violence as protected speech

"judge dreadful": protected violence as political praxis

it seems that every time one turns around, this exact sort of story is once more in the news. in a better sort of higher functioning society this would be an item of note, a matter of outrage and of serious consequence.

but all over the world, it seems that such outrage is gone.

honestly, this just seems normal, a weather report of “slightly overcast” that will slide from the mind tomorrow, lost in irrelevance.

and that’s a problem, because this is highly relevant. it’s a marker of (at best) severe societal rot and dissolution and (at worst) of ongoing societal civil war waged through institutional capture and preferential prerogative turning the insane and un-self-governing into unaccountable shock troops for a variety of unpleasant movements.

and that is no way to live.

now matter how one slices it, the performative tantrum as political theater has gone much too far.

none of this is even tolerable, much less OK.

the seemingly endless indulgence of vandals and wreckers as some sort of "valid expression of political belief" has enabled and encouraged it.

it’s being inflamed, egged on, and accelerated and the utter lack of consequence for such actions acts like jam at a picnic, attracting and elevating a particular variety of emotionally unstable ant whipped to stinging frenzy by endless mantras of “anyone i don’t like is literally hitler.”

we must stop fascism!

whole groups of uncomprehending children and never grown up adults seem so broken in their self-absorbed rage at anything that is not just like them that they cannot discern that violence, property damage, gluing your hand to the mona lisa, wrecking cars, blocking traffic, and smashing up buildings is not "speech" but rather "violence."

if you have a point, make it. speak. i may not agree with you, but i'll defend your right to express your viewpoint. but this? no.

this is colicky baby narcissism culture and we need to stop accommodating it, stop looking at these kids and saying "oh the hijinks!" as dim bulb memories of the 60’s drive some sort of avuncular tolerance for the intolerable.

these are rights violations. they are crimes (and rightfully so).

there has emerged a stark political line dividing which of these sorts of actions evoke prosecution. i suspect these "kids" who wrecked the engineering center are simply going to walk. they get arrested, but will there be real charges? will they be held to account? i doubt it very much.

and because they will not, this sort of behavior will continue. it will spread. it will intensify.

“The University will not be intimidated by this sort of horrific and destructive behavior and will not engage in dialogue with any group using or condoning such destructive tactics.”

here’s the university talking “fake tough” but what do you notice that’s missing? consequence.

where is the “the university will press charges to the fullest extent of the law?”

where is “all those involved in this action will be expelled?”

seem harsh? why? why is it harsh to hold adults to adult standards of behavior? what benefit to the students themselves or the university or society is served by acting like invading and occupying private property and damaging it is just some good natured summer camp game of capture the flag?

the lessons learned from such accommodation are entirely perverse. if the university wants to be taken seriously on such matters, it must begin to act seriously and serious misbehavior must invoke serious consequences. any other course simply invites the next depredation. appeasement begets aggression like humidity begets mold.

of course, this problem stretches far beyond the boundaries of campuses, even if much of it is learned there.

out in the purportedly “real world” we see much the same.

loot a store, burn a business, key a car, steal, assault, vandalize, really nothing much happens to many people so long as they are in the correct classes and categories and support the correct causes with the support of the correct backers.

the extent and slant of the legal system capture remains astonishing.

the simple fact is that there has been a widespread judicial branch coup in america. it was absolutely deliberate and planful as a longstanding goal of george “actual james bond villain” soros and his cunning value investment scheme to win what turned out of be very easy and inexpensive local elections to control the justice system.

those whose political faction controls the DA's and prosecutors and judges may ignore the law with impunity and police cannot buck this and even if they hate it and must rapidly fall in line. why arrest those who will not be charged especially if the DA’s then cast their baleful eyes upon you and start asking what crimes you committed in any sort of arrest gone wrong (or even right)?

the societal effect is chilling not in spite but because of the blatancy and the preferential treatment of friend vs enemy.

consider:

no one argues that 7 figure vandalism is not a crime. that's the power of this system. you can stare right at it, do it in full public view, and stick your tongue out at justice and your political enemies alike. watch what i may do and be untouchable. go ahead, you try it, see what happens to you if you do.

we can burn a city and go home for dinner. you loiter in the capital in a bison hat and it’s real, hard time.

we can deface art, occupy buildings, attack private property, threaten public figures. no worries.

you so much as brake hard on a rainbow painted on the road or step within 100 yards of “protected space” and it’s a hate crime and jail time.

example:

here’s a bunch of flabby, masked, and hooded antifa goons hounding a disabled woman as she leaves a TPUSA riley gaines event in seattle.

they are saying horrible things, hoping she dies on the drive home, etc. the police officer walks between them calm as a buddhist cow. no attempt is made to stop this nor any consequence imposed. just free speech. nothing to see here.

now try this in front of a planned parenthood or a transgender clinic and see what happens to you.

control what is prosecuted and punished, and you can control societal discourse and shape it into one vast game of society scale “punch no punchbacks.”

that’s a rage amplifier.

nothing about this seems to reside on the correct side of the looking glass.

those claiming to be “underprivileged” are, in fact, imbued with astonishing privilege, real honest to goodness private law of “one set for me, another for thee.” it need not be codified, only unevenly applied by prosecutors and judges hand selected to do just that. it’s a form of judicial dictatorship and if you think this is not being used to maximum advantage by a whole murky family of “activism inc” financiers and agents provocateur backed by all manner of NGOs and foundations whose money often traces all the way back to your very own tax dollars through unaccountable cutouts, well i have some denver harbor bonds you might want to consider buying. i make you nice price…

this whole ecosystem is a contrivance and used to whip up violence and rage and then point it squarely at the carefully chosen weak point of “selective prosecution” and “low trust people in a high trust system” that turn ideas like rights and benefit of doubt upon their heads and make them the enemies of liberty and safety.

“selective prosecution” is simply another way to say “selective rights” and selective rights is pretty much the definition of privilege.

he may do what you may not.

her sanctioned actions if taken by you would be a crime.

having to watch this is demoralization. the goal is to sap the will to fight, to relentlessly remove the idea that you can fight. it’s running an influence program in subjugation. and it needs to stop.

the factions that have orchestrated this judicial coup in america know that they are visible. visibility was always a key to their plan: they had to not only be untouchable, but to be seen to be untouchable. that’s how demoralization works.

but this, was backed by a veneer of justification, some abstract notion that this preferencing was “just” or served as redress for past wrongs and that “if we arrest more X people than others, it must be racist.”

at the very least, it could lay facile gaslight claim to “majority support.”

but this has washed off. no one is really buying this disparate impact claptrap anymore. the new prebunking which has been going on for probably a year or so has been one of “lawlessness!” and “disobeying judges.” it’s perfect, brazen goebbels.

it’s the big lie told to project one’s own sins onto others. it casts the judicial coup as “righteous law” and opposing it as tyranny.

it’s kind of perfect.

and it’s working.

a great many are so caught up in it that they have no idea this was cultivated and implanted. it’s their side, it’s under attack, obviously this is tyranny and the selfsame people who cheered biden ignoring judges to cancel student debt and flood the US with fully paid illegal immigrant influxes to shift voting and representation patterns and prosecutors massively overcharging peaceful people and letting arsonists and vandals and thieves skate now howl about “you have to listen to judges when they tell the commander in chief he cannot set standards for the army” or “you cannot be allowed to see that on which the treasury spends money!”

aggressive “pre-bunking,” a modern propaganda technique of advanced frame setting used to shape perceptions, has been the name of the game. you loudly shout “trump is the end of democracy! he’s lawless! he’ll defy judges and wants to arrest them!” precisely because you know that your cadres of captured judges expect to break the law and will do so frequently.

your goal is to yell “see, we told you!” when they do and claim that arresting them for breaking the law is lawlessness. it’s happening all over the US in a wide variety of contexts.

the basic plan is to have judges act lawless and impede all agendas of change or social amelioration and them howl “oppression! fascism! dictatorship!” if anyone tries to stop them.

to a significant extent, this is proving successful.

i’m surprised by how many even quite reasonable people are getting convinced by it through sheer saturation and spin.

and it’s setting up a really nasty fight that stands to go really hot.

if “whether or not the property you destroyed is a crime” depends entirely upon your race, politics, and of what judge you land in front of, well, then we don’t even have a justice system worthy of the name, do we? we have a patronage system and one about to go to war with itself.

if judges can subvert the law and claim it’s lawless to stop them, then they are not judges, they are autocracts (and often unelected ones at that). they are not upholding law, they are seeing to become the law.

that gets really ugly, really fast.

this has set up some incredibly incendiary flash points and i do not think the left understand what they are playing with. many still think they are the majority, that they are popular and have the hearts and minds.

so they back more of this hyper-inflammatory policy.

the judges who support and profit from dirty NGO money tell the executive branch it cannot shut off executive branch funded dirty NGO money.

and somehow, this gang sees this as valid.

the brandon admin quite literally imported and funded illegal immigration including some of the most violent gangs in central and south america, turned them loose in cities, and then pretended it was not happening when called out.

they used NGO cutouts to do it and taxpayer money to fund it.

nothing about it was legal or moral. it was outrageous and self-serving and it was aided and abetted by judges and prosecutors who all “looked the other way.”

but now seeking to return to law is a near impossibility. the legal system is a one way ratchet enabling illegal influx but not legal deportation.

extreme measures get adopted and tensions rise further.

using the alien enemies act of 1798 to send gang members to el salvador and its notably aggressive prison system certainly sends a message. and best i can tell, it actually looks both legal and moral. but this is not how it’s being portrayed.

it’s been misrepresented to great effect by the left to seek to sway the center on “deprival of due process” around a claim of precedents and “they will come for you” but such alleged issues are being seriously overstated. it’s an overplayed hand among many others and it’s just another pratfall for the left exposing their hypocrisy and anti-american societal sentiment. it’s tough to look like the good guy when “nice maryland men” keep turning out to be human traffickers and gang members.

this act is not invoked lightly and i suspect the left really has no idea how close to the precipice they are pushing in trying to claim it is inapplicable.

if you take the time to look at it, it turns out that AEA 1798 is rarely invoked wartime law that allows the president to detain, restrain, and deport noncitizens from a designated "enemy" nation during times of declared war or when the U.S. faces an "invasion or predatory incursion."

this obviously sort of raises the question: are we at war?

increasingly, i fear the answer may be yes, but it’s not declared.

are we suffering from predatory incursion?

well that seems a clearer case and it’s not confined to alien invaders.

yes. we absolutely are and many organs of our own government are onside with the incursionistas.

this is judge cano of new mexico. he just got arrested for harboring TDA gang members in his house and apparently helping them to obtain a number of firearms.

charming.

what’s chilling is that he felt so secure in his position that he allowed pictures like this to exist. no one is that stupid. this was a flex.

as many of you know, i’m pretty intense about due process and not abusing it and engaging in arbitrary arrest. i’m also highly sensitive to coyote’s law of “never grant any power to the state that you would not want wielded by the politician you hate most, because one day, it will be” but when you have this sort of “predatory incursion” by violent foreign nationals illegally on american soil and a set of prosecutors and federal, state, and local benchwarmers that seem more focused on making sure they get to stay and can escape conviction that in solving this problem, just what is one to do?

lying down seems a poor option.

the US judiciary seems a captured thing.

such capture sets the stage for “mostly peaceful” pseudo-color revolutions backed by the implicit and constant threat of actual, unaccountable violence that, if opposed, will lead to lawfare and selective prosecution.

it has been a long time since the west has grappled with this sort of state sponsored internal sectarian strife and it seems the societal immune system has been attenuated to the point where an awful lot of people appear pretty lost and easily swayed by oddly one-sided bugbears around never blocking ingress but always opposing expulsion, but a lot more people are getting frayed down to last nerves.

we can solve a lot of these problems by the simple act of “ceasing to subsidize this” but not all of it. there is going to need to be a multi-prong fight here and while the left in america has grown bold and accustomed to action without consequence and howling about fascism any time they are resisted, my honest appraisal is that this for of judicial warfare is a game they really ought to abandon if they have any idea what’s good for them. it’s not a sound basis for politics, it’s juggling road flares in a gasoline refinery put in place by folks like soros who want to see societal strife.

there is astonishing anger bubbling in america right now and we need to let off steam in a release valve, not jack the pressure higher.

this is a nation founded on the ideals of just overthrow.

we will not be a conquered people.

not externally nor internally.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

i increasingly fear that the left has become mostly a party of useful idiocy unwittingly seeking to cause conflagration. the whole movement seems to be run by immature unrealists who have no idea how dangerous this is.

it manifests as ideological war hoping to spike civil war

this is not a thing anyone should want.

it would be truly horrible and those egging it on seemingly do not realize this, or worse in the case of some of the ringleaders, do and want that for us for some unpleasant reason of their own.

it’s time to shake loose of this manipulated and cultivated conflict and return to the basic sense and sensibility of live and let live rights based republic.

it was not always like this.

it does not need to be like this.

i say this not as a threat but as a hopeful idea:

we are dangerously close to the “fuck around” part turning into an unstoppable “find out” cascade that would upend america.

there are event horizons that once crossed must be followed all the way to the center.

let’s not cross this one.