Lawless

There are two ways to look at the rules. There is the spirit of the rules, the intentions of the rule makers, what they were trying to achieve. Then there is a narrow interpretation of the rules as written without any thought as to what it was the ruler makers were trying to create. The former option assumes the ability to discern the intent of the rule makers from resources often unrelated to the rules. The latter assumes the ruler makers were without error when they created the rules.

This should be how legal disputes are framed. One side argues intent, and the other side argues the letter. The reason is both sides acknowledge the primacy of the law, but disagree as the its meaning. Their dispute can and often does result in a compromise where the letter of the law side agrees to a change in the wording in order to clarify the meaning, such that both sides can agree on the implementation. The dispute is a form of improvement on the law and its consequences.

That should be the nature of the law in a civil modern society. Instead, the law in modern America is a battle where one side conjures imaginary constructs in which the rule makers could have created law and the other side rigidly defends the last set of imaginary constructs that were miraculously embedded into the law. One side argues for a living constitution, an imaginary framework that is always spawning new legal models, while the federalist side defends the law as written.

An example of the imaginary construct is this ruling by the Ninth Circuit which ruled 7-4 against George Young, a man who was twice denied an open carry permit. The court found that Hawaiian law predates and supersedes the Second Amendment. “Hawai‘i law began limiting public carriage of dangerous weapons, including firearms, more than 150 years ago — nearly fifty years before it became a U.S. territory and more than a century before it became a state”.

In the opinion, they rely upon a philosophical claim that the present is the result of the long march of history. The pro-gun side only goes back to the 18th century and the writing of the constitution. This new theory goes back to medieval English law to argue that the default position has always been a strict regulation of weapons. They also acknowledge that they could go back even further, presumably to dawn of writing, to prove that history moves toward an unarmed society.

To the untrained mind, this sounds like a weird new form of animism, in which the intent of history is discerned by a specialized examination of the historical record. In this view, the law itself becomes meaningless. What matters is the esoteric debates among a specialized class of clerics. They compete with one another to conjure novel theories of history to determine public policy. The assumption is always that some animating force lies behind the movement of history.

More important, the people writing the law cease to matter. In the case of the Second Amendment, we know the intent of those who wrote it. Despite the crackpot claims about it applying only to militias, we know what the Founders meant. They wanted a society comprised on armed men willing to defend society from tyrants. Jefferson imagined a society that had regular rebellions in which tyrants were hanged as a way to keep the tree of liberty properly manured.

The intent in this mystical legal theory does not matter, as the people writing the laws are just flotsam on the tides of history. The Founders may have thought they were on the right side of history, but history clearly shows they were not, so history demands their intent be ignored. They fought the tides of history, with their crazy ideas about liberty, but they and their creations must be swept aside as the mighty river of humanity flows towards its inevitable destination.

Another example of this mystical view of history is the claim that the Second Amendment is the result of racism. You see, the concept of racism may not have existed in the 18th century, but it is a thread running through history. It is the invisible hand that guides the white race. Because everything white people have done can be motivated by this dark spirit force of racism, nothing white people have created can have authority, including their intent when writing laws.

In practice, this shamanistic legal theory is the overturning of law itself. If the letter and spirit of the law are products of history and history can only be understood by the shamans of the faith, then there is no law. The Soviet Union had a constitution that looks like something the modern democrats demand. In reality, everything in that document was interpreted by party theorists. The text was meaningless and so was the political theory behind it, because they existed to serve party goals.

Ironically, history tells us where this must end. The clever use of language by people bred to argue esoteric points of moral philosophy does not alter reality. The law in America is now a tyranny of the invisible hand of history, as interpreted by a shadowy class of clerics that never step into direct sunlight. The law is a conspiracy against the people, as corrupt as every other Western institution. Like politics or economics, the law is a tool. The hand that wields that tool is what matters.

At some point, the hand behind the present madness will become clear.


The crackdown by the oligarchs on dissidents has had the happy result of a proliferation of new ways to support your favorite creator. If you like my work and wish to kick in a few bucks, you can buy me a beer. You can sign up for a SubscribeStar subscription and get some extra content. You can donate via PayPal. My crypto addresses are here for those who prefer that option. You can send gold bars to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. Thank you for your support!


Promotions: We have a new addition to the list. Havamal Soap Works is the maker of natural, handmade soap and bath products. If you are looking to reduce the volume of man-made chemicals in your life, all-natural personal products are a good start. If you use this link you get 15% off of your purchase.

The good folks at Alaska Chaga are offering a ten percent discount to readers of this site. You just click on the this link and they take care of the rest. About a year ago they sent me some of their stuff. Up until that point, I had never heard of chaga, but I gave a try and it is very good. It is a tea, but it has a mild flavor. It’s autumn here in Lagos, so it is my daily beverage now.

Minter & Richter Designs makes high-quality, hand-made by one guy in Boston, titanium wedding rings for men and women and they are now offering readers a fifteen percent discount on purchases if you use this link.   If you are headed to Boston, they are also offering my readers 20% off their 5-star rated Airbnb.  Just email them directly to book at sales@minterandrichterdesigns.com.


130 thoughts on “Lawless

  1. I still don’t understand how all of you, Zman in particular, shit on the libertarians.

    Without our base, your movement may as well be a plastic bag in the ocean.

    The whole heart of the DR is based on freedom of association, the NAP.
    And all of that is based on consenting on being around certain “types”.

    So why Libertarian hate? Sure the left libertarians are a scourge, but give me your best against the Mises sect, Tom Woods, Ron Paul?

    Ron Paul is the Godfather of this movement weather you want to admit or not. Ron Paul and Alex Jones were the 10000 watt tower that brought most to this point, on this site.

    Prove me wrong!

    4
    5
    • This! Z’s a bit schizophrenic about small “l” libertarianism.

      I’m convinced that his animosity towards Libertarianism’s public face is purely tactical. He pretends to be a skeptical centrist while he steers his commentary evermore into Libertarianism’s lane.

      If I could say one thing to defend the philosophy I’d say that it is just one of several essential ‘rails’ informing American’s politics, not the monodal fetish that Z pillories occasionally.

      1
      1
  2. This started out as a reply to Whiskey, but I’m curious in a broader response.

    Here’s my proposition: the Taliban is the authentic representation of the will of most Afghans. This is why the Taliban could hide among the people for the last 20 years. The Afghan people want the Taliban, generally speaking.

    Response?

    • Why do you care?

      The will of the afghan people is dependent on the will of globohomo…

      They are third tier pawns on the global chess board, where as americans are first tier, their supposed consent is worth more in the moral stage play, so the value of their life in globohomos view is barely measurable.

      What’s your response to this?

      • I care because I believe that Afghanistan is a good example of how different tribes of people want different kinds of government. It looks like the Afghans really want to be ruled by authoritarian Islam.

        George W. Bush said that the desire for freedom is inscribed in every human heart. Afghanistan shows that this statement is false. Most libertarians believe this too, which is why they are ridiculous.

        That’s why I care.

        • No, libertarians don’t care about what tribals want to be goverened

          A libertarian is a man who wants to be left alone, no more or less.

          The DR on this thread seems to have an infatuation with a white strongman to se everything a right…to hell with individual liberties.

          1
          2
          • Why are libertarian conferences whiter than AmRen conferences?

            Doesn’t that tell you that libertarianism is only possible in a white country?

          • It takes organized power to defeat organized power.

            As far as being left alone. I’m sorry , no one ever gets left alone.

            Sure unless you were brewing whiskey or something the earliest days of the US as a nation the Feds mostly left people alone.

            The States sure didn’t though

            A refusal to impose Rightist authority created the power vacuum that allowed the Left to take power.

            Unless you want a nation full of people manipulated by elite psychologists on a privately censored internet, strung out on drugs, alienated from family, poor and whose sexual experience is watching interracial cuck porn , you need to step in.

            That strongmans job is to curb stomp anyone whose actions makes it hard to start a family, have kids and stay married whether than be free trade grifters, cultural vandals , degenerates or anyone else.

            And note thinking we even have a populated suited to Libertarian ideals is nonsensical. Even when the US was overwhelmingly, we were filled with Damned Yankees and Carpetbaggers and worse.

            In 2021 far too many people are not moral, not religious, have no sense of civic and are pathologically opposed to paying a fair wage.

            After an interregnum, 20-40 years maybe we can try the old ways but til than? Its gonna take boots on necks to fix that and frankly to prevent some idiot from killing us all.

            13
            1
  3. Reminded me of that old Star Trek episode where a warring civilization had a copy of the “sacred document” aka the Declaration Of Independence. It was sacred to them but no one knew how to pronounce the words properly let alone interpret it. Until of course Kirk dramatically saves the day, reading it correctly to them for the first time.

  4. It’s as clear as day. The kosher new world order is bringing death and destruction to America. They want it all and they want it now. That shot is meant to kill you, or debilitate you into retardland. The time is now, if you want to walk the earth as a free man. They got away with 911, which embolded them, now here we are. face to face with slavery.. Walk the path of the righteous, like your ancestors did, or kiss your ass goodbye.

    14
    • how do you reconcile your views, with the fact that israel has jabbed nearly 100% of its people?

      • History repeats itself, even ironically. Amazing how Isreal will have another holocaust, this time by a German/Turkish “vaccine” (BioNTech) as they willingly stick out their arm for the jab as they willingly climbed into the rail cars decades ago.

  5. The program of our enemy can be summed up in a word they have been using for a few years: “re-imagining”!

  6. Somewhat related, I’m sure you have seen the video of the Tik-Tok teacher who replaced the American Flag with the gay pride one and had her students pledge their allegiance to it. She said the American one made her “uncomfortable” so she took it down, and is all about gay stuff etc. This was in Newport Beach. Average house price there (excluding the bay/waterfront) is probably around $7 million. The school suspended her and is likely looking to fire her.
    But that’s most young(is) White women (the woman is White). They hate their country, the symbols, basically their men. Love the gays. Lots of older White women, mothers of kids there, planting US flags in front of the school.
    We are in transition, from the old unwritten laws to the new ones. Likely by year’s end the pride flag will replace the American one, which will be outlawed. With Biden taking a victory lap for defeat and humiliation, leaving 500+ Americans behind (plus military dogs) all to be tortured to death on video, and all sorts of equipment, to the approval of the media the conflict is inevitable.
    What is interesting is that the ox of the Upper Class is being gored. Not the Elites, the Soros/Gates/Clinton “I am the law” types but those who get things done for them. We will have some Cloud people on our side for sure. As there is no limit to pride and diversity. And it will hit even them.

    8
    1
    • Ummm… how old are you? Mothers of kids in elementary school are not usually described as “older women” even in these days of the late breeding start for the middle class.

    • Here’s another scary video from Tik-Tok. A woke soldier threatens to use guns against citizens and force them into their homes should martial law be declared in the United States. I’ve been saying for years these people aren’t your friends. If they were ordered to attack you on behalf of “social justice”, they would.

      ‘Woke’ US Army soldier likens citizens to ‘the enemy’

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSYNaqNUS10

    • They won’t replace the US flag. It still has value as a hollow symbol of a dead nation to confuse and befuddle the more naive civnats. Think of them as a loyal service dog in one of those sci-fi movies where the dog’s owner is taken over by some alien monster. If the creature discarded its human shell the dog would attack. By keeping it the dog still thinks it’s his master and will do the alien’s bidding.

    • she didn’t look white to me.

      home prices in newport do not average $7m. why not look it up instead of guessing?

      her school is actually in costa mesa (the “mesa” in newport-mesa”

      i went to HS in Newport, at Corona Del Mar HS. one time in a class i was taking at the local JC, in Costa Mesa, and the teacher asked “what does CDM stand for”. and this guy says “coast da mesa”. seemed funny at the time.

  7. The Capitol murder and how it played out after the fact is what creates a feeling of dread for me in relation to the current state of affairs.

    One should not have to lean a certain way on the political spectrum to acknowledge how disturbing it is to know the State can take the life of an unarmed person and face no repercussions. To receive an award for it after the fact. To see the reactions of glee and approval for this execution from established “mainstream” media sources is appalling.

    Wrong is no longer wrong, it is merely who/whom is carrying out the actions according to the political/ethnic affiliation. A reasonable person can hold two thoughts in their brain and have both be true without suffering Cognitive Dissonance. 1.) The January 6th Capitol protest became a riot and unlawful trespass of a government building. The participants broke the law. Did many think it would be minimized or forgiven after seeing the riots of the past year? Probably. 2.) An unarmed participant was murdered by a law enforcement officer. This individual broke the law by killing her and the State sanctioned his actions.

    By his own admission in a televised NBC interview he described the rules of engagement (ROE) logic stream that he followed before deciding to fire his service weapon. If these same ROE procedures were applied across the country during the “mostly peaceful” riots of 2020 it would have been a massacre. Portland, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Baltimore, et all, experienced the same scenarios between police and rioters, many tense affairs with bricks, bottles and other debris injuring the police.

    What is not said out loud is the amazing level of restraint put upon the police for these encounters, conditions and requirements directed by political higher-ups. Also not said is how different the response and resources leveled at civil unrest depends on the ideological make-up. This is the ominous ground we find the country treading on now. If equality under the law no longer exists or at least the mirage of it, Man will simply revert to the state of chaos.

    19
    1
    • I would only demur that “unarmed” was not the the important point as to why the killing of Ashli Babbitt was murder, any more than the equally irrelevant “He didn’t warn her!”. It was murder b/c she posed no imminent threat. Full stop.

      • Yes. And did anyone ask him why, if murdering Babbitt was a life-saving measure, he didn’t continue mowing down everyone else in that hallway?

        10
    • “capital murder of white girl by negro” is another spoof, a fake, a show by globohomo to rub your face in their feces. A fake to fire you up… Buy into it at your own peril…

    • How can it be called trespassing when the DC cops held open the doors to the capital? Looked like an invitation to me.

  8. Rights don’t exist, power is truth, tribe is truth, clinging to the law is ghost dancing.

    Its not harder than this, learn to work for a common purpose to build the society you want.

    if the past is a failure, to paraphrase the only great line in a mediocre movie

    Let the past die. Kill it if you have to. It’s the only way to become who you were meant to be.

    At that point you can have your America and while it may seems like you are breaking the chain , truth is you are closer to what was meant to be.

    13
    • Concur. There are no rights in a state of nature. Rights exist in the context of a government and nowhere else.

      “Rights of Man” and “God Given Rights” sound inspiring but we don’t want to fight all over the world to establish them, especially when we do establish them, the non-European recipients don’t even want them.

      10
      • In raw nature, when you meet a stranger, the default presumption is danger, which then can lead to mortal combat and a survival-of-the-fittest outcome. In the case of some species, e.g. rams for example, the males will butt heads and one will eventually back away, beaten but alive.

        In a civil society, it’s difficult to be productive on a daily basis if you have to do combat with every stranger you meet on the street, so modern man created some gimmicks to circumvent this natural proclivity. One of these is the notion of the non-dangerous stranger who can be ignored without always needing to remain on-guard. And this works in a high-trust society. A corollary to this is the notion of “civil rights”, which again enables presumptions that can minimize conflict in large groups (think cities) where most of society is effectively a stranger to you. For example, most people walking around town will presume that a random stranger is unlikely to murder them. This may be, and seem, unnatural, but it “works” in large civil societies and therefore tends to persist.

        The fundamental basis for the presumption gimmick is that it works in an evolutionary sense, which means its origin is neither theistic nor eternal.

        • As you noted Civil Right are a construct to allow large scale cooperation . However its only for those like you in enough fundamental ways and who go along withe the social contract.

          Otherwise they just become something outsiders can manipulate for their benefit.

          Also though ugly xenophobia is healthy and sane as is intolerance.

          If you doubt me. Lets assume you are a moderate sized government , Protestant White . (MSGPW) How much more pleasant is life going to be if everyone around is like you and is also an MSGPW

          You might be slightly poorer or have to pay for some things as money stays in community but this pays large dividends in trust and less social friction.

          Fundamentally homogeneity is good for everyone and anyone pushing for diversity either wants to line his own pockets or wants to virtue signal to hell

          And yes this includes civic nationalists, they mean well but any diversity over 10% is a great way to fail.

          10
          1
          • Civic nationalism is at least as retarded as communism. I would prefer the nationalist communism of the Chinese or Vietnamese over globohomo’s civic nationalism. They govern poorly, but at least they aren’t striving to erase their own people.

        • You know, as our existing conditions worsen, budget deficits widen, fires & droughts in the west, a flooding hurricane in the south, growing crime in our cities, the plague spreading everywhere, a gift of billions of dollars of armaments to terrorists in Afghan, demented old man in the White House, out of control third world invaders replacing our indigenous population, schools barely functioning, how astonishing is it that we have lasted this long? Isn’t there any good news? When it finally does collapse it will make one hell of a boom. Let’s hope that the loudest boom comes from that dung heap just north of Lagos.

      • Or stated another way, America was fighting to establish those rights in foreign lands ( at least, that is how many wars were sold to the public ) while at the same time they were being eroded at home. 😡

    • a shadowy class of clerics that never step into direct sunlight

      Ruh roh, Z.

      Better be careful there.

      ADL & SPLC gonna start putting you on The List.

      12
  9. Scene:
    *Anonymous FBI agent reads online: “The assumption is always that some animating force lies behind the movement of history.”*

    *Anonymous FBI agent, who has been struggling with uncertainty in his faith, leaps up and shouts, to the glad cries of his co-workers, “Hail Satan!!”*

  10. Time is growing short. And at some point, you have to expend some of your brain power devising a remedy and not just using it for endless exposition of the problems. The latter may serve as therapeutic venting for a short while, but if it’s the only game you got, then you haven’t got much when the time comes to man-up. At the very least, now is a good time to get fit (or fitter as the case may be). If you want to be fodder on the firing line, then at least practice your aim at the range. If you prefer to operate from the shadows, then that takes a range of skills, cunning, and planning; all of which also benefit from practice. Either way, the luxury of yakking is about to expire.

    28
    • Well, there’s a natural progression for most of us. You go from noticing that something is messed up to noticing that everything that you’ve bee told was a lie to trying to figure out what the hell is going on (probably most people reading Z) to realizing that talking and debating won’t help (where you want them to be).

      Most people here are moving from the discussion/debate phase to the “doing something” phase. But the question is what to do?

      Organizing officially is out of the question because each meeting might as well be a fed Christmas party. Doing something at the moment means staying very low, trying to find similar souls, learning some skills and looking for a better location.

      If you got better ideas, we’re all ears.

      27
      • That is the most frustrating part, isn’t it. We know what needs to happen theoretically, but in practice we don’t control anything, and taking direct action, even politically, will get you fired, un-personned, and maybe sent to jail.

        I’ve met very few real “dissidents” in real life. Even most “far right” people are just Boomer conservatives with snake flags and a mildly racist attitude.

        I’m kind of waiting. I poke and prod at various people with various levels of authority in various things, trying to inject them with some good ideas. Sometimes I speak the full truth to strangers then walk away.

        I think the number one goal for dissidents is to have families, and run private businesses that hire white only. Getting on zoning boards in your town. We have winning ideas but we are heavily repressed.

        13
  11. OT: less than 10% of the chinese movie market revenue is going to american studios (like disney)! and of course hollywood has completely abandoned the domestic market, so that leaves them with…? suckers.

    • Any corporation big enough for you to know it exists is an arm of the state and has transcended financial concerns.

      16
      • I don’t know if they’ve announced it yet but Disney is having another big round of layoffs. I know a guy in their tech support who says they’re closing entire internal departments.

        Disney has been reduced to its streaming service and legacy IP. Too big to fail, maybe; too big to be acquired and gutted, maybe not.

        • Can’t be true. I see commercials all the time that tell me their parks are fit to burst with mud sharks and Cleaver-like black families.

          • So the boy’s name was literally “Beaver Cleaver”?

            I wonder whether “Beaver” had the same ribald connotation in circa Eisenhower/JFK Amerikkka as it had circa Reagan/Bush/Clinton Amerikka?

            “Cleave”: To pierce or penetrate…

            2
            1
          • Of course the pun wouldn’t make any sense to late Millennials & Gen-Z-ers, as explained by Trey Parker, in Season 18, Episode 252, “The Magic Bush”.

  12. “ The tyranny of the busybody is where everyone is certain she has a duty to mind your business.”

    Which is perfectly complimented by “we just want to be left alone “ – for now the lonely victim of the busybody, who summons legions.

    You want to be alone?
    You are.
    Left alone- without allies , left alone with THEM.

  13. “ The reason is both sides acknowledge the primacy of the law,”

    Er, no. One side of pathetic losers does, the other flouts laws to flaunt power.

    • I like the part about the law being a conspiracy against the people. As far as the Masters stepping out if the Shadow, well so what if they do?

      They are long out of the Shadows and openly mock us.

      Right to mock us, our blustery cowardice earned contempt.
      And retaliation.

    • Maybe we need to stop respecting laws. When we can get away with it. The law lost its respect for us, so fair is fair.

  14. “The intent in this mystical legal theory does not matter, as the people writing the laws are just flotsam on the tides of history. The Founders may have thought they were on the right side of history, but history clearly shows they were not, so history demands their intent be ignored. They fought the tides of history, with their crazy ideas about liberty, but they and their creations must be swept aside as the mighty river of humanity flows towards its inevitable destination.”

    Replace “founders” with “scientists” and you have the Leftist doctrine that “Science is True” or whatever. It’s the great tide of Science that matters, sweeping away religion, sex roles, etc., not the independent opinions of a given scientist, regarding say genetics or race, which are tossed aside if they conflict with the Great Tide.

  15. Just another sign that we’re living in a theocracy. There’s a reason medieval priests wanted the bible in Latin and not the local language.

    But the rot has been going on for decades. Regardless of your beliefs on abortion, Roe vs Wade was made up out of whole cloth. Then you have the utterly ridiculous interstate commerce clause allowing the feds to step into whatever state matter than they want.

    Finally, you have Sandra Day O’Conner who openly jettisoned the Constitution in Grutter vs Bollinger to keep affirmative action around. She literally argued that the 14th amendment could be thrown to the curb so rich white and Asian kids could spend some time around black and Hispanics because those rich white and Asian kids would rule the country some day so this would be good for them. Also, we need a few token blacks and Hispanics at the top level to keep the peace.

    I’m not joking. That was her argument. Then she had the balls to admit that she was basically screwing over the Constitution when she wrote that she hoped that the country wouldn’t need AA in 25 years, i.e. the court can go back to actually following the law.

    What’s going on now started a very long time ago.

    46
    • Yes…Sandra Day was at least honest about her imposition of woman’s feelz trumping the Constitution…Speaking as a former Constitutional lawyer, though, this 9th Circuit rationale takes the cake for creativity…Why not, I ask, rule that the laws of the Chu Mash Indians govern all matters in California…Or the customs of the Fighting Illini tribe, wiped out by other tribes in the 1700s, govern Illinois?

      19
      • O’Conner is the poster child for not having women anywhere near authority. She injected her feelings into cases all the time. Scalia (a champ who smacked down the logic of the liberal and moderate justices regularly) hated it.

        But, yes, the 9th circuit – always a clown show – isn’t even pretending to the follow the constitution anymore. But it’s seeping into the SC when they talk of Anglo-Saxon customs.

        The courts are getting lazy. They’re tired of coming up with convoluted opinions that twist the language and intent of the law. Too much work.

        Or it could be worse. Perhaps they no longer feel the need to pretend. They’ve won. The Americans didn’t care what laws the Japanese wrote before WWII.

        19
  16. The ironic thing is – and I’m talking Alanis Morrisette on a three day bender level ironic — that so much of this “intention doesn’t matter” stuff they use to justify the historical inevitability of socialism was created for the most capitalist reason. Back in the 80s, the Departments of Literature unleashed “reader response criticism” on the world. That’s why, say, Macbeth is *really* about postcolonialism — never mind that Shakespeare never heard the word, and would laugh himself silly if you explained it to him. It’s all about you, the reader, and your precious precious feelings.

    This is because — and ONLY because– only “original” “research” gets published, and only publication gets you tenure. Since The Bard ain’t writing no more plays, if you ever want tenure in the English Department, you need to find a way to say something new about the existing plays…

    Extend that to the liberal arts as a whole, and you’ve got the current mess.

    27
    • “This is because — and ONLY because– only “original” “research” gets published, and only publication gets you tenure… you need to find a way to say something new…”

      I just went on a rant about this a while ago. I recently heard of a trendy new “mood disorder” that is gaining traction. For the life of me I can’t think of the term, but suffice it to say it was absurd. It was essentially just a redefinition of “general depression” but even more soft and tame. I came to the same conclusion as you. I guarantee the concept started out as a post-grad thesis from some mediocre Becky at Columbia. The new generation needs to shake things up and create “original” “groundbreaking” “advancements” in the field.

      I have studied literary criticism like you. Reader response and post-structuralism has infected the entire culture now. Its insufferable watching idiots latch onto these terms, and apply them to their own lives as if its in any way legitimate. I did research on youtube, and the amount of people claiming to have this newfangled “disorder” was astounding.

      • Back in my teaching days, I called it “I-don-wanna-go-to-class-itis.” It’s depressingly common. Every semester, you get a flood of kids coming up after the first class meeting, waving “disability” accommodation paperwork in your face. They all claim to have some kind of “learning disability,” which requires sixteen gorillion kinds of special accommodations, just for them.

        I always wondered what kind of learning disability was so fiendishly specific, that it made it impossible for a kid to finish an exam within the designated class hour, yet enabled them to spend the entire class period jacking around with Twitter on their smartphones. The “learning disability” kids were always jaw-droppingly brazen about it — they didn’t even pretend to try to pay attention in class (when they bothered to show up, which was increasingly rare).

        F*ck it, I’m retired. My blood pressure is so much better these days…

        23
        • What Severian is describing is most common in the field of journalism. From what I’ve gleaned, most of the students studying to be the next generation of writers for major publications don’t really have an interest in what they’re doing and are only “spinning the wheels.”

          Personally, I was in the wrong field. I should have been in English instead of taking the tech courses and business courses I took. And I should have viewed university as serious business, instead of sleep-in time. Since my university days, I’ve become something of an autodidact, however, and have taught myself a tremendous deal of new information. The best way of learning is self-taught with an occasional guiding hand, and blogs provide a lot of that.

          • This isn’t specific to journalism, unfortunately. What brought this home to me is everyone in the medical industry going along with the daily WuFlu edicts issued by the regime, even when the stuff from “today” contradicts” the stuff from “yesterday”. A nation of people “phoning it in”.

          • We’re living in clown world.

            The nation should be renamed the People’s Republic of Facepantia.

            Why shouldn’t people spin their wheels?

        • I have a friend in Chicago, teaches in a public school, who got this note yesterday on the first day of classes:

          ———————————————————-

          I am
          Analeeze XXX

          I prefer
          Billie XXX

          I am
          Transgender FTM

          Please use he/him and respect my name. If you could please refrain from using my dead name. Thank you

          p.s. I have social anxiety

          ———————————————————

          He should have the right to march down to the principal’s office and demand that this freak be removed from his class and placed in either a special classroom or a padded cell. My old man was a teacher and I can’t imagine how he’d handle this. He was just obstinate enough to say “screw it” and lose his job by doing exactly what I just proposed.

          14
          • My solution to that kind of thing was to completely ignore the kid at all times. No, I’m not going to call you by your fake name and your BS made up pronouns. If you raise your hand, I will ignore you. If you complain about not taking your questions or comments, I will simply lecture, without pausing for breath, the entire class hour. I’m sorry the rest of the class has to suffer because of your narcissism, but really, they’re suffering less this way than if I let you talk, because I know from long experience that your “questions” are always just statements about your pwecious widdle feeeewings, aka your mental illness.

            14
          • in olde days a kid like this would have been hounded out of school by the other kids. in a way, that is where people used to learn how to maintain social order. of course now days such school yard “justice” is not permitted. another reason to fold up the public school systems.

        • You would think that a “learning disability” would be kind of a disqualification to, you know, be in an institution of higher learning or something. But we all know that wouldn’t bring in the sweet sweet cash from student loans.

          10
          • I have two regrets about leaving the groves of academe, both about the timing of my retirement. The first is that I didn’t find every Basic College Girl in my AOR and tell her “gosh, honey, you’d be really pretty if you didn’t dye your hair baboon-ass blue, get seventeen gross tattoos, and staple a tackle box to your face.” The second would be to ask the “learning disability” kids — and the student services people who signed off on it — “you know, if you need all that “help” to do basic assignments, just what, exactly, are you doing in college in the first place?”

            And then I’d be arrested for hate crimes, but it would’ve been worth it.

            17
        • One of several reasons I’m pleased with my decision to not pursue a professorship.

          Academia has been becoming increasingly bonkers since the early 70s, but in the last 15 years has has plunged into deep down crazy. I never would have survived in the present environment.

          • I spoke to another friend today, whose wife is an assistant principal in a relatively low-income junior high. They started in-service days this week and they were filled with anti-white lectures. Apparently a couple of teachers, women no less, got up and walked out.

            It will take more than a couple teachers walking out to reverse course but the fires of rebellion are starting to smolder.

      • I think I remembered the term.
        “Adjustment disorder: A short term condition arising due to difficulty in managing the stressful life changes such as coping with work-related problems, loss of loved ones, or relationship issues that leads to significant impairment in functioning.”

        So… if I experience stress due to stressful circumstances/stimuli… I now suffer a “disorder”!?

  17. In the end these concoctions and distortion are just a means for the judges to make their own precedent and do what they want. The decision was known, the narrative had to be spun. The “living constitution” is a poor fig leaf covering party rule.

    21
  18. Most folks know this intuitively if not explicitly. Making the law say what you want it to say, Constitutionally, goes back to Cardozo, a protege of Oliver Wendell Holmes, and farther back to Marshall’s “implied powers” in M’cullogh v. Maryland and, past that, to Marbury.

    But isn’t that the way? Those who hold power dictate the rules and their interpretation. Which is why we urge the clerics to hold for me not for the other guy. Wise clerics/jurists are mediators that help conflicting parties arrive at consensus — or the customs that govern the duel.

  19. I understand the US military has a different set of laws from those used for civilians.

    It will be very interesting to follow the situation with Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller to see how those laws will apply to him following his video post on accountability regarding the disaster in Afghanistan.

    I suspect even in the US military, laws apply to some but not to others.

    Interesting side note regarding his last name; the word Schelle in German means “clamp”. For example the type that is used on automotive radiator hoses to keep them in place.

    13
    • The military operates under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, otherwise known as the UCMJ.
      Schelle has resigned his commission, and when it is accepted he is no longer an officer in the United States Marine Corps, and the UCMJ does not apply to him any longer.

      • And if the military does not accept his resignation, then he continues to remain under the authority of the UCMJ. Seems they hold all the cards regarding his future.

        • Oh, they can burn him for sure, if they want. See, for example, the court martial of General Mitchell in 1925 for what they can do. However, he could just be posturing so the Vichy Republican Party can recruit him to be a bought and paid for bitch just like Cyclops Dan Crenshaw…

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Mitchell

          3
          2
    • “I suspect even in the US military, laws apply to some but not to others.”

      Known colloquially as “different spanks for different ranks”.

  20. Little by little it’s becoming clear that the problems we face in modern America are non trivial; and in fact, represent a societal cancer that is only getting worse, metastasizing into all aspects of public & private life, and will soon end in death of the republic if a remedy is delayed or not forthcoming. But what to do?

    Out of habit, most will try voting harder at least two more times (2022 & 2024) in the hopes of resurrecting a messiah who will lead us to the promised land. My opinion . . . chance of success <10% and probably 5% at best.

    So a backup plan is in order. Many are now thinking rebellion & insurrection (for reals) and organizing accordingly. And more than a few of these covert assemblies are being led by Stasi agents and provocateurs with the goal of entrapping the naive & making a public spectacle of their persecution. The latter is a tried & true means of nipping a problem in the bud with minor expenditure of effort & expense.

    Is there a Backup Plan B that avoids the entrapment pitfall? Yes there is.

    19
      • That is interesting, gotterdam. I dont even know anyone active duty anymore, or any po-po. But it strikes me as an interesting thought experiment: what if a Known Baddie like the TRS side did a headfake psyop to get the system to attack its own enforcers? What if Weev did something to convince tptb that the Capital Police (in reality a lock for the far left) was thoroughly infested with whyte suuupremacists, so as to require massive purges? Get the system to have an autoimmune response, as it were? That would be an interesting situation.

        • One of my tropes, Mutiny in the Ranks™ would meet your definition of an autoimmune disorder. Honestly I don’t know what the odds are, but the woker they get, the more they risk a cytokene storm.

  21. The truth is that legal theories don’t matter when it comes to law. The only laws that exist are the ones backed by force. If you aren’t at risk of being deprived of life or property for disobedience, it’s not a law, it’s an official recommendation, with potential incentives (fines for non-compliance or rewards for adherence).

    If Bezos doesn’t go to jail for tax avoidance, then taxes aren’t law. If you don’t lose your car for speeding, then speed limits are mere guidelines. If a government won’t ruin a citizen’s life for non-compliance with a rule, then it ought not to have that rule.

    11
    2
    • > The only laws that exist are the ones backed by force.

      True. Justices also will not make a ruling they do not think will be enforced. Every political apparatus of enforcement if owned by the left or can be strong-armed by the left. Hence why left-wing lunatic judges rule however they please while right-wing judges are far more constrained.

    • Let’s not forget though, that “the law” most certainly applies to you and us. We dirt people do not have special dispensation in regards to that “law”. We are required to obey the shifting sands and the full force of the State will come down on us and our loved ones should we fail to obey.

      Adjust accordingly.

      17
  22. A wise jurist once said: the Constitution wasnt intended to be a suicide pact.
    We see this every day, as our enemies seek to hold us to rules that have been twisted by politicians, judges and SJWs to harm our people.

    Blacks and the 2d amendment is prime example. Given the outrageous level of gun violence in America committed by blacks, there is no way they should be permitted to own guns. At least until they clean up their own house. Proponents of muh constitution are outraged by this statement, but where is the lie? An armed black population is a threat to the whites, who want to be left alone. For some reason, this common sense position is deemed heretical

    32
    2
    • The laws already exist. Felons cannot own or possess firearms. Most felons are blacks/browns. The penalties, when these “laws” are enforced, are light and often suspended.

      The (((Justice System))) has become just another grift.

      32
    • Blacks ought not to have any of the ‘rights’ enumerated in the Constitution – regardless of their behavior. They are not the people whose history and culture animated the writers of the law, nor the people for whom it was intended. Just like all the philosophical and economic theorists, it was White European men cogitating on the condition and intent and potential of ‘man’ in the abstract, when they were familiar with the behavior and general history of White men only (as well as ‘fellow Whites’ and the intractable problem they already represented).

      28
      2
      • You and your reason and logic. It’s just gonna get you in trouble.

        On second thought, your brief statement can be used as a valid/good vetting tool when meeting new people. If they don’t recoil in horror, you know you may have a like minded person.

        With your permission, I’m stealing your paragraph.

        12
        • Bartleby: Feel free. I use others’ words all the time. And you’re absolutely right – logic and reason fail against emotion. I just can’t help it – it’s the way I think.

          6
          1
      • At least you are standing up for institutional racism and make no bones about it 😆

    • That is pretty much the underlying justification for almost all laws infringing on a citizen’s right to effective self-defense. The attitude of stewardship and assumption of cohabitation are the root problems to address. How blacks address their violence issues isn’t whites’ problem to solve when they have their own jurisdictions and we have ours. Those that describe the constitution as racist are recognizing that it lays out a plan for governance that is inappropriate for any demographic but Heritage Americans. Their authoritarian sensibilities impel them to resolve this tension by eroding our fundamental rights at every opportunity. A new polity representing Heritage Americans rising from the ashes of the United States should recognize this by explicitly defining who “We The People” are more precisely and explicitly excluding aliens from participation in the process of making or interpreting law because, by their own admission, it is foreign and inaccessible to them.

      12
    • The tale of the Good Samaritan was also not meant to be a suicide pact.

      The US was not meant to be the world’s poorhouse.

      Unfortunately, the Left have used both of these moral crosses quite effectively to bludgeon society into submission.

      11
  23. I think Ayn Rand observed The Supremes acting out para 5 in the 60’s. The result is coming up, as she also noted in Atlas “… and society collapses in a spread of ruins and slaughter.”

  24. This new theory goes back to medieval English law to argue that the default position has always been a strict regulation of weapons. They also acknowledge that they could go back even further, presumably to dawn of writing, to prove that history moves toward an unarmed society.

    To the untrained mind, this sounds like a weird new form of animism, in which the intent of history is discerned by a specialized examination of the historical record. In this view, the law itself becomes meaningless. What matters is the esoteric debates among a specialized class of clerics.

    This is a feature of the common law system that America inherited from England. One amplified by the founders separation of powers – granting the judicial branch equal weighting as the legislative and executive branches.

    In the common law paradigm, the law reflects the norms of society, with those norms fleshing out and taking priority in cases of ambiguity or contradiction in the written law. The courts role is to “discover” law and not just enforce it.

    This is opposed to a civil law paradigm, that most of the world operates under, which most American mistakenly believe the US has. Wherein the courts merely enforce the law of civil authority.

    The situation is amplified in the US where courts are separate and equal, as opposed to subordinate to the legislative branch as in parliamentary systems. And by grafting on the concept of absolute rights – to be interpreted by the independent judicial branch. The entire construct is empowering judicial activism.

    • I think “equal weighting” is the key term here. The Founders never intended the three branches to be equal, as equality is an impossibility. These were practical men. Instead, they divided up power among the three branches. This separation of powers was to check the worst tendencies of each branch. We have not lived in that world for generations now. The judicial branch reign over the other two branches.

      40
      • That was the theory yes.

        But the construction created its own reality.
        One John Jay used to arrogate power to the court early in the republics history. Much to the horror of the people that actually wrote the constitution. Because they realized where it would lead.

        The abuse expanded slowly for a long while, until it became firmly entrenched in an American mos maiorum, which set the stage for the abuse of the 20th century.

        It’s a fatal mistake for “our side” to see the constitution as some perfect, holy, document, instead of a flawed one that was the best compromise possible at the time.

        12
        • I highly recommend The Quash podcast by legalman. He’s a smart lawyer who takes a child’s simple view of the constitution and the courts. He regularly and easily breaks down the absurdity of our system. “Constitutional conservatives” are a joke because they defend a system that clearly doesn’t work.

          13
        • Agreed. The original construction was flawed, but we cannot discount the fact that it was a cultural product of a people who no longer exist, by which I mean Southern intellectuals. Once the North defeated the South, the constitution became an obstacle to be circumvented, which is why the law has become the most corrupt of our institutions.

          25
      • Thank John Marshall and his view of “WE decide what’s Constitutional and what’s not!” With that as you say he established a royalty unbeholden to the citizenry. Sometimes it worked in our favor (Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States), most times not (Kelo v. City of New London) [The comment reader may mentally add cases as examples, especially on the not working out side].

        I think it ties to your Taki column about the loss of privacy aka “The Right to be Left Alone”. We the people debate an issue, pass or defeat a law, and mentally say “Well, that’s that”. However, people who are absolutely sure of their goal, and that they are Good and Right, and have the zeal and determination to do so appeal the law up to the SC. Whereupon the SC treats the Constitution like Felix the Cat’s Magical Bag of Tricks: “We really don’t know what’s inside it until we look in and find so many wonderful new rights!” (Obergefell v. Hodges). And so we find things we think we’ve decided need to be reexamined and reopened and debated until the “right” conclusion is made.

        You want to make law? Fine. We amend the Constitution (A living document, right?) and you jokers get a five year term where We The People (remember us?) get to vote for your retention or dismissal. Oh, and after 75, pack your office up champ. Go home and write your memoirs or become “Of Counsel” and go golfing with your cronies.

        It’ll never happen and I know “Vote HARDER” and all, but a touch of accountability would be nice.

        11
      • The judicial branch reign over the other two branches.

        And that One Branch to rule them all.

        • This is the why EU bureaucrats (at the behest of their globalist masters) were screaming bloody murder years ago when the Poles cleaned up their judicial system before the maggots could finish seizing it. The judicial system, like the financial system, is a civilizational control node that once captured is easily defensible.

          12
    • Great post.

      Courts are not formally subordinate in the parliamentary system, although judges are often recruited from the civil service.

      The real difference is that there’s no separation between the legislative and the executive in a parliamentary system, so there’s no president-figure. The prime minister is alia inter pares, often not even the most powerful minister.

      5
      1
    • Looking at the history of law in England versus that of Germany or France it is obvious that the laws in England have neen less mutable than that of France or Germany.

      Think of the changes to property rights or due process which occurred in France or Germany from the 1800s to the 1960s.

      Your theory is not factually supportable.

      1
      1
  25. If we learned anything from the recent Taliban takeover of Afghanistan it should be that the right to keep and bear arms works to the benefit of society.

    As for laws in general and the spirit vs letter distinction, which is of course biblical… we don’t really have laws anymore in the way we used to. Maxine Waters recently summed up the situation we are all in perfectly with her comments on why the CDC can and should extend the illegal eviction moratorium even though the Supreme Court said it is unconstitutional and unlawful: who is going to enforce that?

    From shoplifting to the violent crime wave sweeping America the answer is a resounding: nobody. If nobody is going to enforce laws anymore, it truly is just a matter of getting your heart right with God.

    25
    1
  26. And when you point out that if you, in fact, banned black people from owning firearms then gun crime in this country would plummet to European levels. You would be seen as a horrible person by a large segment of the population.

    28
  27. A large part of the problems in modern America is that we have gone from a people following the spirit of the law to a people following the letter of the law. Which invariably includes arguing over the meaning of words, pushing up to the edge of legal limits and constantly expanding the letter of the law to keep up with the jostling.

    These development s have happened as our legacy Anglo-American cultures have been diluted with more legalistic ones – ie Protestantism replaced with Catholicism and Jesus with the Pharisees and Talmud.

    9
    1
  28. I forget what Supreme Court justice it was, but there was an infamous ruling in the 2000’s where a Supreme Court justice nominated by a Republican made a ruling partially based on international law. Anyone with a lick of sense understands the effect this has on political sovereignty, but because some other nations have laws the left likes, they’ll import them by judicial fiat. In a sane country a judge who makes such a ruling would be hanged for treason the next day.

    Also, note the right has said gun control laws were based on racists trying to keep guns away from black people, trying to reverse the narrative. Of course, this falls flat because it takes leftist morality at face value and black women don’t care.

    Notice also they go back in history for an example that suit their purposes, and stop right there. They could easily go back to Roman, Brehen, or Sumerian law if they wanted, but they don’t, because history is just a weapon like the others.

    16
    • Right wing people don’t realize or ignore the reality that legal arguments are entirely specious now. There is no outcome that can be rationally arrive at by strict application of “the law”.

      The best, prettiest, most compelling argument wins – whether it has any basis in legal reality or not.

      It’s all sophistry at this point.

      Righty legal activists need to accept and embrace this battle space and stop the appeals to muh constitution.

      11
      • Agree to all, with a ‘yeah but’ to your statement: “The best, prettiest, most compelling argument wins – whether it has any basis in legal reality or not”.
        The worst, ugliest, least compelling argument may well win if it’s delivered by a pc / poc to a jury of pc / poc.

    • I believe that was actually Breyer, and yes I recalled correctly that it was about…sodomy:
      https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/941589/posts
      Now I’ll note that although conservative thinkers didn’t care for the ruling they did observe that Breyer did have some thinking behind it and that although very, very thin, a case could be made with the U.S. being signatories to various treaties, blah, blah. The consensus there being that he’s the rare very smart leftist and that in the near future we’ll just be ruled over by dunderheads who will issue a similar societal breaking ruling with the backing being only “because”.

    • Sandra Day O’Connor mentioned some aspect of international law in one of her decisions. Ruth Bader Ginsberg made a statement about admiring the South African constitution at one point too.

      • The US constitution has been a dead letter for decades, now. As others noted, John Marshall began the accrual of judicial power, but it really picked up after WWII. Almost everything FDR did was blatantly unconstitutional, but he threatened to pack the court and the old White justices backed down. Everything since then has been mere pilpul (not to say that the law was anything magic or lofty prior). The whole bugaboo about magic oaths and serving the constitution is mere rhetoric. What matters is the animating spirit and culture of one’s people. Our current ‘law’ reflects those who rule, and it’s not Christian White Europeans.

        14
        • Exactly – change the people, change the country. A piece of paper is meaningless when the people no longer have a cultural connection with it.

          10
  29. As the old saying goes “If you don’t have the law on your side, pound the facts. If you don’t have the facts on your side pound the law. If you don’t have the law or the facts on your side, pound the table.” I’d argue that today, everyone is pounding the table i.e. its all emotional appeals, consciously and subconsciously. The OJ and Chauvin trial are obvious case studies on this topic.

    Legal procedure has deteriorated and those at the helm don’t really follow the letter nor the spirit of the law anymore. An advanced civil society should always implement objective and external laws, but in the final analysis, laws and procedures are only as good as those who are upholding them. Today, everyone’s mind has already been made up before litigation even begins. The narrative is set, the motivations of the DA, the judges, the jury follow the same trendy emotional arc. The current cultural ethos has been injected into the court room. It has been thus for a long time. One need look no further than major supreme court decisions. If the judges want it done, it will it get done. They will apply the usual obfuscation and deliberate reinterpretation of a single otherwise less essential word in order to change the entire meaning of policy; they will hole poke and search for loopholes to get the job done.

    31
    • Reynard: As Zman has written before, we are living under a gynochracy and kritarchy. Theoretically kill all lawyers and judges, rein in all women – hey, it would be a start. All else is fiddling around the edges while accepting a fundamentally unsound and thoroughly degraded system.

      16
      • I agree. I’m a culture-first guy. So I’ve always said, if we could shift from an overly feminine to a more masculine culture, we could actually get started on the major issues facing us. Until then its all fruitless.

        16
        • That culture has already started developing in what is currently referred to as, “the Manosphere.”

          The problem is that this cultural movement has been effectively locked out of the mainstream by the juice farmer cries of, “sexism!” and, “misogyny!” even though a lot of what the guys in that realm discuss is common sense knowledge that was taken for granted for years.

          I don’t have any good ideas how to create that breakthrough, and it’s not clear anyone else does either.

        • you very much seem to have cause and effect reversed. pretty sure culture is the creation of man (and not the other way around).

    • The hand is increasingly clear if you want to see it. Few do because anti Semitism is the greatest sin among America Whites

      18
      • Listening to normie civnats earnestly wax poetic about Our Greatest Ally is so tiresome.

      • Worshipping false idols. Honestly, if I was Jewish, I’d want to get the hell away from these people!

        ‘If you prick us, do we not bleed?’ People do crazy things when their gods fail them. It’s a dangerous situation.

    • Glenfilthie,

      Yes, it is entirely clear to me, but as poster My Comment observed, their are certain kinds of “noticing” that are forbidden.

      The original sin with the judicial branch springs from John Marshall’s artogation of authority to the SC in Madison v. Marbury, but this spirit of second-guessing to me has its origin in the Old Testament influence that pervaded (and still in many ways does) Christianity, whether majority Protestantism back then, and increasingly in Catholicism.

      It’s a semite thing, visible in both Judaism and Islam, wherein the meaning and context of some text is subsequently tortured into a form unrecognizable by priestly commentary, or by hadith, or even as in some recorded instances in the OT, by the miraculous discovery of a new, “uncorrupted” text found hidden in the temple wall, and only found when the wall is being rebuilt. It’s how they roll.

      Oswald Spengler posited a phenomenon he called, pseudomorphosis, literally false form, whereby a culture is overlaid by another culture’s guiding religiosity or principles. He reflected that this is what transpired with the Classical or Barbarian cultures when once they fell under the sway of Pauline Christianity. Nietzsche composed a work called The Anti-Christ, in which he argued that Paul (formerly known as Saul the Pharisee, chief persecutor of the early followers of Jesus) following his conversion, was the greatest disaster that ever befell what would become Christianity.

      In what way might that be? To Nietzsche, Jesus was a mystic, stripping away the legalistic, self-serving formula of the priestly order, and focusung on The Commandments, but in a newly spiritualized form. Paul/Saul dragged his teachings back into the straitjacket of Pharasaic/Priestly rules. Contrast Paul’s love for rules, with Jesus’ merciful, patient nature.which was interrupted in its expression when he confronted the anti-spiritualism and corruption of Priestly Pharasism, particularly at Passover in Jerusalem.

      Jewish persecution of the early Christians made them wary of the Juice, but Pauline foems had planted the seed that later would manifest from time to time.

      To the Greco-Romans and Barbarians, laws were practically based, and not subject to priestly manipulation. That slowly changed under the Chirch. Ober time, our Gentile ways were substantially overthrown, pseudomorphosis in action. Tribal law dird the death, and Greco-Roman law had to battle its way into currency during the late Medieval and Renaissance periods.

      And now that the Juice in so many ways dominate the judiciary and the legal profession, we live under Talmudic forms and practices of legal interpretation. We have a text, and a set of statutes, but all only and ever viewed through this lens.

      Forgive my prolixity, and the somewhat unformed nature of this comment; it is on the fly, stealing time from my day. Thanks, all.

      14
  30. The last sentence sounds pretty ominous. My mind reels in the possibilities.

    Reminds me of the 80s miniseries Amerika. Russian occupiers standing with American politicians and stating they don’t see any communists and pointing out how all of our institutions are intact. Garet Garrett called it revolution within the form.

  31. The next sophist carnival sideshow from the courts should be a Stare decisis, with a reference back to King Hammurabi’s code.

    While a few unlucky jaywalkers will be put to death we will all sleep better at night confident in the fact that at least the laws weren’t written by old racist white men.

    Seriously, this current age of lawlessness gives one a feeling of dread. Watching the Capitol cop justify killing an unarmed woman and expecting a cookie for it was sickening.

    36
    • Luckily, the display was so over-the-top and ham-fisted that only the most sadistic twitter libs tried to justify it.

      A great GOP commercial they would never have the guts to show would be to splice his interview where he said he saved countless lives with the video of him shooting Ashli in the throat.

      The only way to get to people now is to be as brutal and visceral in messaging as possible.

      35
      • Just like ‘our’ servicemen got cookies and pats on the head for dumping thousands of Afghan tribesmen on us – it’s the new universal morality of destroying and defiling anything White. Prime example – picture of a now dead ‘heroic’ White female American ‘soldier’ cuddling a brown child, when she should have been home bearing and raising White children.

        Everything is twisted and debased. Utter inversion of what is natural and good and true. There is no fixing any of this. It must be utterly destroyed.

        23
        1
      • The pavement Ape got away with it because he was a black guy, who killed a white person. At this point in history, that’s ok, no problem.
        Is anyone even paying attention? And that Orc was promoted way above his IQ. Can someone say AA?
        It’s no surprise things went down this way. Expect him to be promoted even further.

        21
        • Ja, impulsive action, prejudiced toward extreme action. He could have just pushed Ashlii back through the aperture, and she might have gotten the message with no further prompting. But no, lethal force, not measured force, was the only option for this australopithecene-brained thug. Totally unjustified, he skipped straight to murder. And command structure being what it is, impunity for this action is de rigeur.

          10

Comments are closed.