Leftist violence, Media silence and why the Right keeps losing

Andrew Bolt, the loveable daggy old uncle of the Australian Right, loves to showcase how he denounces even the mildest right-wing rudeness while the left ignores open thuggery amongst those they consider on their side. In his mind and the mind of many other right of centre commentators, such double-standards are proof of their superior morality and the righteousness of their cause.

Bolt even has a catch phrase regarding such events: that for the Left it’s not the principle that counts, but the side.

He’s wrong.

The Left believes their crazed principles are incredibly important, but they also realise that principles don’t matter at all if your side loses.

The violence and intimidation of the Left means they are able to decide who gets to easily speak in the public square, and outside the establishment who gets to speak at all. That’s one of the main ways they win. (Read the whole article below the fold or here)

The fake debate about fake marriage

By Moses Apostaticus, XYZ

The fake marriage debate is not about the rights of homosexuals. It’s about the destruction of Western civilisation by a class of people programmed to hate it. Moreover, it’s happened before.

fake marriage marxism photo
‘Let’s just burn it down to make it better!’ – Every Marxist ever.

When the Chinese Cultural Revolution began at Peking University in 1966, it seemed just a localised event. Once the iconoclastic frenzy got official support from Mao, however, the wave of destruction spread to educational institutions across the country. From there it touched every facet of Chinese society.

By the time the revolutionary spasm of destruction had worn itself out five years later two million were dead, the heritage of the country had been all but destroyed and the social order of the nation had been entirely upended. Chinese culture has never recovered.

Continued below the fold

Homo Marriage

china cultural revolution photo
The ideology must be obeyed.

The same type of cultural revolution has now begun in the nations of the West. We are seeing statues defaced, place names being changed, marriage itself corrupted and little children sexualised by radical teachers determined to destroy what remains of Christian civilisation in this nation.

And just as with China’s Cultural Revolution, ground zero for ours is our educational institutions.

If you think this won’t lead to corpses one way or another you’re kidding yourself. That’s where Marxist revolutions always end up before the carnage is over.

The tactics that the postmodern left are using in their campaign for fake marriage reveal clearly what their true agenda is. While using rhetoric about love and the vicitimisation of homosexuals, they shut down dissenting views and hysterically silence even moderate voices.

Like all Marxists, the advocates for fake marriage plead victim while committing political violence. They cry out while they strike you.

The media’s recent acknowledgement of Antifa violence when discussing this current cultural revolutionary outbreak in the West is a sign the establishment is panicking, in my view. Like all regimes in history who fear overthrow, our rulers have resorted to fomenting a religious upheaval to distract the mob. I suspect the flames they fanned have scared even them.

This is because Antifa are just the attack dogs, albeit mangy and decrepit, of an ideological movement which has taken control of education, the arts, media, government bureaucracies and the political class in Australia. Antifa think they are revolutionaries. They are fools. They are deranged thugs defending the status quo against a populist uprising the neo-Marxist elite are growing increasingly frightened of.

At the top of this fifth column inside Western societies are oligarchs like George Soros, using their ill-gotten financial gains to foment and destabilise societies around the world. Soros himself is a Marxist, and seeks a new world order in which white, Christian cultures are relegated to the fringes and the mass of humanity is reduced to a beige underclass of fungible economic units serving a godlike elite.

Marxist rhetoric about protecting the poor and vulnerable has always been a smokescreen for a cult of power which benefits a tiny, oligarchic elite. In this sense, Soros uses crony capitalism and neoliberal globalism in the way Trotsky and Lenin used communist rhetoric about a global workers’ paradise. They are but means to power.

The communist vs. capitalism dialectic of the Cold War is a false one. Crony capitalism goes hand-in-silk glove with the Marxist, globalist agenda.

Puppet politicians like Bill Shorten care about gays about as much as Richard Di Natale cares about trees. Their concern is feigned. They care only about power, and the destruction of traditional, Western civilisation in order to achieve it.

Among those of us throwing our weight behind the No campaign for this plebiscite there is little hatred for gays. Our concerns lie mainly with the perversion of children and the enabling of trans-whatever mental illness in society.

Traditionalists like me just wish they’d stayed in the closet, for their sake and for the sake of society. No-one was ripping them out of their sequin-studded wardrobes and throwing them off roofs. Not yet, anyway. The argument that they were the victims of systemic oppression is laughable. They’d never had it so good.

But the fake marriage agenda is not coming from the queers. They’re being used. This cultural revolution is coming from a ruling elite who understand how to deploy the Marxist agenda to gain power.

This elite is using a millennial generation utterly indoctrinated with cultural Marxist ideology to create a revolutionary vanguard who believe they are birthing a paradise of diversity and equality.

They aren’t, of course. These people are nuts. And just like those rabid radicals in China in the late 60’s, they will stop at nothing to bring about their utopian vision.

Stop thinking they won’t kill you or that this is just a debate between opposing and equally valid worldviews. Such naivety from the conservative right over the last 50 years has led us to this current revolutionary outbreak. The right has been underestimating the Marxist left for over a century now, only realising what Marxists are capable of once the goons arrive in the dead of night to drag them away.

When the kulaks were driven off their land and the middle class sent to prison camps in Bolshevik Russia, people thought there must have been a mistake. How could those harmless intellectuals who preached about fairness and justice do something so utterly wicked? How could they be so cruel? All they’d wanted was greater equality, right?

Our Marxists today are no different from the Bolsheviks. If you’re the type of evil white cisgender Deplorable who reads XYZ, they want you dead. Unlike pre-Soviet Russia, however, the Marxists here today are already in control. They’ve had the kids to themselves in the privacy of the classroom for 50 years, and now the children of hate are ready to bring about the anti-Western Götterdämmerung so desired by fanatics like Soros.

This revolution has been long in the making and has only just begun. Unlike in Russia though, it isn’t coming from the lower classes. This is a top-down revolution aimed at the middle class. At people like you.

*****

Leftist violence, Media silence and why the Right keeps losing

Last week a rally of at least two-hundred left-wing thugs, some holding signs calling for the death of government ministers, violently attacked attendees and police at a fundraiser for former Prime Minister Tony Abbott. Included amongst the victims were Abbott’s sister Christine Forster and her partner Virginia Edwards who were pushed, shoved, pelted with fruit, spat on and screamed at by the mob who even tried to rip the clothes off Ms Forster’s back.

It took thirty to forty police to rescue them from the screeching crowd.

As is usual for leftist violence and intimidation, zero charges have been as yet been laid.

This multitude of violent extremists were led by the Stalin-loving Greens senator Lee Rhiannon, Marxist activists Mark Goudcamp, Tooba Anwar and Daniel Cotton of Ian Rintoul’s Solidarity organisation and Lily Campbell of Socialist Alternative: the largest, most violent, and most radical political extremist group in Australia today.

Another Socialist Alternative member Josh Lees publicly gloated about the violence he and his comrades had organised, declaring that “none of these Tories are innocent” and that a mass assault on people trying to attend an event he politically disagreed with was “one of the best demonstrations in years”.

The reaction from press and public figures was swift.

Opposition leader Bill Shorten condemned the attackers on Channel Nine, stating that Australia “should have zero tolerance for abuse like that”. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull joined him, declaring: “What is this country coming to, when you can’t go out and have a meeting without being abused by idiots”.

The Guardian ran editorials calling the mob “sickening for its malice and its cowardice”. Waleed Aly tweeted furiously that “I don’t get along with Tony Abbott, but there is NO EXCUSE for the harassment his sister copped today”.

Greens leader Richard Di Natale was grilled relentlessly by all sectors of the press as to how he could be associated with Senator Rhiannon after she had helped organise such a violent attack on his political opponents. When he refused to clearly denounce the thuggery media outlets across the country printed ringing condemnations and questioned whether the Greens should even be considered a mainstream party.

Jon Faine on ABC Radio in Melbourne called those who perpetrated the violence “ratbags”and “peanuts”, while ABC stablemate Fran Kelly called them out as “extremists” and “far-left dolts”.

And then a unicorn flew over Sydney Harbour Bridge and farted rainbows out of its arse until the Opera House was covered like snow.

Because of course none of that happened.

When hundreds of rabid leftists led by known violent extremists, not to mention a sitting Senator of what is supposed to be a mainstream party, participate in a violent blockade of an opposition political meeting the media and political left barely said a word against them.

Yet when three Aussie blokes in Hi-vis confront two elected politicians in a university pub and put them on the spot [whilst admittedly being rude] the supposed right leaning voices in this country lose their minds.

After Neil Erikson’s little stunt with Sam Dastyari, Prime Minister Turnbull did say on Channel Nine that we “should have zero tolerance for abuse like that”.

The supposedly evil-right-wing-Murdoch Australian did run an editorial stating that heckling Senator Dastyari was “sickening for its malice and its cowardice”.

Sky News talking head Paul Murray was the one who said “I don’t get along with Dastyari, but there is NO EXCUSE for the harassment he copped today”.

Pauline Hanson, who had no link at all to the men in the pub, was almost washed away by a deluge of ink denouncing her for not sufficiently disapproving of three people who not only were not members of her party but whom she had never even met.

Andrew Bolt was the one who called them “ratbags” and “peanuts” and Rita Panahi was the one who called them “extremists” and “far-right dolts”.

It’s the same story as ever.

Every time someone on the right tries to use even mild and non-violent versions of the activist tactics that the left has used successfully for generations, the first thing you will hear is the sound of prominent voices of the Australian Right screaming their denunciations.

The establishment Left never seems to feel the need to do the same despite the rocks, Molotov cocktails, bricks and metal bars their side brings and the opposition blood they leave on the streets. Why should they? Their side is winning.

Andrew Bolt, the loveable daggy old uncle of the Australian Right, loves to showcase how he denounces even the mildest right-wing rudeness while the left ignores open thuggery amongst those they consider on their side. In his mind and the mind of many other right of centre commentators, such double-standards are proof of their superior morality and the righteousness of their cause.

Bolt even has a catch phrase regarding such events: that for the Left it’s not the principle that counts, but the side.

He’s wrong.

The Left believes their crazed principles are incredibly important, but they also realise that principles don’t matter at all if your side loses.

The violence and intimidation of the Left means they are able to decide who gets to easily speak in the public square, and outside the establishment who gets to speak at all. That’s one of the main ways they win.

Has it ever occurred to these people that no matter how many times you attack your own side it never seems to prompt the Left to do the same? Has it occurred to them that this might have something to do with why the Left has been winning over and over for the last eight decades or so? Has it dawned on them that playing nicely and by the rules doesn’t really work when the other side has no intention of doing so?

You know what, it probably hasn’t.

But I’m sure our “right wing” commentariat feels very comfortable sleeping at night wrapped in all that moral righteousness.