Stephen Coughlin with V4F: Explaining the information battlefield

This is a well done 9 minute explainer video taken from an amazing podcast with Stephen Coughlin and Vets4Freedom. Please watch, learn, enjoy and most of all, spread.

The full video is below:

Stephen’s documents can be found at https://unconstrainedanalytics.org

Please click through to V4F’s YouTube channel and give it a thumbs up if you would.

The point is never the point, and global warming

The following short clip is a single question taken from a video of dual presentation on ‘Climate Change’ given by Action4Canada last week in Ottawa. The whole presentation, which richly deserves to be seen, will be available as soon as possible.

This is a question from one audience member to the first speaker of two discussing ‘Climate change’,and who, by her question, is pointing out a herd of elephants in the room:

This clip is a magnificent example of how we all become controlled opposition when we do not understand the larger strategy.

With the left, the point is never the point. The revolution, is always the point.

How does this apply here. Well, its clear that the same people who are working three shifts to take away your privacy and liberties under the rubric of Global Warming/Climate Change, are the same people replacing the population, or if not replacing, diluting them, of Western nations to the point that there is no coherence to them anymore. This means no shared values, history or sense of joint existence.

The questioner makes the point that each person who moves from a hot place to a cold place increases their ‘carbon footprint’ by 4.2X on average. So how can the same policy makers do this while also claiming to want to stop Climate Change?

At this point let’s look at the difference between a mistake and a policy.

A mistake is where you try to achieve an objective, and when you notice your methods are not achieving the results you want, you stop using them, and try something else. A policy is where you see you are in fact getting the results you want and you continue and or double down on it, no matter what you say you want or are trying to achieve. The immigration and climate change frauds have both been going on for far far too long for this to be incompetence. Writing it off as such, stupidity, ignorance, hypocrisy, greed, this is what makes us controlled opposition. Even unwittingly so. Because we are arguing the point, which it never is.

This is not to say that the architects of all these things do not fully take advantage of these lesser attributes of man. Corporate and individual greed is most definitely one of the ways the architects managed to entice powerful people and institutions into being a part of the overall plan.

When you argue against abortion, ‘trans-rights’ and all the other not-really-the-issue-issues  which are tearing us all apart in the absence of a greater understanding, it assists those with the meta plan to control us all through a total philosophical revolution. A revolution at the core of who we are.

It is obvious that the people pushing these issues and policies do not believe in them. Al Gore bought a beachfront villa for USD $8,875,000 in California in 2010, presumably in part, from the proceeds of his movie warning us all that the oceans were rising and would swallow up coastal cities within a few years. Flashing forward to today, The Oligarchs use private gets to get to the brothels in Davos every year for the WEF hedonism and megalomania festival. (Ever see the menu? It isn’t cricket)

This is because the issues themselves are meant to be destructive to our civilization, as are the ‘solutions’ to them. To divide, to dissolve any coherence we may have as a people. It is also to have the state be able to arbitrarily impose a pseudo-reality on us at a whim, especially destructive ones, and have us accept, believe and defend them. (The first example in this author’s lifetime would be Trudeau Senior’s arbitrary, expensive and destructive imposition of the Metric System in Canada. More on that in another post)

So a phoney problem is invented that requires a solution that the architects wanted all along but the public would never accept. In fact we have national constitutions preventing exactly these scenarios. This so called solution will control critical aspects of the public’s lives. Aspects which they would never have willingly given up were it not for the ‘problem’. But the phoney problem media blasts at us night and day is the device used to get the public to accept the only “acceptable ‘solution” to it. (Think vaccines) Thesis, counter-thesis, solution.

Also note: Real problems are never to be addressed; the drastically falling sperm rates in men. The paving of the best farmlands in Canada to build gargantuan brutalist beehives for massive  (debatably) legal and illegal immigration, with no consideration of how to feed these new people that we are aware of. Massive spike in dangerous recreational drug use, enormous health impacts of gene therapy vaccines, which cannot even be acknowledged by the enemy-propaganda networks that our media has become.

That is not to say that we should not understand these things on a case by case. Small policy victories can be made if you can argue reality against the imposed pseudo reality, or put simply, the total BS reasons to create a policy no one would want otherwise. But only if you can do it publicly enough that it embarrasses the policy makers. I have seen it with my own eyes. But it’s the publicity of showing obvious reality that makes the difference and again, at a small scale, like a school board. This is because the policy makers know damn well the policies they want are based on lies. But then sometimes larger scale powers will designate those who insist on reality to be terrorists, and eliminate that line of defence, such as, like parents who speak truth to school boards. The children must be seen as property of the state and doubly so what they believe. The responsibility for ensuring that ownership is all the parents have left.

If the policy makers actually wanted to mitigate the problems they claim are the issues, then proving they are wrong would work to change the policy, even without public scrutiny.

Think about how many fields in which we have all had to become minor experts in the past few decades. Climatology and virology for sure. For some of us, Islam and other issues every so often. Y2K, ozone holes, purple loosestrife, zebra mussels, killer bees, africanized honey pigs. This is because all these things are being used to negate us as a people, a history and a culture. Understanding these things well enough to know what we are being told is false is great and all. But how often does it work to explain to others who need to believe the government is benign? I would guess close to never.

The videos of the speakers from Friday night’s event should be available soon. And people should watch them. They are excellent expert presentations on climate reality. Understanding them will make you bullet proof in climate discussions. The result of which is people stop shooting at you. Getting them to understand that this isn’t about climate science is another thing altogether.

At some point the question always comes up in one form or another, ‘Why would they lie to us about all this’?

Answering this is very dangerous because unless really well explained, you will be dismissed as a nut no matter how on top of the truth you actually are. And frankly, even if it is really well explained. You have to have an audience willing to consider that they are misled as opposed to waiting for an opportunity to dismiss you and everything you think from their uncluttered intellectual cosmos.

For those who figured out early that the gene-therapy shots were a bad idea, discussions with others usually went loosely like this:

[Vaxx Skeptik] well, science science, data data, experts with nothing to gain and everything to lose show us that…

[Normie] Ok Well then if that is true, then why would they….

And that is when it all goes off the rails. You could convince someone that the vaxx is bad using reason, science and evidence. But if you dare tread into the motives for agencies promoting the shots, you move from what you know and can prove into dark conspiracies and ad hominem that even if true, will cost you your listener. In fact being asked why they would do this is a kind of trap, whether the asker is conscious of that or not.

Dr. Peter McCullough early on was brilliant in his approach. He would testify to the facts of heart damage from the gene-therapy injections, and when asked why this was being done to us, would refuse to touch the subject. He would just stick to cardiology. That was the right approach in terms of not being immediately dismissed. He did point out though, that the official literature contained curious omissions, leaving it to the listener to figure out why those omissions existed. He also explained the curious censorship of his factual documents on Covid19. This leads us to the reality on these narratives without saying that in fact, narratives is what they are. One doesn’t have to censor truth, facts and expert opinion unless you are trying to hide it.

So what Dr. McCullough did is give facts that leave the listener to come to rational conclusions about the next layer problems. This can work.

So asking everyone to abandon their jobs, families, hobbies and other interests to become an expert on every set of meta-lies imposed on us to get a world of stateless people with no rights is not a practical solution. Most people won’t even bother to read a single paper or watch a decent video showing the counter-narrative materials.

But trying to get people to understand how to look at all things in official media and see what they are designed to do, might work. Still, it is critical that we all must continue to fight the small fights we chose to take on. Whether it is the bogus trans-rights issues used to make monsters out of your children with surgery and drugs while the same people ban books like Dr. Seuss and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory for somehow being dangerous to children, or forcing your children to endure male fetishists to read kid’s books to them – yeah fight it if you can endure the Discourse Theory attacks you will be under as a consequence. We have to keep doing this. But sooner or later we have to come to understand that these issues are not the real fight.

The real fight is against a total Marxist revolution attempting to destroy every single aspect of our existence, using issues from the sanctity of life (abortion and MAiD) right on down through our cultures, to what type of car you drive.

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog.

Thank you for your time.

 

Tucker Carlson for February 24th, 2023

It should be noted that any reference to the US secretary of Transportation, Pete Buttigieg, without explaining that his father was the founder and #1 fan of the Antonio Gramsci society, and himself translated Gramsci’s Prison Diaries into English, is an error of omission that prevents any understanding of Buttigieg’s actions for what they are. Specifically Marxist dialectics, and in no way incompetence. Furthermore, the fact that he is homosexual is not identity politics. It is a distraction from the fact that he is where he is because he is a communist.

Identity politics is a smoke screen. When Clinton was running for president each time, the narrative was launched that we must vote for Hillary because she is a woman. Meanwhile the exact same people and organizations that launched her campaign and designed it to be focused that way, also launched military grade critical-theory attacks against a staggeringly competent Alaskan governor, Sarah Palin.

Attacks so well orchestrated they even dusted off Tina Fey and put her on Saturday Night Live.

As an aside, I had a discussion with a then-friend who is a Democrat and leftist in every way at around that time. I asked him why he hated Sarah Palin so much. He answered mocking a woman’s voice, “I can see Russia from my house”. I let it go for a while and a few minutes later, I asked him, ‘Do you think people who can’t tell the difference between a TV comedian and a candidate for high office should be allowed to vote?” to which he answered no.

I then reminded him that it was Tina Fey who said “I can see Russia from my house” while Sarah Palin had actually answered a question on foreign policy experience very well showing that she had to deal with Canada and Russia and other countries across the Arctic regularly as governor of Alaska, and therefore had more foreign policy experience than any of the other candidates for president or VP. (paraphrasing).

So while Sarah Palin and Hilary Clinton both identified as women at that point, only the leftward leaning ones get our support. The same for homosexuals. Pete gets to be celebrated for who or what he has sex with. But non-communist ones like Glen Greenwald, must be ignored, and on occasion demonized and destroyed. Like Candice Owens or other African descended Americans who actually like the US and Western values where destroyed by Marxist allegedly black-rights groups like BLM.

In other words, it is not, nor is it ever hypocrisy to note how identity politics is played to advance the leftist power grab. It is a smokescreen so you won’t notice who really is in control and why.

Stephen Coughlin joins Vets For Freedom Canada (V4F) for a podcast on understanding the enemy

The perfect example of Frankfurt School Discourse theory: Making opposition to govt. policy illegal

At a dinner once, I was given a licence to only say the word, “Dialectic” three times. After that, no dessert. So I learned to save it for the best uses.

This video below is a stellar example of the Frankfurt School’s Discourse theory. The way that works, is that a communist think-tank comes up with a concept they want to force onto the mainstream. They call that “a consensus”. Usually its to impose a pseudo-reality onto the public at the expense of reality. Often really obvious untruths like men can make themselves real women just by saying they are, and any attempt to stop them from all aspects of female life is a semi-crime.

The way this is done, is to make any opposition to the consensus, “hate-speech”. This is a form of dialectics. Targeted use of language and concepts to always force the culture farther and farther to the left. Examples are easy. Critical race theory. Critical gender theory. Global Warming, which if there was any honesty in the left, would be called, “critical climate theory”.

In this case, it was the Spanish Parliament. A VOX member was making the case that unbridled and massive illegal immigration resulted in certain kinds of criminality.

When he made this case, he was reminded by the president of that parliament, I assume equivalent to the Speaker of the House or Speaker of a British style Parliamentary system, that to equate immigration with crime was illegal and he must take it back and not do it again. There is zero consideration as to the truth or falsity, or even consequences to his claim. It’s that it is a claim that may not be made.

This would be because the plan is to flood the West with African and Islamic migrants with no vetting in order to prepare it for the death of all of its concepts of national identity and individual rights and replace it with an authoritarian essentially Marxist Leninist state, as they are preparing us for in Canada as well under Mark Carney and Justin Trudeau.

Normally the use of Discourse Theory is a little harder to spot. Slightly more subtle. Just real enough to make you sort of accept it while you get that increasingly familiar buzzing in your head from trying to accept what makes no logical sense. But this exchange in the Spanish Parliament was deliciously clear cut. Habermas’ Discourse theory perfectly applied in a Parliamentary situation such that no factual reference to the consequences of the massive invasion of Spain can be made. Not even it seems, pointing out that Illegal immigration is in fact, illegal.

Keep an eye on Stephen Coughlin’s Twitter feed. One suspects he will have something to say about this one.

Below, a refresher course on exactly what Discourse Theory is and how it is applied:

Please also see RAIR Foundation’s write up on the Spanish video

 

Solving the problem by defining the standards

The following YouTube video is one of the most enjoyable experiences I have had standing up. Beyond its face level meaning, there is a lot to take away about how things have happened in the past few years and even into earlier efforts this site and its colleagues have made against other government lines of effort to destroy our culture, and we as a people.

Remember how the word, ‘vaccine’ was redefined to allow for the inclusion of mRNA shots that in no way whatsoever acted like, or was made in the manner of, or in any other way fit the definition of a vaccine? The same could be said of using the PCR test for a diagnostic tool, and adjusting the cycle threshold to give the desired results. Actually for more than the last few years, governments have been manipulating definitions to get the results they want in order to justify whatever policy they want.

Anyone who follows the banning of guns knows this to be true. Legal gun owners have a lower violent crime rate than the general population. Especially homicide rates.

Homicide rate for PAL 0.67 accused / 100 000 ppl . Average Canadians 1.22 /100 000 ppl . Keep in mind 80% of Pal licensees are men aged 18-40 and the homicide rate for men aged 18-40 in the Gen pop is much higher

But it goes back much farther even with the current efforts. Remember the “Religion of Peace”? That wasn’t exactly a lie. In the book, Milestones, which is the foundational document of the Muslim Brotherhood right after the Islamic war-manual, the Koran, it is stated that once the whole world is subjugated to Islamic law, it shall know peace. And therefore, Islam is the religion of peace.

Examples of these kinds of what seem to be childish linguistic tricks are actually quite common and are among the more powerful devices being used to destroy Western Socratic civilization.

But it seems that the problem goes back much farther.

Please watch this video, which claims to be a banned Ted Talk, on how science has been practiced for centuries. We might think after seeing it, that in a way, yes, Anthony Fauci IS INDEED science. Science as its actually done, not as it is intended to be done. Science as practiced, not in theory. When one watches this, and examine Fauci’s life through the lens of RFK Jr’s book, one gets the sense that Fauci is acutely aware of the principles in this video, and applies them to his work, which means to all of our lives. Some of them much shorter and much much worse as a result.

As an aside, presumably after this lecture was recorded, but before the date of upload, the James Web telescope has accumulated enough data to put the Big Bang theory into question.

[This post may be updated and corrected over the day as people point out aspects which do not present as intended.]

 

 

Prof. James Lindsay explains the Leftist tactic of critical attacks called a “Struggle Session”

From the description:

The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 104

One of the most famous and most evil techniques of Maoist Marxism is the “struggle session” (dòuzh?ng, ??; or p?pàn dòuzh?ng, ????, “critical struggle”; or sometimes just p?dòu, ??; also called “denunciation” sessions). They were made famous during Mao’s Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), but they were utilized in the Chinese thought-reform (x?n?o, ??, lit. “wash brain” or brainwashing) prisons starting in the early 1950s under the CCP. The nature of struggle sessions must be understood clearly in 2022 because Western nations are going through a “Woke” Maoist insurgency now, and the struggle session is all the way back in fashion (and has been for some time). Since being banned and returning to Twitter following Elon Musk’s acquisition, host of the New Discourses Podcast, James Lindsay, has been subjected to a rather brutal online struggle session (a “twitter storm” as a harassment campaign) in the attempt to punish him back off the site and to discredit his highly effective popularization of the term “groomer” for Maoist ideological groomers, especially those using Queer Marxism. In this groundbreaking episode of the podcast, James goes through the struggle session he’s currently experiencing while tying it to the psychological analysis of that phenomenon as presented in Robert Jay Lifton’s book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of “Brainwashing” in China (https://amzn.to/3ulwEkf ). Join him to learn about this destructive form of bullying activism and to learn how you can resist it.

War on Christmas and repressive tolerance

Johnny U posted a worthy oped from the Washington Times in a much appreciated comment he left at Vlad this morning.

Thank you John, for that and for all your contributions to this site.

The OpEd is about the war on Christmas being in fact about a war on America. This is of course true. But the author went to war and left his guns, uniform and C rations at home. While he noticed that there seems to be, shall we say, inequities in how Christmas is treated by the left and left influenced institutions, he didn’t offer any understanding as to why.

I would like to post my response to that comment here, and with an additional example beyond the response to the comment.

Anyone reading that article should aquaint themselves with the concept of “Repressive Tolerance”.

This, if memory serves, is a Frankfurt School Marxist based tactic.

One uses the concept of tolerance to try and get people to deconstruct all their own traditions and concepts and culture in order to show tolerance to others, while promoting all the others at the expense of your own.

The author of the Washington Times article described the effects quite well, even if he left out the best examples of it and showed lack of awareness as to its strategic origins and nature.

In terms of examples, I would point out that while we are increasingly no longer allowed to acknowledge Christmas, disapproving of women in burkas is a hate crime and closer and closer to a criminal offence every day.

This is Repressive Tolerance at work.

A few years ago, we subtitled a series of videos by a Polish academic on Marxism where he covers this concept. But it is dense and not fun watching even if it is very important and explains a lot. Much like Stephen Coughlin. In fact, Maj. Coughlin actually used those videos in some of his writing and briefs.

But here is James Lindsay, (the Prof. who busted the whole peer-review process with the publication of his phoney essay on “Rape Culture at a Dog Park”) demonstrates how repressive tolerance was devised and is used.

Ultimately, one uses tolerance to do two things.

Move the culture ever leftwards

Be maximally destructive to Western Civilization.

Subsequent to writing this response to Johnny, an example of same leapt to my attention on my phone. Almost as if Google was carefully tracking my interests.

Here is the aforementioned Polish academic explaining how Marxism uses homosexuality as a destructive force on Western civilization

(Actually it’s about much more than that, and worth every second of the 13:42 it lasts.)

Now in case anyone gets the idea that you can beat this thing by simply not going to see crappy commie themed movies like the one she refrences, let’s stop and think about what a social credit score and CBDC actually means. If you don’t go and see whatever propaganda is put out before you, and pay for it with what means you have, you just might get turned down for that critical loan or other item you need for yourself, your business or your family. Hell you may not even be able to see your family.

For that matter, you may not be able to access what you thought of as ‘your own money’. I think a few hundred truckers and people who contributed small amounts to a legal protest over removal of basic civil liberties in Ottawa may be able to see how that can happen.

And if anyone still thinks that the scenario I just described is too far out to be true, you simply have not been paying attention for the past twenty years. Even the last three.

Pseudo-environmentalism and the extinction of the Right Whale

This is a now archetypal story. Feminism has been subverted by Hegelian/Marxist weaponized rhetorical devices to destroy women. It was possibly even created to do that. The practice of medicine, well I’ll leave that to readers to decide how that started and where it is now.

Climate science is now a tool to destroy only Western Civilization while all other cultures and industry get a pass on using as much coal and oil as they want.

And of course, environmentalism is now about to cause the extinction of an extremely rare species of whale, called the Right Whale.

This problem is now so large, that actual environmentalists do not wish to call themselves that, as the word itself now means corruption and perversion of something important to do its opposite.

Can anyone think of a word to describe this process? Starts with a D.

Please read story details at: RAIR Foundation.com

James Lindsay: The Marxification of education

Like all Prof. James Lindsay’s lectures. this is profound and important. Anyone who has children in schools or recently changed their values while in schools should watch this. This video is a brilliant explanation of the methods and tactics of Marxists within the school system to destroy children’s whole belief set and value system, and make them activists for a permanent system of endless destruction.

Lindsay explains who Marx is not a philosopher, but is someone who simply created a system for transforming people into agents of destruction, of everything, eternally.

One could, if one wanted, score another point for the claim that communism is demonic. At the practical level, it is.