” It is such a compelling sleight of hand that Communist regimes also used it for decades.

But then came Trump, who actually meant “the people” when he said “the people.” And that’s one principal reason why the statists who hitherto championed themselves as guardians of the interests of “the people” hate him with such incandescent intensity.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas: Muslim who murdered his daughters for dating non-Muslims didn’t want to raise ‘whores as daughters’

Muslim Cleric Denounces Peace Agreements with Jews

The Rising Islamic Terrorist Threat in Austria Strikes a Synagogue

Cyprus: 46 Years of Turkish Occupation

Islamic Republic of Iran: Father gets nine-year sentence for murdering his 14-year-old daughter in honor killing

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Black Lives Matter Spray Paints “Free Palestine” Outside Kenosha Synagogue

/in , , , , /by

As reported by Town Hall correspondent Julios Rosas, a Black Lives Matter rioter was caught on video spray painting Free Palestine on the driveway of the Beth Hillel Temple in Kenosha.

Beth Hillel, like a number of other leftist temples, is a despicable institution that had been pandering to the racist hate group and excusing the violence, but that doesn’t change what the graffiti says about the motives and mindset of BLM.

Nor is this an unusual event. It’s part of a pattern.

During the Los Angeles Black Lives Matter riots which targeted the Fairfax community and its large Orthodox Jewish population, Congregation Beth El on Beverly Blvd was spray painted with the hateful message, “F___ Israel”, and “Free Palestine”.

There’s a pattern. And the pattern is antisemitism.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Amid Racial Turmoil, Kenosha Synagogue Defaced With ‘Free Palestine’ Graffiti

Rioters Left Behind a ‘War Zone’ That Residents Now Have to Clean Up

Birds of a Feather: Joe Biden, Democrats, and the Rioting Mob

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Kyle Did Nothing Wrong’: Attorneys For Teen Kenosha Shooter Say He Acted In Self-Defense

/in , , , , , /by

Attorneys for Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old charged with killing two people and wounding another during a riot on Tuesday, said the teenager “did nothing wrong” and only pulled the trigger to defend himself from harm.

“Kyle did nothing wrong. He exercised his God-given, Constitutional, common law and statutory right to self defense,” Pierce Bainbridge, the law firm representing Rittenhouse, said in a press release Friday evening.

Rittenhouse is facing six charges from the shooting, including first degree intentional homicide and attempted intentional homicide.

Video from the incident shows a group of people chasing after Rittenhouse, someone other than Rittenhouse firing a shot into the air, and then Rittenhouse turning around and shooting one of the men chasing him. As Rittenhouse fled from the scene of the first shooting, he tripped and was set upon by several other individuals who were chasing him, videos show.

Rittenhouse shot two of the men as they lunged at him while he was on the ground, according to video from the scene. All three of the shooting victims were convicted criminals with crimes ranging from sexual conduct with a minor to felony strangulation, court documents reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation show.

“A 17-year-old child should not have to take up arms in America to protect life and property. That is the job of state and local governments,” John Pierce, the law firm’s founder, said in a press release Friday.

“However, those governments have failed, and law-abiding citizens have no choice but to protect their own communities as their forefathers did at Lexington and Concord in 1775. Kyle is not a racist or a white supremacist,” Pierce added.

COLUMN BY

PETER HASSON

Editor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

This Democratic Congresswoman Called The Alleged Kenosha Shooter A ‘White Supremacist Domestic Terrorist’

Mitch McConnell’s Reelection Campaign Hires Former Covington Catholic Student Nick Sandmann

Meet The Hero Dog That Saves Firefighters’ Lives After The Flames Are Put Out

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.