It's literally the other way around. You've had murders in the streets and buildings torched, and governors and mayors sucking up to them.
It's not even close here in the UK. We've only had one statue toppled, and one riot. Both in Bristol. Both recently. The riot condemned by all parties.
Whatever happens in the US eventually infects us 2 years later. But it always starts there. It's just a complete fantasy and denial of responsibility to say you got this shit from us.
The US is the source of all the West's commie problems, exported arpund the world via your celebrities 24/7.
It's not. He moved to the UK around the new year.
Reality is certainly like a side-scroller.
The only way to make progress is to go right. If you go left, you're literally going backwards.
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/ashton-challenor-the-boy-who-disappeared
This is the original. It'd be great to put in the OP so everyone knows what that person is.
This was one police force, they were roundly condemned for inventing law (it isn't an offence), and were forced to apologise.
That's not to say the UK doesn't have issues, but they're far milder than a stolen election, an illegitimate leader, a border invasion, and demographic collapse in a generation.
And of the issues we do have, 90% of them are imported from the US via American celebrities/TV shows/music, etc. We didn't have any of this shit until it migrated across the Atlantic.
While I fear for the future of England. I live in a state of abstract terror for the future of America.
A fund needs to be established offering bounties for evidence of election fraud. A big one.
Do you really think none of the useful idiots they had coordinating wouldn't flip for a million? How about 10 million?
Get a decent sized cog in the wheel, and in theory - unless the entire DOJ is compromised, which is possible - you could start to collapse a house of cards. Starting a chain reaction if flips for cash/and or immunity. Use RICO laws.
These people did the scam for money. They'd fold for money too.
Hell, at this point, in order to protect the Republic, i'd be happy offering blanket immunity for anyone involved in the fraud in exchange for testimony and a lifetime ban from public service.
All except for elected officials. They're the ones who need to pay.
It's even worse.
The head was left inside her, and they needed to give her a cesarean to retrieve it.
A doctor then stitched the corpse back together so she could say goodbye to her son.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-scotland-tayside-central-45652019
I wonder what percentage of election fraud is commited by what percentage of the population...
"We're a platform, not a publisher!"
YOUR PAGE IS IN DANGER OF BEING UNPUBLISHED
His issue was that he has a desperate desire to help the poor, but couldn't concieve any other way to uplift them than Socialism, which he also knew from experience, didn't work.
So it created a dissonance inside him where almost all of his professional work was his honest, intellectual side bitterly attacking Socialism in practice, while still believing emotionally and naively that some manifestation could work.
I honestly think if Orwell could see the state if the poor in the West today, he'd be a Capitalist. The days of 60-hour weeks in a mineshaft just to barely get by are long gone.
Homage to Catalonia and Road to Wigan Pier.
Catalonia deals with his experiences in the Spanish Civil War, and exposes the power-mad factionalism of the left.
Pier is him living in the crushing poverty of industrial England, and explaining why, despite what it offers on the surface, the poor still hate Socialism, and why they're right to.
Kamala only considered herself black once she hit the public eye, and realised it opened doors.
Her childhood photos are all her wearing saris.
Orwell was a naive, idealistic Socialist, who hated almost every real Socialist he met, and every Socialist government he encountered, and was compulsively honest about the corruption, hypocrisy, and murderous flaws in the system in practice.
His only real failing was he still hung onto the naive dream that there somehow existed a form that it would work. And this was born mainly from horror at the state of the poor in his era rather than anything else, and the feeling that no other system than enlightened Socialism could help them.
If he saw the comparative wealth of the poor under Capitalism today, I doubt he'd still be a Socialist.
He was basically a insider whistleblower at a time that it was fashionable among public figures to praise and propagandise for the Soviet Union. He did not believe in "by any means necessary", and was in fact a deeply sentimental patriot, who had no love for Globalism.
It can happen.
I once met someone who was born with what the doctors called 'ambiguous genetalia'. Parents had to make a decision, so they put them in for surgery, and raised them as a girl.
The child was never told, but grew up attracted to girls, and after they didn't really develop breasts, and started losing their hair at 17, the parents told them the truth.
Turns out post-puberty development decided they were more male than female, so they embraced it, had more surgery, and carried on as a man.
They were still a bit feminine looking and slight in build though.
It's like murderers who say the first one's the hardest, but it gets easier from there.
Propaganda forces cowards into becoming liars. But then, rather than be struck by lightning for their crimes, they instead get rewarded for their compliant lies. They lose their fear of lying while becoming afraid of telling the truth.
Sooner rather later, they start to find lying easier and easier, until it just becomes automatic.
He also spent his career working as a doctor in prisons and hospitals in low-income areas, both in the UK, and Africa.
Unlike a lot of cultural critics, he's been in the trenches.
It's like I always say - people don't care about race. They care about culture.
The sad thing is, race is often a marker of culture - either due to upbringing or racial tribalism.
People discriminate because they know they have a greater chance of a bad cultural interaction with certain races due to behaviour that the dominant culture (or even just a large minority culture) within that race promotes.
I'm not 'haircut-ist'. But I would likely discriminate against a skinhead to protect myself. Because there's a visual indicator of a possibly harmful culture. Same with baggy pants. Same with facial tattoos.
It's just a natural evolutionary response to mitigate harm by avoiding groups that have a higher chance of hurting you than others by visually observed trends (and crime statistics) that are more common within those groups than others.
Until race and culture become delinked (which is unlikely anytime soon, as the left are reinforcing the two as one) people will continue to act 'racist' (when it's really just 'culturist' and managing risk exposure)
I will go further than this. I would not (by choice) hire a black person.
Not out of bigotry. But just due to the fact that by the virtue of the color of their skin, they could ruin my career and business with an unfounded accusation that would require no evidence, and I would be barred from defending myself against.
There is no point exposing you or your livelihood to that risk. There is no point hiring a functionally unsackable employee.
I doubt i'm the only one who feels this way either. This is the disservice BLM agitator types do to fellow black people.
People forget the power the Pope had back then.
Kings derived their claims of power due to being 'appointed by God'. So if you defied the Pope, he could excommunicate you - removing your claim to the throne, and expressly encouraging revolution and invasion.
These tussles between crown and Rome were never about religion, but power. Becket didn't deserve to be murdered, but at the same time he was defending the principle of Roman supremacy over British laws.
He wasn't an icon of freedom. Just because he was a victim of tyranny doesn't mean he wasn't a proponent of a competing form of tyranny.
The process of limiting the political power of the church is as noble as that of limiting the power of kings. Look at Iran for what can happen otherwise.
Would anyone here really want the current Pope to effectively have power over Trump? The ability to greenlight the US military to oust him, and handpick his own successor?
Because that's what Becket stood for.
Yes, the state shouldn't have supremacy over people's beliefs, but no, the church shouldn't have supremacy over the state either.
The church during that time wasn't looking for state freedom, but state supremacy. Limiting the power of the church is as noble as limiting the power of kings - both can lead to tyranny.
Freedom of thought is freedom not just of religion, but from religion.
I haven't read the book, so am not hugely familiar, but she read it as a critique of WW1 and WW2, which she said was the fault of capitalism, men, and the West.
She also linked it in the sinking of the Titanic too for some reason, and said it was proof of the unsustainability of (again) men, capitalism, and the West.
The book might even be making those claims. I doubt it, but don't know. The issue was she was uncritically endorsing them, calling them historical facts, and not even opening the topic to discussion.
Study works that criticise these things by all means. I don't want to live in an echo chamber. But she was simply propagandising to children and trying to stop them making their own minds up. As a teacher, she shouldn't be allowed to take any political positions.
As William Gibson said - "The future's here - It's just not evenly distributed".
What's happening in cities now is what will happen in your town in 10 years time. Cities are literally future generators when it comes to social trends. Ignore at your peril.
I was working in a UK school recently, and the (Muslim) English teacher was talking about about "An Inspector Calls" that the class were reading.
She boldly told the class that the message of the book was that the West, Capitalism and the Patriarchy are all evil, how they all needed to be dismantled, and how this was a great message.
I was utterly shocked. I imagine this shit happens daily.
This was after Boris unambiguously made this illegal too.
I'm a working-class Brit who grew up with that narrative too, but the reality is far more nuanced.
Basically, coming out of the 70s, British industry was horribly uncompetitive, and riddled with union corruption. Huge swathes were government owned, so essentially taxpayer propped. They were also behind protectionist barriers, which I'm not totally averse to, but these hurt other industries by preventing free trade deals.
What she did was rip the band-aid off. She recognised the world had changed, and Britain's economy desperately needed modernising. Her crime is in doing it too quickly, and not offering enough transitional support to all the single-industry towns it devastated.
Her policies were necessary evils. But I agree she could have gone about things much better. She was very much 'small-state' conservatism, but I think some safety nets are important, and where they wrongly exist, you can't just remove them overnight. You have to help people transition.
White men gave away their civilization to make miserable, entitled white women happy.
That's the source of it. Childless white women wanting to give everything away to fake 'helpless' people due to a fucked up, misdirected, unfulfilled maternal instinct.
And cucked, low testosterone white men going along with it just so they can trick them into sex.