Bulletin N° 1025
Subject: Radical Thought and Socialist Ideologies: problem solving and revolutionary change.
February 16, 2022
Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,
Barrington Moore, Jr. concludes his comparative study of the social origins of dictatorship and democracy in the making of the modern world - first in England, France, and the USA, then in Japan, China, and India – with some reflections on the theoretical implications of these specific histories and projections into the possible future. The third and final part of this book is composed of three chapters, the first of which examines the theoretical implications of the “democratic route to modern society.”
From our present perspective we might now sketch with broad stokes the major features of each of the three routes to the modern world. The earliest one combined capitalism and parliamentary democracy after a series of revolutions: The Puritan Revolution, the French Revolution, and the American Civil War. with reservations discussed later in this chapter, I have called this the route of bourgeois revolution, a route that England, France, and the United States entered at succeeding points in time with profoundly different societies at the starting point. The second path was also a capitalist one but, in the absence of a strong revolutionary surge, it passed through reactionary political forms to culminate in fascism. It is worth emphasizing that through a revolution from above, industry did manage to grow and flourish in Germany and Japan. The third route is of course the communist variant. Finally, by the middle of the 1960s, India had no more than haltingly entered upon the process of becoming a modern industrial society. That country had experienced neither a bourgeois revolution, nor a conservative revolution from above, nor so far a communist one. Whether India will be able to avoid the appalling costs of these three forms to discover some new variant, as it was trying to do under Nehru, or succumb in some way to the equally appalling costs of stagnation, remains the ghastly problem faced by Nehru’s successors.
To a very limited extent these three types – bourgeois revolutions culminating in the Western form of democracy, conservative revolutions from above ending in fascism, and peasant revolutions leading to communism – may constitute alternative routes and choices. They are much more clearly successive historical stages. As such, they display a limited determinate relation to each other. The methods of modernization chosen in one country change the dimensions of the problem for the next countries who take the step, as Veblen recognized when he coined the now fashionable term, ‘the advantages of backwardness.’ Without the prior democratic modernization of England, the reactionary methods adopted in Germany and Japan would scarcely have been possible. Without both the capitalist and reactionary experiences, the communist method would have been something entirely different, if it had come into existence at all. It is easy enough to perceive, and even with some sympathy, that Indian diffidence is in good measure a negative critical reaction to all three forms of prior historical experience. Although there have been certain common problems in the construction of industrial societies, the task remains a continually changing one. The historical preconditions of each major political species differ sharply from the others.
Within each major type there are also striking differences, perhaps most striking in the democratic variant, as well as significant similarities. In this chapter we shall try to do justice to both, in analyzing certain agrarian social features that have contributed to the development of Western democracy. It is well to be explicit once more about what this rather sonorous phrase means, even if definitions of democracy have a way of leading away from real issues to trivial quibbling. The author sees the development of a democracy as a long and certainly incomplete struggle to do three closely related things: 1) to check arbitrary ruler, 2) to replace arbitrary rules with just and rational ones, and 3) to obtain a share for the underlying population in making of rules. The beheading of kings has been the most dramatic and by no means the least important aspect of the first feature. Efforts to establish the rule of law, the power of the legislature, and later to use the state as an engine for social welfare, are familiar and famous aspects of the other two.
Though a detailed consideration of the earlier phases of premodern societies lies outside the scope of this work, it is well to raise at least briefly the question of different starting points. Are there structural differences in agrarian societies that might in some cases favor subsequent development toward parliamentary democracy while other staring points would make this achievement difficult or rule it out altogether? Certainly the starting point does not completely determine the subsequent course of modernization. Fourteenth-century Prussian society exhibited many of the same features that were the ancestors of parliamentary democracy in Western Europe. The decisive changes that fundamentally altered the course of Prussian and eventually German society took place in the next two centuries. Yet even if the starting point is not decisive in itself, some may be much more favorable to democratic developments that others.
A good case can be made, I think, for the thesis that Western feudalism did contain certain institutions that distinguished it from, other societies in such a way as to favor democratic possibilities. The German historian Otto Hintze in his discussion of the social orders of feudal society (Städe) has perhaps done the most toward rendering the thesis convincing, though it remains a topic of lively scholarly debate. For our purposes, the most important aspect was the growth of the notion of the immunity of certain groups and persons from the power of the ruler, along with the conception of the right of resistance to unjust authority. Together with the conception of contract as a mutual engagement freely undertaken by free persons, derived from the feudal relation of vassalage, this complex of ideas and practices constitutes a crucial legacy from European medieval society to modern Western conceptions of a free society.
This complex arose only in Western Europe. Only there did that delicate balance occur between, too much and too little royal power which gave an important impetus to parliamentary democracy. A wide variety of partial resemblances do occur elsewhere but seem to lack either a crucial ingredient or a crucial proportion among them found in Western Europe. Russian society did develop a system of estates, the soslovii. But Ivan the Terrible broke the back of the independent nobility. The attempt to recover their privileges came after the strong hand of Peter the Great had been removed and resulted in obtaining privileges without corresponding obligations or corporate representation in the process of governing. Bureaucratic China generated the conception of the Mandate of Heaven that gave some color of legitimacy to resistance to unjust oppression, but without a strong notion of corporate immunity, something the scholar officials created to a limited extent in practice and against the basic principle of the bureaucratic polity. Feudalism did arise in Japan, but with heavy stress on loyalty to superiors and a divine ruler. It lacked the conception of an engagement among theoretical equals. In the Indian cast system one can perceive song tendencies toward the conception of immunity and corporate privilege, but again without the theory or practice of free contract.
. . .
With this brief assessment of variations in the starting point, we may turn to the process of modernization itself. One point stands out quite clearly. The persistence of royal absolutism or more generally of a preindustrial bureaucratic rule into modern times had created conditions unfavorable for democracy of the Western variety. The varied histories of China, Russia, and Germany converge on this point. It is a curious fact, for which I shall not try to offer an explanation, that powerful central governments that we can loosely call royal absolutisms or agrarian bureaucracies establish themselves in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in all the major countries examined in connection with this study (except of course the United States), namely, England, France, the Prussian part of Germany, Russia, China Japan and India. Whatever the reason may be, the fact form s a convenient if partly arbitrary peg upon which to hang the beginnings of modernization. Though their persistence has had unfavorable consequences, strong monarchical institutions have performed an indispensable function at an early point in checking the turbulence of the nobility. Democracy could not grow and flourish under the shadow of prospective plunder and pillage by marauding barons.
In early modern times too, a decisive precondition of modern democracy had been the emergence of a rough balance between the crown and nobility, in which the royal power predominated but left a substantial degree of independence to the nobility. The pluralist notion that an independent nobility is an essential ingredient in the growth of democracy has a firm basis in historical fact. Comparative support of this thesis is provided by the absence of such an ingredient in Akbar’s India and Manchu China, or perhaps more accurately by the failure to work out an acceptable and legitimate status for the degree of independence that in fact existed. The ways in which this independence has been hammered out are equally important. In England the locus classicus for positive evidence, the War of the Roses decimated the landed aristocracy making considerably easier the establishment of a form of royal absolutism rather milder than that in France. It is wise to recall that the achievement of such a balance, so dear to the liberal and pluralist tradition, has been the fruit of violent and occasionally revolutionary methods that contemporary liberals generally reject.
At this point one may ask what happens when and if the landed aristocracy tries to shake free from royal controls in the absence of a numerous and politically vigorous class of town dwellers. To put the question in less exact form, what may happen if the nobility seeks freedom in the absence of a bourgeois revolution? I think it is safe to say that the outcome is highly unfavorable to the Western version of democracy. In Russia during the eighteenth century the service nobility managed to have its obligations to the tsarist autocracy rescinded, while at the same time it retained and even increased its land holdings as well as its power over the serfs. The whole development was highly unfavorable to democracy. German history is in some respects even more revealing. There the nobility carried on its struggle against the Great Elector for the most part separately from the towns. Many of the aristocratic demands of the time resembled those made in England: for a voice in the government and especially in the government’s ways of raising money. But the outcome was not parliamentary democracy. The weakness of the towns has been a constant feature in German history subsequent to their efflorescence in southern and western Germany in the late Middle Ages, after which they went into a decline.
Without going into the evidence further or discussing the Asian materials that point in the same direction, we may simply register strong agreement with the Marxist thesis that a vigorous and independent class of town dwellers has been an indispensable element in the growth of parliamentary democracy. No bourgeois, no democracy. The principal actor would not appear on the stage if we confined our attention strictly to the agrarian sector. Still the actors in the countryside have played a sufficiently important part to deserve careful inquiry. And if one wishes to write history with heroes and villains, a position the present writer repudiates, the totalitarian villain sometimes has lived in the country, and the democratic hero of the towns has had important allies there.
Such, for example, was the case in England. While absolutism was growing stronger in France, in a large section of Germany, and in Russia, it met its first major check on English soil, where to be sure the attempt to establish it was much feebler. In very large measure this was true because the English landed aristocracy at an early date began to acquire commercial traits. Among the most decisive determinants influencing the course of subsequent political evolution are whether or not a landed aristocracy has turned to commercial agriculture and, if so, the form that this commercialization has taken.(pp.413-419)
. . .
There are real difficulties in grouping revolutions, or for that matter, any major historical phenomena. Before proceeding any further, it might be well to discuss this point.
Certain very general considerations make it necessary to adopt broad categories of this variety. It is or should be quite obvious that certain institutional arrangements such as feudalism, absolute monarchy, and capitalism rise, have their day, and pass away. The fact that any specific institutional complex develops first in one country and then in another, as did capitalism in Italy, Holland, England, France, and the United States, is no bar to a generally evolutionary conception of history. No single country goes through all the states, but merely carries the development a certain distance within the framework of its own situation and institutions. Thus a revolution on behalf of private property in the means of production has a good chance of succeeding in some phases and not in others. It may be hopelessly premature and but a minor current in the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries and yet be hopelessly anachronistic in the second half of the twentieth. Over and beyond the concrete historical conditions at a given moment in a particular country, there are worldwide conditions, such as the state of the technical arts and the economic and political organizations reached in other parts of the world, that influence heavily the prospects of revolution.
These considerations lead to the conclusion that it is necessary to group revolutions by the broad institutional results to which they contribute. Much of the confusion and unwillingness to use larger categories comes from the fact that those who provide the mass support for a revolution, those who lead it, and those who ultimately profit from it are very different sets of people. As long as this distinction remains clear in each case, it makes sense (and is even indispensable for the sake of drawing distinctions as well as perceiving similarities) to regard the English Civil War, the French Revolution and the American Civil War as stages in the development of the bourgeois-democratic revolution.
There are grounds for the reluctance to use this term, and it is worthwhile pointing out the way in which it can be misleading. To some writers the conception of a bourgeois revolution implies a steady increase in the economic power of the commercial and manufacturing classes in the towns up to a point where economic power comes into conflict with political power still in the hands of an old ruling class based mainly on the land. At this point there supposedly occurs a revolutionary explosion in which the commercial and manufacturing classes seize the reins of political power and introduce the main features of modern parliamentary democracy. Such a conception is not altogether false. Even for France, there are some good indications of an increase in the economic power of a section of the bourgeoisie hostile to the fetters imposed by the ancien régime. Nevertheless this meaning of bourgeois revolution is such a simplification as to be a caricature of what took place. To see that it is a caricature we need only recall 1) the importance of capitalism in the English countryside that enabled the English landed aristocracy to retain control of political machinery right through the nineteenth century; 2) the weakness of any purely bourgeois impulse in France, its close ties with the old order, its dependence on radical allies during the revolution, the continuation of the peasant economy into modern times; 3) the fact that plantation slavery in the United States grew up as an integral part of industrial capitalism and presented an obstacle to democracy much more than to capitalism.
As pointed out a moment ago, the central difficulty is that such expressions as bourgeois revolution and peasant revolution lump together indiscriminately those who make the revolution and its beneficiaries. Likewise these terms confuse the legal and political results of revolutions with social groups active in them. Twentieth-century peasant revolutions have had their mass support among the peasants, who have then been the principal victims of modernization put through by communist governments. Nevertheless I shall remain candidly and explicitly inconsistent tin the use of terms. In discussing peasant revolutions we shall be speaking about the main popular force behind them, well aware that in the twentieth century the result was communism. In discussing bourgeois revolutions the justifications for the term rests on a series of legal and political consequences. Consistent terminology imposes the invention of new terms that, I fear, would only add to the confusion. The main problem, after all, is what happened and why, not the proper use of labels.
Now it seems just about as clear as such matters ever can be that the Puritan Revolution, the French Revolution, and the American Civil War were quite violent upheavals in a long process of political change leading up to what we recognize as modern Western democracy. This process had economic causes, though they were certainly not the only ones. The freedoms created through this process display a clear relationship to each other. Worked out in connection with the rise of modern capitalism, they display the traits of a specific historical epoch. Key elements in the liberal and bourgeois order of society are: the right to vote, representation in a legislature that makes the laws and hence is more than a rubber stamp for the executive; an objective system of law that at least in theory confers no special privileges on account of birth or inherited status; security for the right of property and the elimination of barriers inherited from the past on its use; religious toleration; freedom of speech; and the right to peaceful assembly. Even if practice falls short of profession, these are widely recognized marks of modern liberal society.
The taming of the agrarian sector has been a decisive feature of the whole historical process that produced such a society. It was just as important as the better-known disciplining of the working class and of course closely related to it. Indeed the English experience tempts one to say that getting rid of agriculture as a major social activity is one prerequisite for successful democracy. The political hegemony of the landed upper class had to be broken or transformed. The peasant had to be turned into a farmer producing for the market instead of for his own consumption and that of the overlord. In this process the landed upper classes either became an important part of the capitalist and democratic tide, as in England, or, if they came to oppose it, they were swept aside in the confusions of revolution or civil war. In a word, the landed upper classes either helped to make the bourgeois revolution or were destroyed by it.
In closing this discussion it may be useful to set down the main conditions that have apparently been most important for the development of democracy and, as a rough test of these conclusions, set them alongside the Indian experience. If it turns out that the presence of some of these conditions has a demonstrable connection with the more successful aspects of parliamentary democracy in India or the historical origins of these aspects and, on the hand, the absence of other conditions displays a connection with the difficulties and obstacles to democracy in India, we may have greater confidence in these conclusions.
The first condition of democratic development that our analysis encountered was the development of a balance to avoid too strong a crown or too independent a landed aristocracy. In Mogul India at its zenith the power of the crown was overwhelming in relation to the upper classes. Lacking any secure properly rights, the noble was, in Moreland’s well-known phrase, either a servant or an enemy of the ruling power. The decay of the Mogul system freed the upper classes by tipping the balance in the opposite direction toward a polity of fighting local kinglets. Nevertheless the subsequent British effort in the eighteenth century to crate on Indian soil a class of vigorous progressive squire similar to their domestic variety was a complete failure. Indian society has also failed to meet the second major prerequisite: a turn toward an appropriate form of commercial agriculture either on the part of the landed aristocracy or the peasant. Instead, the protective umbrella of British laws and order allowed population to increase and a class of parasitic landlords to skim off, together with the moneylenders, much of what the peasants did not eat themselves. In turn these conditions greatly inhibited capital accumulation and industrial growth. When Independence came, it arrived partly under the impetus of peasant yearning for a return to an idealized village past, which further limited and even dangerously delayed real modernization in the countryside. That these circumstances have been among the major obstacles to the establishment and working of a firmly based democracy needs no laboring here.
On the other hand, the departure of the British greatly weakened the political predominance of the landed élite. There are many who would claim that post-Independence reforms have even destroyed that power. To this limited extent, the development of democratic institutions has followed the Western pattern. Even more important, the British occupation, by resting its power on the landed élite and by favoring commercial interests in England, drove a substantial section of the urban commercial and trading classes into opposition, preventing the fateful coalition of a strong landed élite and weak bourgeoisie that, as we shall see in more detail in the next chapter, has been the social origin of rightist authoritarian regimes and movements in Europe and Asia. Thus two conditions have been met: the weakening of the landed aristocracy and the prevention of an aristocratic-bourgeois coalition against the peasants and workers.
India indeed constitutes an important instance where at least the formal structure of democracy and a significant portion of its substance, such as the existence of legal opposition and channels for protest and criticism, have arisen without a phase of revolutionary violence. (The Sepoy Mutiny was mainly a backward-looking affair.) Yet the absence of a fifth condition, a revolutionary break with the past and of any strong movement in this direction up to the present moment, are among the reasons for India’s prolonged backwardness and the extraordinary difficulties that liberal democracy faces there. Some students of Indian affairs have expressed surprise that India’s small Western-educated élite has remained faithful to the democratic ideals when they could so easily overthrow it. But they would they wish to overthrow it? Does not democracy provide a rationalization for refusing to overhaul on any massive scale a social structure that maintains their privileges? To be fair one must add that the task is a sufficiently formidable one to make any but the most doctrinaire radical quail at the thought of taking responsibility for it.
Though it would be tempting to discuss this point further, Indian politics are relevant here only insofar as they serve to test a theory of democracy. The achievements and shortcomings of democracy in India, the obstacles and uncertainties it still faces, all find a reasonable explanation in terms of the five conditions derived here from the experience of other countries. That is not proof by any means. But I think it is fair to hold that these five conditions not only illuminate significant aspects of Indian history; they derive strong support from this history.(pp.427-432)
The 16 + items below reflect important discussions now circulating in the Anglophone social media, which take into account historic events that are shaping our lives, and will continue to influence us for many years to come. The neoliberal monetization of everything, and the linguistic rapport de force which has now replaced reason can only be seen as an eminently self-destructive characteristic of “disaster capitalism,” offering at best only short-term benefits for a few.
We encourage readers to look at the underlying assumptions of the presentations below and to judge for themselves the merits of the information presented here and the reasoning behind the arguments. We acknowledge that our perceptions are often governed by the momentary lighting shed on events, while any true understanding must be determined by our knowledge of the historical origins of events, whether they be institutions or individual behavior.
Francis McCollum Feeley
Professeur honoraire de l'Université
Ancien Directeur des Researches
Université de Paris-Nanterre
Director of The Center for the Advanced Study
of American Institutions and Social Movements
The University of California-San Diego
Mass politics must be rooted in class struggle
with Chris Hedges
Christian nationalists have turned the Bible into a political battering ram
The Rule of Law: Does Might Make Right? "Does the State come before the People or Do the People come before the State?"
How the U.S. Keeps Fascism Alive and Well in Italy Today—As It Has Kept It Alive Every Year Since 1943
by Aidan O’Brien
The Ultimate End of NATO
by Matt Taibbi
How Empires Die
by Charles Hugh Smith
New World Next Week
with James Corbett and James Evan Pilato
America's Cold War on China. Uyghurs: To Put an End to Fake News
by Roger Keeran
Viral Anti-Xi Article Reveals CCP Infighting That May Derail Xi's Bid For 3rd Term, Analysts Say
by Nicole Hao
Norway, Not USA, Is The 'Greatest' Democracy In The World
by Tyler Durden
Edelman PR and the Manufacturing of “Trust”
by Johnny Vedmore
Eight times the United States Has Used Biological and Chemical Weapons Since WWII
by Danny Haiphong
The Government's COVID Narrative Is A LIE
with Jimmy Dore
Still No Answers On The CIA's Unconstitutional Mass Surveillance Of Americans
by Matthew Guariglia & Andrew Crocker
New Injectable Chip For "Mass Injections" To "Monitor Temperature", Israel And Mask Coercion by TLAV
(May 16, 2021)
States of Emergency
with James Corbett
British Government Laundered Fake U.S. 'Intelligence' On Ukraine
by Moon Of Alabama
How The British Establishment Functions
by Craig Murray
Europe Relies Primarily On Imports To Meet Its Natural Gas Needs
by Tyler Durden
The Strategic Blunder That Set the Stage for Today’s Ukrainian Crisis –
by Rajan Menon
Oliver Stone: American Exceptionalism Is on Deadly Display in Ukraine
by Robert Scheer
A Ukrainian sociologist explains why everything you know about Ukraine is probably wrong
America’s real adversaries are its European and other allies: The U.S. aim is to keep them from trading with China and Russia
by Michael Hudson
What does the UK gain with Ukraine war?
with Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris
US Intel Agencies Played Unsettling Role in Classified and “9/11-like” Coronavirus Response Plan
by Whitney Webb
(March 20, 2020)
How to Survive Regime Change
by James Corbett
Video: Coronavirus Investigative Committee Grand Jury
by Grand Jury
A group of international lawyers and a judge are conducting a criminal investigation modeled after the United States Grand Jury proceedings in order to present to the public all available evidence of COVID-19 Crimes Against Humanity to date against “leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices” who aided, abetted or actively participated in the formulation and execution of a common plan for a pandemic. This investigation is of the people, by the people and for the people, so YOU can be part of the jury.
Through showing a complete picture of what we are facing, including the geopolitical and historical backdrop – the proceeding is meant to create awareness about
Comedian Jokes About Vaccine Then Collapses On Stage
with Jimmy Dore
‘Health nightmare’: Dr. Robert Malone spotlights study on mRNA spike protein
“Dr. McCullough invites anyone who thinks he's wrong, and knows enough to say so, to debate him”
Dr. Peter McCullough talks about the fallout from his bombshell interview on the Joe Rogan Experience: celebrities have left or are threatening to leave Spotify because they’re angry Rogan interviewed guests like him who they say are spreading covid disinformation. McCullough has also been fraudulently fact-checked by several media outlets and says he’s willing to have a public discussion with any pro-vax expert as credentialed as he is but so far has no takers.
by Real Covid Research
"They all 'died suddenly' just this past week - February 8-14"
by Mark Crispin Miller
Brook Jackson Interview - Pfizer Reveals Concerns With 'Data Integrity' Vindicating Previous Claims
with Ryan Cristián
HIV/AIDS Compared SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 & DARPA's Immune System Focused B̶i̶o̶w̶e̶a̶p̶o̶n̶ Agenda
with Ryan Cristián
CDC finds COVID booster protection wanes after 4 months, but UCSF doctor says immune response continues - ABC7 San Francisco
by Luz Pena
News from Underground
envoyé : 13 février 2022
à : firstname.lastname@example.org
objet : Daily digest for email@example.com
1.Canada's police are joining protesters (though some are now harassing anti-Trudeau Facebook users) - Mark Crispin Miller (11 Feb 2022 18:52 EST)
2.Joe Rogan slams the lying twerps at CNN - Mark Crispin Miller (11 Feb 2022 19:25 EST)
3."Slash the tires, arrest the drivers": Harvard professor/CNN "analyst" Juliette Kayyem calls for violence against the truckers - Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 10:22 EST)
4.For Ottawa police, there is (apparently) NO "vaccine" mandate! - Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 10:32 EST)
5.Lexi Reed hospitalized after "organs started failing" - Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 10:58 EST)
6.They're still telling us that those "vaccines" are "safe." 1,000 peer-reviewed studies now say otherwise. - Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 12:42 EST)
7.116 pharmaceutical drugs are now in dangerously short supply in the US - Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 14:00 EST)
8."The Internet of Underwater Things" is yet another globalist attack on Planet Earth, and all that lives on it (including us) - Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 16:51 EST)
9."Letter to the New York State Department of Health" (MUST-READ/SHARE) - Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 16:57 EST)
Celia Farber posted this good news earlier today, on Facebook. (Scroll down for her Substack.)
This (to put it mildly) cannot be good news for Justin "Fidelito" Trudeau, and his apparat. This, no doubt, is why they're cracking down on "far right" Facebook users in Ontario:
Ontario residents cheering on the freedom protests on Facebook get a visit from police
Officers are monitoring Facebook conversations.
Canada Police Are Joining The
Protest Movement, And Other Fascinating Facts: CRITICAL Press Briefing With
Central Intelligence/Minds Of Canada Freedom Convoy, Quiggen
Shattering all propaganda talking points about "insurrection," "violence," "paranoia," and so forth
8 hr ago
Link to news conference here.
Link to news conference here.
(At the moment I have no other way of sharing this, than via FB.)
Update/edit: Link to conference on Bitchute. (Thank you Edmond)
Here is the latest effort to distort and malign the Freedom Convoy, yet when you read it, you can see the impossibility of doing so.
Joe Rogan Steamrolls CNN - Slams Brian Stelter And Don Lemon Over Misinformation
Joe Rogan Steamrolls CNN - Slams Brian Stelter And Don Lemon Over Misinformation
February 11, 2022
Joe Rogan pulled no punches in his latest podcast episode, where he savaged CNN and its top anchors for not reporting 'honest' news, and said that the network's abysmal ratings are a reflection of a lack of trust - while more people "believe me or trust me or want to listen to me talk."
Rogan, 54, reaches approximately 11 million listeners per episode - and there's a reason why.
"The answer is not to silence me, the answer is [for] you to do better," said Rogan. "The answer is for you to have better arguments. When you're on television talking about how I'm taking horse paste, and you know that's not true. "He's taking horse dewormer."
"What you should have said, "How did Joe Rogan get better so quick? How come he got COVID that's killing everybody and he was better in five days, negative in five days, working out in six days?" How come that's never discussed?"
CNN notoriously knocked Rogan for taking 'horse dewormer' because ivermectin was part of his Covid-19 treatment regimen. He subsequently annihilated CNN's Sanjay Gupta over the network's lies.
Click on the link for the
This genius wants the cops to "slash the tires," then "move the trucks"? How? (And how, with her understanding of logistics, did she get to be Obama's Undersecretary of DHS?)
"Slash The Tires, Arrest The Drivers": Harvard Professor And CNN Analyst Calls For Violence Against Freedom Convoy
BY TYLER DURDEN
February 11, 2022
Harvard professor, CNN analyst and former Obama admin undersecretary of Homeland Security Juliette Kayyem has called for violence and vandalism against Freedom Convoy protesters who have amassed on the bridge that connects Detroit, Michigan to Windsor, Ontario.
"The Ambassador Bridge link constitutes 28% of annual trade movement between US and Canada," tweeted Kayyem. "Slash the tires, empty gas tanks, arrest the drivers, and move the trucks."
Click on the link for the rest.
5.Lexi Reed hospitalized after "organs started failing" by Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 10:58 EST)
Reply to list
Multi-organ failure is a "vaccine" injury widely noted on VAERS:
Fitness influencer Lexi Reed hospitalised and placed in medically induced coma after ‘organs started failing’
February 11, 2022
Fitness influencer Lexi Reed is in the hospital “working on recovery” after she was placed in a medically induced coma and on a ventilator after her organs began to fail, according to her husband.
6.They're still telling us that those "vaccines" are "safe." 1,000 peer-reviewed studies now say otherwise. by Mark Crispin Miller (12 Feb 2022 12:42 EST)
Reply to list
And so do all those people, of all ages, keeling over all around us.
1000 Peer Reviewed Studies Questioning Covid-19 Vaccine Safety
Peer Reviewed Medical Papers Submitted To Various Medical Journals, Evidencing A Multitude Of Adverse Events In Covid-19 Vaccine Recipients.
Whereas there is no shortage of "vaccines."
Global supplies of pharmaceutical drugs are getting tighter and tighter, and this has very serious implications for 2022 and beyond. If you depend upon a certain pharmaceutical drug in order to stay alive, I would recommend doing whatever you can to make sure that you have as much of that drug stockpiled as possible, because a day may come when you are unable to get any more for an extended period of time. Much of our drug production has been outsourced to China, and our relations with China are not going so well right now. In fact, the moment that China invades Taiwan we are going to have a major league national crisis on our hands.
Let me try to explain this one step at a time.
Click on the link for the rest.
The vast pollution of our oceans with discarded masks was just the start of something bigger and worse yet, by far.
New Threat to Life: The Internet of Underwater Things
The Internet of Underwater Things is an invasive and dangerous initiative that has been quietly unfolding for a number of years
Development of “smart oceans” is a part of the overall agenda of financialization of nature
The initiative requires introduction of a wide range of invasive technologies into the ocean on a massive scale (including potentially 6G)
The Internet of Underwater Things involves device communication using acoustic waves, which can drastically interfere with marine life as inhabitants of the ocean rely on acoustic signals for basic everyday functions
Among the interested parties are World Economic Forum and DARPA
Click on the link for the rest.
This should guide all those of us who are fighting (unelected) Governor Hochul's heinous regulations.
Letter to the New York State Department of Health
On Proposed Regulations That Threaten Human Rights, Bodily Autonomy, Health, & Social Bonds
Margaret Anna Alice
32 min ago
“‘I think that New York is the new model for the new concentration camp, where the camp has been built by the inmates themselves, and the inmates are the guards, and they have this pride in this thing they’ve built. They’ve built their own prison. And so they exist in a state of schizophrenia where they are both guards and prisoners, and as a result, they no longer have, having been lobotomized, the capacity to leave the prison they’ve made or to even see it as a prison.’”
—English tree expert quoted by Andre Gregory, My Dinner with Andre
I am not a New Yorker, but that doesn’t matter. I am a human being, and I am a defender of human rights, and Dr. Mary Bassett, it appears you are, too, having previously served as director of the François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health & Human Rights and FXB Professor of the Practice of Health & Human Rights at Harvard.
And so I speak to you, Katherine Ceroalo, and your fellow decision-makers as defenders of individual rights, as New Yorkers, and as human beings. I ask that you shed any political biases, social pressures, preconceptions, cognitive biases, and coercive influences—whether financial, pharmaceutical, institutional, media, or otherwise—as you consider the following amendments and additions:
Amendment of Part 2, Section 405.3 and Addition of Section 58-1.14 to Title 10 NYCRR (Investigation of Communicable Disease; Isolation and Quarantine)
Amendment of Section 2.60 of Title 10 NYCRR & Repeal of Subpart 66-3 of Title 10 NYCRR (Face Coverings for COVID-19 Prevention)
Amendment of Section 415.3 of Title 10 NYCRR and Addition of Section 485.18 to Title 18 NYCRR (Personal Caregiving and Compassionate Caregiving Visitors in Nursing Homes and Adult Care Facilities)
Addition of Section 2.61 to Title 10 NYCRR, Amendment of Sections 405.3, 415.19, 751.6, 763.13, 766.11, 794.3 & 1001.11 of Title 10 NYCRR & Sections 487.9, 488.9 and 490.9 of Title 18 NYCRR (Prevention of COVID-19 Transmission by Covered Entities)
Before you rubber-stamp these changes into effect, please understand that you hold the lives of individual human beings in your hands, and you will be personally responsible for any physical, psychological, and emotional damage that comes to people because of your decisions.
The proposed amendment of Part 2, Section 405.3 and addition of Section 58-1.14 to Title 10 NYCRR (Investigation of Disease; Isolation and Quarantine) include treacherously broad redefinitions of terms such as “case” and “suspected case”:
(b) [A case is defined as] Case shall mean a person who has been diagnosed [as likely to have] as having a particular disease or condition. The diagnosis may be based [solely] on clinical judgment, signs and symptoms combined with known exposure based on the best available evidence of transmissibility to a case or suspected case, [solely] and/or on laboratory evidence, [or on both criteria] as applicable.
(c) [A suspected case is defined as] Suspected case shall mean a person who has been [diagnosed] determined as [likely to have] possibly having a particular disease or condition. [The suspected diagnosis] A suspected case may be based [solely] on signs and symptoms, signs and symptoms combined with known exposure based on the best available evidence of transmissibility to a case or suspected case, [or solely] and/or on laboratory evidence, [or on both criteria] as applicable. The term “suspected case” shall include persons under investigation, consistent with any guidance that the Commissioner of Health may issue with respect to a particular disease.”
Here’s a little tip: Whenever you’re reviewing legislation, always consider that you could one day be on the receiving end of the very policies you are approving.
Altering the definitions of “case” and “suspected case” such that they can be determined based solely on an authority’s judgment opens the floodgates for abuses and politically motivated persecutions the likes of which have historically been documented in totalitarian regimes to the tune of hundreds of millions of incarcerations and deaths. Believe me, you do not want to be responsible for flinging open that Pandora’s box.
Anyone with the faintest awareness of history—or every dystopian story ever written, for that matter—should understand that Orwellian redefinitions of language and ambiguous shades of meaning can and will be abused to the fullest extent that the law permits, so it is your responsibility to ensure the law reigns in rather than expands tyrannical powers. You may think those in control will exercise it responsibly, but as the past two years of escalating global authoritarianism have proven, the opposite is true.
Realize the amendments you are considering are not unlike those used to stigmatize and ghettoize the Jews during World War II.
Nazi poster distributed in Poland, March 1941
The translation of the above poster reads, “Jews are lice; They cause typhus.” Substitute today’s presently defined enemy and manufactured public health crisis made possible by the redefinition of “pandemic”, false positives generated by highly manipulable PCR tests, and inventions such as the myth of asymptomatic transmission, and you’ll find no difference between that poster and today’s fear-spiking propaganda about the unvaccinated as spreaders of disease.
Each policy enacted in the name of COVID has been driven not by “the science” but rather by political science and pharmaceutical profit motives. Thousands of exceptionally qualified scientists, physicians, and medical professionals of integrity have been voicing grave concerns about detrimental COVID policies for two years, but their cries have been smothered and their reputations smeared by the pharma–owned media, Big Tech, politicians, $cientists, and phy$icians.
Gates Foundation–bought scientists formulate conclusions scripted by their paymasters against protests from ethical scientists; career bureaucrats with god complexes formulate public health policy and remain in office despite exhaustive evidence of corruption and crimes against humanity; tyrants perpetually ratchet up their emergency powers while colluders enforce their totalitarian policies; captured agencies propagate disinformation campaigns; for-hire fact-chokers label inconvenient scientific truths “misinformation”; medical professionals violate the Nuremberg Code by administering experimental drugs without informed consent; school boards and hospitals are incentivized to enact injurious and even fatal policies; and propagandists whip up fear campaigns to “nudge” the public based on manipulation tactics devised by behavioral psychologists—a practice now under investigation in the UK after a group of psychologists condemned the government for using “grossly unethical” fear tactics, noting in their letter:
“More disturbingly, the inflated fear levels will have significantly contributed to the many thousands of excess non-Covid deaths that have occurred in people’s homes, the strategically-increased anxieties discouraging many from seeking help for other illnesses.
“Government scientists deploying fear, shame and scapegoating to change minds is an ethically dubious practice that in some respects resembles the tactics used by totalitarian regimes such as China, where the state inflicts pain on a subset of its population in an attempt to eliminate beliefs and behaviour they perceive to be deviant.”
Even Chief Medical Propagandist and WEF Young Global Leader Dr. Leana Wen now declares “the science has changed” (i.e., the public is catching on to their lies and reaching a tipping point in their awareness of the mass formation they’ve been inculcated into) and says we “should lift restrictions now.” You can get a sampling of her “evolving” messaging in this clip:
As Wen’s progenitor Goebbels says:
“There will come a day, when all the lies will collapse under their own weight, and truth will again triumph.”
We are witnessing that collapse now, and even BigPharma accomplices like Johns Hopkins are admitting policies like lockdowns not only failed but actually caused harm and even mortality.
At a time when the scientific evidence for the inefficacy of and health risks associated with masks could not be clearer, you are considering the amendment of Section 2.60 of Title 10 NUCRR and repeal of Subpart 66-3 of Title 10 NYCRR (Face Coverings for COVID-19 Prevention), which would permanently equip the governor with the power to declare mask mandates at will—sans consensus.
Click on the link for the rest.
James Corbett Lays Out the Biosecurity Agenda
with James Corbett and Jaime Santiago
Deep Dive: Vaccine Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, HIV Inserts In SARS-CoV-2 & The Aftermath
with Ryan Cristián
2021 (And 2022) Worse Than 2020 Despite Jab & "Fully Vaxed" In UK's Last Month Over 80% Of Deaths
with Ryan Cristián
What About Excess Mortality? – February 2021
with James Corbett
NOW What About Excess Mortality? – February 2022
with James Corbett and Denis Rancourt
Embalmer Reveals 93% of Cases Died from the Vaccine
by Steve Kirsch
Palestinian Factions Revolt Against PA Which “Cancels” Security Coordination With Israel
by Robert Inlakesh
Will Israel ever free itself from its Pegasus state of mind?
by Liran Gordon
Mega Group, Maxwells and Mossad: The Spy Story at the Heart of the Jeffrey Epstein Scandal
by Whitney Webb
Labour blew $1.3 million pursuing "anti-Semitism" leakers
by Asa Winstanley
Israel Pumps $30M into “Concert,” a Revamped Propaganda Campaign to Fight Apartheid Label
by Jessica Buxbaum
Will Scathing Amnesty Apartheid Report Lead to Change in Israel’s Criminal Practices?
by Miko Peled
Texas anti-BDS measure ruled unconstitutional -- again
by Nora Barrows-Friedman
Israel Bombs Syria, Syria Defends Itself, Israel Bombs Again In "Self Defense"
by Robert Inlakesh
BAR Book Forum: Ahjamu Umi’s “A Guide for Organizing Defense against White Supremacist, Patriarchal, and Fascist Violence”
by Roberto Sirvent
CIA Bad Boy John K. Singlaub, Virtual Director of Contra War, Dies at 100
by Jeremy Kuzmarov
How the US Uses the NED to Export Obedience, with Matt Kennard
by Aidan O’Brien
1 in 3 Big Defense Contractors Profit from US Prisoner Suffering
by Alan Macleod
Conflicting Views from the “Left » :
If labor truly believes that "an injury to one is an injury to all," it must build support for global vaccination.
by Saurav Sarkar
The Mandates Are Leaving Europe. Is Freedom Winning?
by Joanna Miller
Anti-democratic forces like the trucker convoy are subverting the idea of freedom in service of right-wing extremism.
by Henry A. Giroux
Video: World Awakening - Freedom Convoys
by Marcel Irnie
The Great International Convoy Fiasco
by Matt Taibbi
Canadian Civil Liberties Association Condemns Trudeau For Invoking National Emergency Over Truckers
by Tyler Durden
Video: Has Justin Trudeau Been Duly Vaccinated? Registered Nurse Expresses Doubt on Authenticity of Trudeau's Vaccine Jab
by Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Freedom Convoy: Trudeau declares emergency just hours after Ontario announces end to vaccine passports |
Worldwide Freedom Movement against Covid Mandates, QR Codes and Restrictions: The Global Elite’s Technological Coup d’État Against Humanity
by Robert J. Burrowes
Our Moment – Our Movement! Beyond the Covid Mandates. A New Horizon
by Julian Rose
Mexico City Health Ministry Stands By Ivermectin Use After 'Colonialist & Authoritarian' Censorship Of New Study
by Derrick Broze
How a little trade union in Mexico 'defeated a many-headed monster'
by Meizhu Lui
Google & Oracle To Monitor Americans Who Get Warp Speed’s Covid-19 Vaccine For Up To Two Years
by Whitney Webb
World's Rivers Awash in Pharmaceuticals, Historic Study Reveals
by Jessica Corbett
Demokracy and the Whole Point of Political Cartooning and Satire
by Mr. Fish
“Democrats, the More Effective Evil”
by Chris Hedges
“Rather Than Sink Main Street by Raising Interest Rates, the Fed Could Save It. Here’s How”
by Ellen Brown
'Net-Zero'? Europe's Top Banks Have Pumped $400 Billion Into Oil and Gas Since 2016
by Kenny Stancil
Afghan central bank calls US theft of $7 billion 'Injustice to people of Afghanistan'
by Jon Queally
Medical providers reported performing thousands less abortions in September 2021
by Sharon Zhang
African Civil Society Slams Moderna Attempt to 'Derail' Vaccine Project
by Jake Johnson
Groups Warn Texas Voting Rights 'In Jeopardy' as GOP Law Wreaks Havoc
by Jake Johnson
Police Murder of Amir Locke in Minneapolis Sparks Outrage
by Natalia Marques
Propagandist for Syria terror proxies compromised Amnesty International, leaked docs show
by Kit Klarenberg
The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Has a New Corporate Megadonor
by Donald Shaw
From: Reclaim The Net <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Feb 9, 2022
Subject: Canada begins vaccine passport backtrack, free speech app banned mandates will be removed on Februqry 14, while Alberta’s Premier Jason Kenney said his province will remove the mandates on February 15 at midnight.
Two Canadian provinces drop vaccine passports; “It is time for us also to heal the divisions in our communities” Will others follow?
by Christina Mass
On Tuesday, the premiers of the Canadian provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta announced plans to end several Covid policies, including the divisive vaccine passports.
The two provinces will become the first to end the mandates that have been sparking protests all over the country.
According to both premiers, the mandates have outlived their usefulness, and that it was time to heal the divisions caused by Covid measures.
Reclaim The Net accepts no advertising and is funded entirely by the community. If you support free speech, the eradication of cancel culture and restoring privacy and civil liberties, please become a supporter here.
Google Play, the primary app distribution channel on Android devices, has booted the alternative social network Flote from its app store after Flote, in its words, refused to "conform to their idea of 'community standards.'"
NEW SPEECH RESTRICTION
TikTok has updated its “hateful ideologies” policy with new speech restrictions to specifically include a ban on “misgendering,” and “deadnaming.”
On Christmas Day, Netflix released comedian Jimmy Carr’s special “His Dark Materials,” where the comedian made a controversial joke. You can read about that here.
"Just so I can get this right, you think people who laugh at offensive jokes should be jailed and thought this would make the SNP look good how?" one user said.
The UK has long been leading the way with the mass use of mass surveillance, such as CCTV cameras, but it is now emerging that much of the technology enabling this policy and trend is not manufactured at home.
WHAT'S THE ENDGAME?
What cynics consider to have been Twitter's "pie in the blue sky" - the Bluesky project - is apparently not forgotten.
SOMETHING TO BE AWARE OF
GiveSendGo, an alternative crowdfunding platform that came to the rescue after GoFundMe pulled the plug on fundraising for the Freedom Convoy, has suffered a vulnerability that exposed private data, TechCrunch reports.