When did free speech become a bad thing?

[QUOTE=Facepalm]Exactly.

Meanwhile, if Trump becomes President he wants to make it easier to sue news outlets.[/QUOTE]

If you print lies...

[QUOTE=west_tip]
It seems like we are becoming a more polarized, racially segregated society which is not good.[/QUOTE]


[IMG]https://i.sli.mg/XgKy2f.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Nick Young][IMG]https://i.sli.mg/XgKy2f.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

Also, there is one component that is not addressed on that chart that forms an important part of the social control model in the US: Identity politics pushed 24/7 in the news media and in academia to create tension and distrust amongst races. It's just good old divide and conquer by getting everyone to think and act along tribal lines.

[QUOTE=west_tip]Also, there is one component that is not addressed on that chart that forms an important part of the social control model in the US: Identity politics pushed 24/7 in the news media and in academia to create tension and distrust amongst races. It's just good old divide and conquer by getting everyone to think and act along tribal lines.[/QUOTE]

A very key component.

[QUOTE]Demoralize a public with depressing news in the mainstream media, plunging the nation into serious debt using controlled and manipulated recessions and depressions, low-income jobs and high unemployment, evermore controlling new laws and regulations that are increasingly intrusive to all citizens.

[B]Destabilize a population by pitting groups against each other, i.e. Democrats vs. Republicans or pro-choice vs. anti-abortion or gun owners vs. anti-gun citizens, in pitched battle. And when The First Sphere of Influence (TFSI; The Jesuits) can’t corral those elusive holdouts who subscribe to no party or religion or group, TFSI creates even further “false opposition,” i.e. those people and groups who purport to be friends of We The People and who allegedly oppose TFSI, echoing their pro-We The People sentiments in high public places. The grim reality is that those final holdouts among We The People are cleverly being pulled into a black hole of false security by all the false opposition and controlled opposition.[/B][/QUOTE]

We've seen both of these things recently.

[QUOTE=west_tip]Also, there is one component that is not addressed on that chart that forms an important part of the social control model in the US: Identity politics pushed 24/7 in the news media and in academia to create tension and distrust amongst races. It's just good old divide and conquer by getting everyone to think and act along tribal lines.[/QUOTE]
Identity politics are the class warfare part.



Rule 8) can be summarized in modern terms as "check your privilege"

I'm not an Alinsky fan by any means, but where is the source for this text? It seems suspiciously relevant to contemporary controversies...

You probably got it off some right wing website.

[QUOTE=BoutPractice]I'm not an Alinsky fan by any means, but where is the source for this text? It seems suspiciously relevant to contemporary controversies...

You probably got it off some right wing website.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/62/Rules_for_Radicals.png[/IMG]
:cheers:

[QUOTE=west_tip]It's actually a fascinating phenomenon, I'm not sure when exactly liberals went from being relatively tolerant to essentially trying to suppress peoples opinions that they don't agree with and brand people racist or sexist in order to discredit them.

When I was in college in the 90's I certainly identified as a liberal but given ones natural predisposition for moving toward the center/right as you get older and have a family/mortgage combined with the authoritarian and dogmatic behavior of many liberals today I just cannot identify with them. It seems all too many of them are just useful idiots for globalists who care not one jot for humanity, only profits.[/QUOTE]


This

[QUOTE=BoutPractice]I'm not an Alinsky fan by any means, but where is the source for this text? It seems suspiciously relevant to contemporary controversies...

You probably got it off some right wing website.[/QUOTE]

'Rules for Radicals'

[QUOTE]Despite the effective nature of the lessons passed down in Rules for Radicals, Alinsky has received some criticism for the methods and ideas he presented. First, it has been noted that much of his instruction has only been effective in urban, low-income areas.[7] This has led some social scientists, such as Robert Pruger and Harry Specht, to criticize his broad statement that Rules for Radicals is a tool for organizing all low-income people.[/QUOTE]

^This^ means 'steps to control poor black folks' but it's much more PC to say 'low-income urban areas'.

[QUOTE][B]Alinsky would find an external antagonist to turn into a "common enemy" for the community within which he was operating. Often, this would be a local politician or agency that had some involvement with activity concerning the community.[/B] Once the enemy was established, the community would come together in opposition of it. This management of conflict heightened awareness within the community as to the similarities its members shared as well as what differentiated them from those outside of their organization.[3] The use of conflict also allowed for the goal of the group to be clearly defined. With an established external antagonist, the community

[QUOTE=UK2K]


BLM, blocking interstate roadways for example? Which only works because police go in with strict orders not to be too mean. We all know if I was out blocking traffic on the interstate, I'd be arrested in a heartbeat but....[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUVfuTYrtC0"]Yes. Or blocking ambulances with patients inside. [/URL]

[QUOTE=UK2K]If you print lies...[/QUOTE]
What lies about Trump did the Washington Post print?

[QUOTE=Nick Young][URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUVfuTYrtC0"]Yes. Or blocking ambulances with patients inside. [/URL][/QUOTE]

Holy shit.

:facepalm

Wtf has this world come to.

Leftists are not going to like where this is heading. :lol

It's not a bad thing when the populace is educated and mannered.

It is harmful for the well being of the individual to let loose the tongue without certain restraints

[QUOTE=JEFFERSON MONEY]
It is harmful for the well being of the individual to let loose the tongue without certain restraints[/QUOTE]

Sounds like something Mao or Stalin might have said.