Excellence in Shitlording

The Supreme court passed sweeping decisions and sent the 101st airborne ... because the powerful just didn't care? 18 of the generally largest, most populist state had already banned school segregation ... because it was a fringe, marginal position?

That is a take. I don't know, campaigning for the federal government to do what it already was doing, but harder, just doesn't feel very civil disobedience. I guess complaining to higher management is being a rebel?
We may not like it but Karens run the world
 
Not to black pill too hard or anything, but we do have the recent example of the trucker convoy in Canada and how hard their government stomped down on that perfectly peaceful civil disobedience, apparently at the behest of the US government. They declared these people to be terrorists and declared martial law, froze peoples' assets, too their property, and sent thugs after people to throw them in jail. And while they now admit that they exceeded their authority, they have yet to face any kind of accountability or consequences for it. And when you look at the attempt to do an American Convoy, it basically failed completely to do anything. They were kept out of DC and the story completely fizzled out.
 
We may not like it but Karens run the world

Eisenhower was many thing. A Karen I don't think is one of them. The court declared what morality was, and the government enforced that moral order. I'm not really sure where a Karen comes in there, unless all government bureaucrats are being labeled Karens.

Also I added a reply to Barcle above, in case that changes your like. Don't want to have you liking content you didn't mean to.
 
Eisenhower was many thing. A Karen I don't think is one of them. The court declared what morality was, and the government enforced that moral order. I'm not really sure where a Karen comes in there, unless all government bureaucrats are being labeled Karens.

Also I added a reply to Barcle above, in case that changes your like. Don't want to have you liking content you didn't mean to.
I was saying the people who complain enough for the most part eventually get their way
 
The Supreme court passed sweeping decisions and sent the 101st airborne ... because the powerful just didn't care? 18 of the generally largest, most populist state had already banned school segregation ... because it was a fringe, marginal position?

That is a take. I don't know, campaigning for the federal government to do what it already was doing, but harder, just doesn't feel very civil disobedience. I guess complaining to higher management is being a rebel?




This has so little relation to reality, and is so generally vague, that I'm not sure what is actually being suggested.

I mean, yeah, take over the Supreme Court and use the FBI to destroy any organized resistance to the right. Then we can find some charismatic black guy to morally bash the survivors into compliance. That's more or less the MLK game plan. The Right I don't think is in a position yet to have the supreme court rewrite the constitution in our favor and then amend the constitution to make apposing the right unconstitutional.

What are you thinking of?
You missed the point of the reference by tying the either Civil Rights Movement and what MLK achieved to a very limited definition not held by most of the public.

What I was thinking off is more looking at the Wu Flu vax stuff, the bullshit Marxist mandates handed down and the lies told to push it all, and how the ignoring of the bullshit mask and vax stuff, and using real data and facts to counter it, has met increasing success at actually getting to the ears of normies and such because people ignored the bullshit after it became clear the lies no longer held up about the vax's or things like Ivermectin/HCQ.

We showed the 'Right Wing' civil disobedience could work, and gain traction, because the Left and their backers have gone so fucking insane.

Our civil rights movement now is about changing the political landscape so people like Fauci and his backers and the depopulation pushers like Gates end up at Supreme Court criminal trials.
Not to black pill too hard or anything, but we do have the recent example of the trucker convoy in Canada and how hard their government stomped down on that perfectly peaceful civil disobedience, apparently at the behest of the US government. They declared these people to be terrorists and declared martial law, froze peoples' assets, too their property, and sent thugs after people to throw them in jail. And while they now admit that they exceeded their authority, they have yet to face any kind of accountability or consequences for it. And when you look at the attempt to do an American Convoy, it basically failed completely to do anything. They were kept out of DC and the story completely fizzled out.
The Wu Flu vax and all the push back around it and the bullshit mandates around it show it can work.

What the Right has to avoid is letting grifters, glowies, and racists hijack events, like we saw on Jan 6th.

There is a reason I never went to a Trump event, and it's cause I always felt like it was just asking for problems with grifters, glowies, and potential false flags. Plus, well, Trump's pettiness always was kinda off-putting and his need to brag felt tiresome sometimes.
 
Not to black pill too hard or anything, but we do have the recent example of the trucker convoy in Canada and how hard their government stomped down on that perfectly peaceful civil disobedience, apparently at the behest of the US government. They declared these people to be terrorists and declared martial law, froze peoples' assets, too their property, and sent thugs after people to throw them in jail. And while they now admit that they exceeded their authority, they have yet to face any kind of accountability or consequences for it. And when you look at the attempt to do an American Convoy, it basically failed completely to do anything. They were kept out of DC and the story completely fizzled out.

I've heard an argument (on twitter) that it was actually more successful in Canada than it appears: the elite of the Conservative party were able to mobilize to boot out their previous leader who was basically a carbon copy of Trudeau and move the party a little bit right, and Alberta was able to do a mass purge of Ottawa toadies from local governments, and get people into power who are actually loyal to the local people rather then the main government.

Whether that come to much, well see. But, that is also what one needs to keep the eye on when considering activism: did this get the movement more power, or lose power?

Civil Rights activism mobilizes federal power to crush local power, and centralized key decisions in friendly power centers. Civil rights activism increased the power of the civil rights movement. Massive resistance and pulling kids out of public schools protected the kids from whatever the parents feared from integration, but without control over the public schools such costly signaling cost power and community cohesion. It marked the local government as troublemakers, bringing on the eye of Sauron so federal power could be concentrated to destroy the resistant community.

So, if your activism is gaining power, its good, especially if it also furthers the movements goals. If the activism spends power, it better really further the goals, or at least harm your enemies power. And you still need at least some activism that generates power, otherwise your organization goes broke power wise and can't do anything.
 
I think you're blowing this tactic way out of proportion @King Kravoka.
What tactic? Using institutions as intended? That's obviously a tactic. The other thing...the thing that I was responding to...that's not a tactic. It's not even a philosophy, nothing so thoughtless could have been indulgence in the LOVE of THOUGHT.
 
The Supreme court passed sweeping decisions and sent the 101st airborne ... because the powerful just didn't care? 18 of the generally largest, most populist state had already banned school segregation ... because it was a fringe, marginal position?

That is a take. I don't know, campaigning for the federal government to do what it already was doing, but harder, just doesn't feel very civil disobedience. I guess complaining to higher management is being a rebel?
There were protests before brown v board. But that's not the real wrong part of your analysis. The real problem is you don't realize why they sent the 101st Airborne. It was a mirror of the civil war. The south defied the union authority (in this case a Supreme Court Ruling). People who cared about the federal government above all then forced Union policy on them. Did they also care about slavery/integration? A little. But mostly it was about federal supremacy to the union/federalists, while to secessionists/segregationists it wasn't about state power but keeping slavery/segregation.

Civil disobedience is what got those people who barely cared to enact the civil rights law a decade later. They did not have massive federal sway, just a won court case and the truth.
 
You missed the point of the reference by tying the either Civil Rights Movement and what MLK achieved to a very limited definition not held by most of the public.

So, what are you referencing? What MLK actually did was bring attention to local people who were doing stuff the Federal government didn't approve of, so that Federal power could be brought to bear to beat resisting local communities into compliance with National standards.

What I was thinking off is more looking at the Wu Flu vax stuff, the bullshit Marxist mandates handed down and the lies told to push it all, and how the ignoring of the bullshit mask and vax stuff, and using real data and facts to counter it, has met increasing success at actually getting to the ears of normies and such because people ignored the bullshit after it became clear the lies no longer held up about the vax's or things like Ivermectin/HCQ.

We showed the 'Right Wing' civil disobedience could work, and gain traction, because the Left and their backers have gone so fucking insane.

So, when we say this worked, what do we mean? In California and New York, did it remove any power from the people implementing the Mandates? Or did it merely let them grab power, and then as people got sick of it they felt the need to with withdraw a bit. So, they're power only grew by 20%, instead of 40%. Technically a victory, but not much.

In the left wing power centers, I'm not sure civil disobedience achieved, well, anything. At least politically. In fact doing a quick google of LA Times, they are still giving Fauci soft ball and generally glowing interviews.

So, in the hearts of Progressivism, its quite unclear to me what political goal was advanced by civil disobedience against covid. I'm not even sure what mechanism would advance such a thing. Its clear what MLK engaging in activism in Alabama does: you provoke a response which then justifies a Federal crackdown on the area, and create tension and division between the local white and black elites.

Martyring yourself against the LA government does not have a similarly clear mechanism to turn the activism into power. The government in fact probably is gleeful at the opportunity, because it forces political enemies to potentially make public stands, marking them for destruction.

I should also be clear I'm specifically talking about civil disobedience as activism: political actions to achieve political goals. So, while not enforcing a vax mandate on your employees and hoping no one notices might count as civil disobedience, that's just skirting the law, in the same way some specifics of overly burdensome safety regulations may be glossed over. Doing illegals activity and hoping you get away with it is not civil disobedience purely with a hope to not get caught doesn't really count I think.

Right wing civil disobedience in Right wing areas might have generated better results. But, were back to the position of civil disobedience only really have value when people supportive of you are already there: for example, a Trump like republican clearly had misgivings about the mandates, but felt some pressure to go allong with them. Right wing Civil disobedience provides an excuse for management to do what they already wanted to do in such a case.

In other cases like Desantis is signals the unambiguously in charge right wing government the strength of the sentiment, and gives more confidences that they can push harder against the mainstream and they will still have support.

So, right wing civil disobedience can work, as long as there is already a right wing government to support the right wing activists.

Our civil rights movement now is about changing the political landscape so people like Fauci and his backers and the depopulation pushers like Gates end up at Supreme Court criminal trials.
The Wu Flu vax and all the push back around it and the bullshit mandates around it show it can work.

What the Right has to avoid is letting grifters, glowies, and racists hijack events, like we saw on Jan 6th.

There is a reason I never went to a Trump event, and it's cause I always felt like it was just asking for problems with grifters, glowies, and potential false flags. Plus, well, Trump's pettiness always was kinda off-putting and his need to brag felt tiresome sometimes.


This however I'm not sure if any right wing civil disobedience moved anything a single step forward to Fauci getting criminal trials. If that's the measure of success for right wing civil dissident, it was a complete failure.

I was saying the people who complain enough for the most part eventually get their way

Eh, not really? The South Complained a lot in the lead up to and post the Civil War. I'm not sure it did a whole lot for them. I'm not sure reducing will to power as complaining is particularly useful. Complaining generally only works to the degree it gives someone in power a mandate to do something they wanted to do anyways, as a general rule.

There were protests before brown v board. But that's not the real wrong part of your analysis. The real problem is you don't realize why they sent the 101st Airborne. It was a mirror of the civil war. The south defied the union authority (in this case a Supreme Court Ruling). People who cared about the federal government above all then forced Union policy on them. Did they also care about slavery/integration? A little. But mostly it was about federal supremacy to the union/federalists, while to secessionists/segregationists it wasn't about state power but keeping slavery/segregation.

Civil disobedience is what got those people who barely cared to enact the civil rights law a decade later. They did not have massive federal sway, just a won court case and the truth.

I'm not sure "The Federal government didn't really care about black people at all, it was just a cynical play to crush local oppositional power structures" is an argument for civil disobedience being a generally effective tool. And I thought I was getting cynical about the civil rights movement!

Even with the most good faith reading here, your still basically repeating my initial claim on what civil rights was "support what the government is already doing, but campaign for them to do it harder".

So, the equivalent to the MLK tactics in the covid situation is not the right wing resisting mandates, but Left wingers causing trouble to bring left wing power against right wing institutions resisting the mandates. To basically campaign that the government isn't mandating hard enough.

Which I mean, they did do constantly.
 
Last edited:
Republican Texas Representative Troy Gehls appeared on Erin Burnett's show on CNN.



So many triggers!

Conservative Brief said:
He appeared on the network on Thursday when he said it was his “first time on the Clinton News Network.” He was appearing on the network to talk about the ongoing contest for the Speaker of the House role and made the comment as he explained that he did not mean to offend host Erin Burnett when he referred to her as “young lady.”

Looks like it went well... :sneaky:

 
Like, I appreciate that things can be suuch that it can be very hard to determine if something in clownworld is real or not, but I think this one limped over the line of satirical joke.
 
FnVItOoXEAMiZwy
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top