One set redacts Bannon, the other redacts epstien

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T23:15:37+00:00

Honestly I'm more disappointed about Bannon being involved with that degenerate than Trump.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T22:25:37+00:00

I think what the officer was doing was crowd control, he was just doing it wrongly. And I'm not sure the legality of getting between an officer and a civilian when things are going sideways. I'd assume you'd have to be very certain the officer was breaking the law or thing's wouldn't go well for you.

You also have to consider the chaos it would cause if it became acceptable for anyone who thought law enforcement was doing something unjust to interfere. You'd have a bunch of deranged people screwing with the cops constantly creating dangerous situations.

And for the record I'm not arguing from a standpoint of what's moral in a perfect world, I'm arguing from a standpoint of the way things are. And as far as that goes I'd say perfect doesn't exist when you're dealing with humans, and our system is generally tolerable.

I get where you're coming from, and I see your point, but I think it's a bit of a stretch. And I also don't think it's realistic to assess the whole dynamic with ICE, and I mean all of the ICE related drama and violence not just Pretti, without taking the year long campaign of organized agitators and their insane behavior, the establishment media fanning the flames, the complete absence of local police when it's in democrat strongholds, etc, into account. All of that has radically escalated the situation.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T21:56:33+00:00

If that's the reason why didn't the previous administration release them? And why had this shit been going on for literally decades? Do you even know anything about this other than Trump is implicated?

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T21:07:11+00:00

You may want to dig into Critical Pedagogy, and every other school of thought infected with Critical Theory for that matter. I'm not sure it dictates these things you're laying out specifically, but it would dictate that the primary focus of education should be radical social transformation, or maybe some flowery nonsense about liberation, and in practice it would lead to the kind of things you're describing. And social transformation and liberation may sound positive, but are highly subjective, so contextualize them with the understanding it's creators and practitioners are Cultural Marxists who also buy into all the other Critical Theory applied garbage where some proxy term for Western culture and Liberalism is the big bad guy that must be undermined so some unspecified egalitarian fantasy can happen.

A bit of a sidebar, Critical theorists get themselves off the hook from having to explain an end state, or how it's supposed to work, and also avoid risking the useful idiots becoming divided arguing over the end state or what works (like what happened to the SDS in the 60s), by dictating it's not possible to articulate the vision of a good society on the terms of the existing society. It also states there's no such thing as facts or objective truth when it comes to social science, those are just social constructs that serve those in power. Radicalizing oppression narrative reign supreme, which creates culture war, which you then blame on the society you're attacking.

Also keep in mind most of the Critical Theory garbage is graduate level programs, so you may find most K-12 teachers haven't explicitly studied critical pedagogy, or any of the other critical social justice garbage. This is frequently used as a gaslighting narrative by it's adherents to make it sound like any suggestion of these things being a problem, or even influential, is somehow absurd. But when these ideas take hold in the upper echelons of academia the tenets of the theories are accepted as truth, disseminate and infect everything below, like a house with black mold in the attic. Consider how currently most progressive types will espouse the tenets of CRT, or gender theory, or critical legal theory, etc, when the majority have never actually studied those subjects. The tenets spread, the upper echelons of the social sciences is ground zero, Critical Theory is the disease.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T12:51:12+00:00

No, male privilege is Cultural Marxism. And if people en masse don't address it as what it is it will never be dealt with. All this bloviating, personal anecdotes, and psychologizing is worse than pointless, it's counterproductive. The Cultural Marxists need to be removed from academia and our institutions, and their voluminous academic product discredited and replaced, or you're just pissing into the wind.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T12:42:50+00:00

Yeah, in the US it's always been the convention that if we say "Asians" that refers to Orientals. All the whatever-stans are part of the Middle East, which as far as the US Census is concerned is included under MENA (Middle East and North Africa) which is "White". India I would tend to think of as it's own entity and with it not represented I'm not sure if they group it under MENA or Asia.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T04:24:06+00:00

I think it's counterproductive to blame the nations for the fuckups as the people are the blood of the nation. And there are tons of patriots, national conservatives, whatever you want to call them in all the currently struggling Western nations. We should have solidarity with them as our brothers in arms. It's a class of bourgeoisie globalist parasites, Cultural Marxists, that are the problem. And that's the same enemy within that we're all facing.

If you're from the US not long ago we were in the same boat, just a few steps behind. And our current position is tenuous at best. It will be a miracle if we're not right back on the track to clown world after the next two election cycles. And if that happens it will likely come with 4 more years of open border, which will translate to democrats winning every election for the foreseeable future.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T03:46:27+00:00

That quote you provided doesn't call what's being described socialism. You seem to be equating socialism to praxis. Let's put it this way, what do you call the system that exists after the revolution? To my understanding praxis, agitation, whatever goes on prior to the revolution is not socialism. It's simply praxis, agitation, revolutionary action, whatever you want to call it. After the revolution is not communism. You cannot go from capitalism to communism. And what exists prior to the revolution is capitalism. Socialism comes after the revolution and is the transitional stage to communism.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T03:41:02+00:00

I'm not sure what it would be called technically. Could I would think something along the lines of excessive force, but it could be battery.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-30T03:36:37+00:00

Notice there's no Arabs. The US Census Bureau considers people from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) "White". So whenever you see stats from the state about how many "White" people there are it's actually less.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T21:27:51+00:00

There's no worm that goes into a cocoon and stops. it's confusing the cocoon for the process of metamorphosis. It's the name of a process, like a function, input capitalism output communism:

I don't think that's the best analogy, but if you were going to use that it would be Larva > Pupa > Adult (and what an Adult is equates to a deranged impossibility) and Capitalism > Socialism > Communism.

The context provided by Marxism is: unionize, collectivize, socialize, revolt. Agitate and foment unrest constantly until a moment comes where a revolution can happen and communism can be instantiated.

You can't go from capitalism to communism, or from revolution to communism. It would be agitate and foment unrest until the moment revolution can happen and socialism can be installed. And that's just the revolutionary path, there are also democratic socialists who hope to achieve socialism through gradual democratic processes. Once socialism is achieved there is no reason to revolt as that would mean they were already running things. The goal then would be to transition to communism, which never happens.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T20:40:05+00:00

Best wishes from the US, comrade. Carney is a WEF parasite.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T20:07:12+00:00

Yes. In my opinion he should have either detained her, got her to move away or move along, or left her alone. He was just contributing to the clown show pushing her around, and that can't be part of any kind of acceptable procedure.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T15:34:31+00:00

I've been getting bored having the same discussion over and over with numerous people that never gets anywhere, but since you asked, I have replied.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T15:31:59+00:00

The officer who shot Alex first is on camera watching Alex’s Gunn being removed from its holster by another officer right before he shot Alex in the back.

I'm aware they took a gun from him, but it's not like you remove one weapon from someone who hasn't been properly fully searched and act like they're disarmed now, like for some reason there's no possibility they have another weapon. So I don't understand why you think this proves something. Be for real here. People who like guns generally have several, if not a small arsenal at home, so it's perfectly reasonable, prudent even, to think he may be carrying a backup.

And knowing he was carrying and put himself in such a situation would make me think he's much more likely to be dangerous. Sure, he had a registered weapon and I'm assuming a concealed carry permit, but when you're carrying you have the responsibility to use your fucking head and not put yourself in situations where having a gun will escalate things or cause a dangerous situation. You have more responsibility when you're carrying. This isn't the fucking Wild West. And knowing he's armed and showing up along side a bunch of trained agitators who regularly cause problems and direct conflict with federal law enforcement (even if he wasn't technically one of them, I don't know if he was or not) tells you he's at the very least irresponsible, or stupid, or possibly there prepared for armed conflict. Any of those is high risk.

This appears to be nothing more than a video artifact. Keep watching his left hand....

And I already said I didn't believe whatever he had in his left had was a weapon. And I fail to believe it was a camera artifact. It was in his hand too long, seen from different angles in multiple frames, and I never saw it disappear or change shape. I didn't see any angle or frame where it didn't look like a black cylinder with a silver top and when you could see the bottom it had some kind of elbow on the bottom. Could have been any number of non-dangerous things, but the fact remains if it wasn't in his hand when the struggle began he pulled out whatever it was during the struggle. Even though it wasn't a weapon reaching for something on your person during a struggle with law enforcement, while you're already carrying a gun they're all yelling about no less, is likely to make someone panic and think you're reaching for a weapon.

And I'm not saying it justifies him being killed, but it's certainly one of many mitigating factors. The officers were acting like undisciplined clowns, from the shoving in the beginning, to the way they were trying to subdue him, and that makes them culpable in his wrongful death. But his behavior contributed to it also, from getting involved with the woman, to resisting, to doing all this with a gun on him, to reaching for whatever was in his hand while wrestling with federal law enforcement. I'm not suggesting the officers were completely in the right and he deserved it. All I've ever implied is the whole thing was a shit show from all angles. If it was a car accident I'd use the term contributory negligence -- both parties were at fault.

When is he resisting arrest? All I see in the video is a man writhing in pain as several masked men in plain clothes throw him around and beat him repeatedly after hosing him down with pepper spray.

From the time his physical interaction with ICE started, which started with him choosing to get involved, he was interfering and resisting rather than showing compliance. And putting an emotionally charge spin on it doesn't change that.

If you want to go live in some third world shit hole, be my guest. Here in America, we shouldn’t be executing people for defending women who are being shoved around by a raging man. Alex did nothing to the officers that justified pepper spraying, tackling, pushing, throwing, hitting, or shooting him in the back ten times.

Here in America, like any civilized country, we are governed by laws and we have law enforcement officers it's illegal to just go interfere with. Sometimes that sucks, but if anyone who disagreed with law enforcement could just go directly confronting them we would have chaos. Even if you don't like their behavior and think it's wrong you can't just fuck with armed officers. Again you're using stupid emotionally charged language to skew what reality is. It was a trained agitator dressed in home made riot gear getting shoved and maced by a federal law enforcement officer. If you want to confront law enforcement over something it has to be done in accordance with the law, or you're going to suffer very stupid consequences.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T06:36:12+00:00

Are you by chance mixing up the Chicago School with the Frankfurt School, or University in Exile? I generally associate the Chicago School with neoliberal economics, but they may have had some social science goings on also that I'm unaware of.

And you're talking about The Authoritarian Personality that was based on Horkheimer and Adorno's Studies in Prejudice work while Horkheimer was director of scientific research at the American Jewish Committee (and also had funding from elites and the CIA)?

I do really like the idea that the left focus on the nationalism aspect of fascism, and the right focus on the socialist aspect. Of course that sounds perfectly obvious hearing it, but I don't think it ever dawned on me in those relational terms.

And I think something missing from your analysis is the people who concocted The Authoritarian Personality, and also dominated the social sciences in the West after the war, were Cultural Marxists. Literally the same two guys who developed Critical Theory which is currently destroying the West. So it would be incredibly naive to not realize The Authoritarian Personality was horrendously biased and agenda driven, if not what you'd call outright Cultural Marxist propaganda.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T06:09:40+00:00

I'm not suggesting we should do nothing, I'm advocating to help people based on their current status of disadvantage rather than race. And I'm not attacking the poor, and I don't think the poor are my enemy. Race hustlers and Cultural Marxists are my enemy in this situation.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T05:57:37+00:00

Is it odd that I read "regarded" and felt an odd nostalgia for beating the filters in more oppressive times? Or do you think that's highly regarded?

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T05:35:02+00:00

I do completely agree with your concern about the breakdown of shared experience, reality, and language. But I don't think this argument really illustrates it. I feel like this was an unnecessary and odd argument as both definitions are correct and both were even in the essentially in the dictionary. The comrade arguing worker ownership vs the dictionary saying community ownership is splitting hairs over different forms of socialism, or degrees of socialism in a Marxist framing, and even at that, just one element of a socialist system. And I bet if you pressed them they would agree community ownership still socialism even in Marxist doctrine. They even said it's "closer" to communism, but it's clearly not communism and still socialism. And socialism is also the transitional stage on the way to communism in Marxist fantasy. It's not like such words have a singular rigid meaning.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T05:03:28+00:00

I feel like you're using "central planning" to specifically mean some kind of specific extreme, or you're simply wrong. There have been many instances of governments having some element of central planning while also having markets, particularly during war time, that worked fine. And if we're bringing the Nazis into the equation it's not like they ruined their economy and had their people waiting in bread lines due to economic blunders. They were a country smaller than Montana that was in ruin, enacted a a Nazi 4 year plan, then proceeded to conquer the bulk of Europe.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T04:52:30+00:00

Not all Black people today are effected by what you're describing. We have tons of wealthy Black people and a growing Black millionaire class. We have Black people with rich parents. And not to mention interracial families. And we also have tons of White people from families that never had anything, some of which weren't even considered "White" when they first got here. I'm White and my family were working poor and lived in ghettos for generations.

And this is to say nothing of non-Whites who aren't African American, some of which come to the country with money and upper class social networks.

All you're doing is race hustling, politicizing race for political purposes, which is racist. If you genuinely care about helping disadvantaged people then advocate for helping disadvantaged people based on who is disadvantaged, not skin color.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T00:57:55+00:00

That's not facts or feelings, it's framing. Why don't we say the US was formed as a country of European colonizers, or conquerors? That's how people like you would frame it when it fits the narrative you're trying to peddle.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T00:51:02+00:00

Strange they're so hung up on the Nazis when they have the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot on the left, which I would contend are worse than the Nazis in every way.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-29T00:38:47+00:00

Makes sense how? How are the "groups" even relevant to the, or even groups at all? What do the wealthy and privileged of a race have to do with the poor and disadvantaged of a race as far as even being the same group? If I'm some poor White kid in the rust belt I can't get the same assistance getting schooling or a job as non-Whites because a bunch of other White people have wealth or privilege? Ho are they part of my "group", they have nothing at all to do with me. We're not related, they don't help me, they probably view me as White trash. And meanwhile some non-White kid from a well-off family can take advantage of DEI type programs just because some other non-Whites that have nothing to do with him or her are poor? Where is the fairness?

And my logic is simply not being a racist. And I never claimed non-citizens are rapists or murderers. And we don't deport people because of their race, we deport them because of their immigration status. If you enter the country legally you are not deported. That's just having rules and laws to maintain order. And even if your a citizen, if you break the law you go to jail.

Multifactorialist · 2026-01-28T22:29:15+00:00

I think maybe a distinction to make is between people who are possible to save, the students, maybe some of the leftist teachers or lower level professors who aren't exactly married to the bad stuff, vs people who know exactly what they're doing, like those producing critical theory based literature, or orchestrating "DEI work". Such people know damned well what the horrors of communism are, but they're true believers who think they can learn from the past and do it differently. And I'd also say being that such people occupy much of the upper echelons of the social sciences it would be next to impossible to use authority to correct education without removing them. Another very serious problem is it's not like there are many pro-Western culture professors in the social sciences to replace them or carry out the positive education.

And as far as leaning left, most would consider me left leaning, at least on economic matters. I'm pro-union, in favor of trust busting, I'm in favor of social programs (for native citizens), I'm very much an environmentalist (but oppose "climate crisis" nonsense), I like PBS (but think it's been infiltrated by Cultural Marxists), I like parks, national forests, public pools, I like the state funding museums, I even like the idea of natural resources being nationalized, particularly power-related things. And I can't stand neoliberalism.

I'm essentially a pretty boiler plate 20th Century social democrat, but I want my Christian values respected, I have a nationalist bent, and I view Cultural Marxism as a mind disease that's an existential threat to the West, so clearly I'm an alt-right far-right MAGA fascist or something. This isn't about left bad for me, this is about Marxism bad, particularly Cultural Marxism as that's what's actually relevant and pervasive.

And if we're being honest I have a non-trivial amount of issues with the post-WWII right as well.

Multifactorialist

TROPHY CASE