“The psychological consequences [of 1930] were overwhelming. The trying experiences of the post-war period of turmoil and hyperinflation had left many Germans without the emotional strength to deal with an economic crisis that exceeded everything that had come before. An apocalyptic mood of hopelessness began to take hold, even among those segments of the populace that were not primarily affected by the Depression. Faith in democratic institutions and democratic political parties dissolved, and anti-parliamentary sentiment, already rife in the Weimar Republic, was given a huge boost. Those in power appeared to have no solutions to the crisis, and the more helpless they seemed to be, the greater the demand became for a ‘strong man,’ a political messiah who would lead Germany out of economic misery and point the way towards renewed national greatness.”
“Hitler’s campaign speeches followed the same pattern. He began with a polemic against the Weimar ‘system’ which he blamed for Germany’s decline and decay, comparing Western parliamentarianism to a ‘worn-out tailcoat.’??? Democracy, Hitler claimed, was fundamentally unable to solve Germany’s problems ecause it privileged the rule of the majority over ‘“the authority of personality.’ Hitler then went after the other political parties, which, he claimed, represented only special interests and never the people as a whole. ‘Twelve years of unlimited rule by the old parliamentary parties have turned Germany into an object for exploitation and made it the laughing stock of the entire world,’ Hitler thundered. The NSDAP, he told his audience, represented a ‘new popular German movement’ that overcame class conflicts and the selfish interests of specific social castes: “There is only one movement that recognises the German people as a whole, rather than individual groups, and that movement is ours.??? In this respect, the NSDAP was a model for what Hitler had in store for all of Germany: the creation of a Volksgemeinschaft, a racially defined ethnic-popular community. This Hitler defined as a form of social ‘organisation that no longer knows proletarians, bourgeois, farmers, artisans, etc. but rather is constituted by people from all parts of Germany and all groups of [its] population.’ The idea of the Volksgemeinschaft seems to have particularly fascinated Hitler’s audience. He could count on storms of applause every time he invoked it. The concept was inseparably linked with the promise of national revival …”
Yes, now one of the more popular (as in 78 listens!) from Old White Coot.
Donald J. Trump just appointed the real General Jack Ripper, Michael Flynn, to national security advisor, except he’s Army, Ripper was USAF. Much like Ripper’s catastrophic belief that fluoridation was “a Commie plot to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids” in Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove, Flynn believes that Shariah, or Islamic law, is spreading throught the country, impurifying our precious bodily fluids, so to speak. “It is not,” informs the New York Times, with some lack of prudent emphasis.
Here’s one thing the Democratic Party never understood and now it lies in ruins. For the eight years of the Obama administration GOP special interest groups sent an assortment of paranoids and bigots into small town red state USA to give lectures on sharia and how Iran was going to put an end to American civilization with an electromagnetic pulse.
A friend pointed me to a new biography of Adolf Hitler, reviewed by Michiko Kakutani at the New York Times. In writing about Hitler: Ascent 1889-1939 by Volker Ullrich, Kakutani goes out of her way to insert Donald Trump into almost every paragraph without naming him. It’s that transparent.
Factor in the hysteria over a Trump victory in November now gripping the swells. It virtually dictates a goose-step parade of crap-dumpling social media picture memes, pull-the-wings-off-flies sneering and more Hitler comparisons between now and election day.
Hitler is a book I’ve just started to read (obtained on the digital theft line — I will accept a hardback copy, too).
And it would be good to recall Trump still doesn’t have anywhere near the reputation for extreme political and street violence beating up the opposition Hitler possessed prior to being named chancellor in 1933. No failed revolt in a big city or state; no jail time in which to write a Mein Kampf.
People were intimidated, killed, disappeared, their houses and stores smashed, their belongings stolen by Hitler’s paramilitaries, the SA and the nascent SS. And Dachau was opened in 1933, a little after he was named chancellor but a year before he made himself reichsfuhrer.
I don’t say it’s necessary to read Mein Kampf but if you dig into a little of it — well, let’s say Trump couldn’t write a book like that, although he claims to have written a few bestsellers on how to use greed with skill.
Trump has no complicated ideas, other than terrible asshat ones, that vanish or change in instants. Hitler had many, well outlined, and he never wavered from them.
Relatively early in Mein Kampf, Hitler expresses his rage, in dense prose, at being poor while simultaneously cultivating a murderous contempt for “elites,” that disregard growing enormously while in Vienna as a struggling young man where fine arts college masters thought so little of his talents they wouldn’t let him take an entrance exam.
Hitler became a bitter homeless bum. But, to put it mildly, that was not the end of it.
Unlike Trump, Hitler never had any interest in money or becoming a businessman.
Blacked out for a few minutes during the middle of the debate.
I’ll be voting for HRC despite her being a pedant who talks nonsense about reviving the middle class through the fostering of small business. Sell your curios on eBay, in other words. Innovation!
Everything Trump said except the opening bits on trade and globalism sounded like gobble.
I blacked out again when the debate got to cyberwar, Putin being behind hacking us poor Dems and Trump going on about his 10-year old son being good with computers. Neither of the candidates has anything worth listening to on the subject. A few extra points off for HRC who assuredly knows about Stuxnet and our cyberwar with Iran but who insisted upon putting up a facade indicating the country’s behind in capability.
Blanked for a third and fourth time when it got to arguing about who was more likely not to use nuclear weapons first against a theoretical enemy. Trump seemed to say he would adhere to no-first-use then appeared to reverse himself seconds later.
Still unanswered, how to fix the wreckage caused by “free trade” in the US. Clinton had nothing for it last night. Expected nothing, got nothing.
However, since she’s going to be president she ought to have to keep answering for it, not just send her husband out the next day as cover:
“Mr. Clinton, who was president 1993 through 2000, acknowledged that the international trade deals have not always worked out as well as planned.” [the Toledo Blade]
“Not always worked out as well as planned,” accurate but like saying, “Deepwater Horizon was a bad oil spill.” It kinda leaves a lot out.
“Her opponent blamed NAFTA, but that’s not really what happened. You want to know what happened? It’s really important you understand this, because any president who wants to trade with other countries has got to take this into account.???
Clinton said Carrier wanted to break the union in a rush toward profits and in turn blew off an offer from employees to try to save the Midwestern plant from going to Mexico.
“They wanted to break the union, make the money in a hurry and give it to their activist shareholders, we used to call them raiders, and give it to their CEO. So an American president, until we go back to being a stakeholder country, where corporations take account not just their most active shareholders, but their workers, their communities and their customers and their future, we have to be a lot more careful,” Clinton said. “And that is something we have all learned.”
The Clintons would love to squirm out of this by throwing up a dust screen of nit-picky details. Economists, and authors like Thomas Frank, have written quite a bit about how NAFTA was made to give corporate wealth power at the expense of labor.
In this case, Bill Clinton is being slippery and it’s because his wife is extremely vulnerable in this area.
So it’s a choice between the teacher’s pet and the class clown. Between Reese Witherspoon and Jack Black. — Barbara Ehrenreich, today
And do listen to all 90 seconds of China Toilet Blues from “Old White Coot.” It helps me out, if only psychically.
The symbol of the Strat electric guitar & big “Freedom,” at the — ahem — Quicken Loans complex in Cleveland, setting the standard:
“In Cleveland, officials are estimated to have spent at least $20 million in federal funds on equipment ranging from bicycles and steel barriers to 2,000 sets of riot gear, 2,000 retractable steel batons, body armor, surveillance equipment, 10,000 sets of plastic flex cuffs, and 16 laser aiming systems, which a technology retailer describes as being used for night direct-fire aiming and illumination.???
Because freedom is not free, particularly the crowd suppression and riot control parts.
It’s the news phenom in which US reporters ask Brit-expats, almost always wealthy, what they think of Brexit. The old blog term for it was Shoeshine, that being what the well-off will say or think in support of those at the very top. A high button performance in kickdown on the classes below the chosen and their servants.
From Brattleboro, Vermont, Peter Solley, a Brit hack session producer/musician from the era of classic rock:
In fairness, the newspaper goes on to interview one person with a bit of a different viewpoint.
For the sake of timeliness I’m reading Greek economist Yanis Varoufakis’ latest book, “And the Weak Suffer What They Must?” on the EU. Obviously written before Brexit, it’s fair to say Varoufakis saw it coming.
Britain didn’t always have it so great and the City of London, its financialization engine, wasn’t its sole place of super successful economic activity. Things were hard before the EU was called that, the Seventies, when it was the European Communities. Even Margaret Thatcher was not a fan at all, being ridden out of power by peers who wished to be in on the administration of a newer monetary order.
Varoufakis’ book is a history of the EU, its early precursors and the economic policies and tides that have led to where it is today.
There are a numbr of reasons for its genesis, prime among them being the Paul Volcker-devised Nixon shock that did away with the Bretton Woods system.
It’s a complicated story.
But very briefly and incompletely Bretton Woods instituted a system in which the US made the dollar a euro-dollar. The purpose was to re-initialize the economies of Europe after World War II. Germany was in ruins. France had been occupied, turned into a vassal state, and been a battleground, too. And Britain was encumbered with crushing debt. The US used Bretton Woods to back the European reconstruction of currencies and value with gold set at a rigid price in which one ounce was an absolute guarantee of 35 US dollars.
But by the early Seventies, Germany and Japan had been rebuilt, going from deficit to surplus nations. The US had been the supreme global surplus nation, controlling the currents of the world economy. No longer was it the single pole of the engine.
The rise of Germany and Japan meant the US went from being a surplus to a deficit nation. This, along with gold speculation by German bankers and the French, destabilized Bretton Woods.
Paul Volcker, then the head of the New York Federal Reserve Bank analyzed what had happened and developed a scheme for keeping America’s upper hand in the global economy. It would no longer honor Bretton Woods. It uncoupled the gold pledge, raised global interest rates and instituted tight money.
Varoufakis explains:
“High interest rates are wonderful for those living on unearned income, the so-called rentiers, but not so good for manufacturers who see their investment costs skyrocket and the purchasing power of their customers plummet. For this reason, combining high returns to financial capital (requiring high interest rates) with high profit rates for American businesses (requiring low interest rates) was never going to be easy, and Volcker knew this. It was a combination that could only come about if another way of providing that profit could be found. And one way to do that would be to reduce wages. On the one hand, the Fed would push interest rates through the roof while, at once, the federal government would turn a blind eye, indeed promote, policies that crushed the real wage prospects of American workers …
“Soon, the fate of America’s working class was to infect the circumstances of weak citizens in Britain, in France and, by the 1990s, even in Germany …
“Disintegration was in the air and the majority of people in a majority of countries eventually acquiesced to the notion that labor was overvalued and overprotected, manufacturing was overrated, while finance was undervalued and in need of unshackling. Everything became increasingly reducible to its financial value.”
Varoufakis’ book is fascinating, particularly as a history in which the European economic engine is assembled in a jerrybilt way as a substitute for Bretton Woods, but regularly misfiring and bringing misery, plagued by the monetary policies of its leading nations, primarily here set by German bankers and their autocratic agendas. The story Varoufakis tells is surely not one at all favored by the current rulers of the EU and American economic machines.
So while the institutional complainers, the shoeshine boys of the ruling elites, go after the the alleged misinformed and nativist flaws of the Leavers, they really don’t know a lot more about what they’re talking of than those they’ve condemned so vehemently. Of course, from their short term point of view, Brexit is bad.
Historically, perhaps something like this was slated to happen. And if a similar political earthquake transpires here, it can’t be unexpected. At least that’s the impression Varoufakis’ reasoning gives me.
Varoufakis continues, mid-book:
When John Connally crudely explained to President Nixon, relying on Volcker’s underlying analysis, that “all foreigners are out to screw us and it’s our job to screw them first,” what he meant was that the Bretton Woods balancing act was becoming imbalanced by the surpluses of countries like Germany and Japan.
Impervious to the global responsibility that comes with large trade surpluses, these foreigners were trying, childishly, to take advantage of the United States’ commitment to global balance, the result being a complete collapse of the postwar equilibrium. Like immature children that know not what is good for them, European governments and Japan, sporting increasing surpluses, were taking advantage of America’s difficulty in maintaing order with detrimental results for everyone.
Volcker’s 1978 Warwick speech had given the Europeans ample warning. He effectively threw down the gauntlet to Bonn, Paris, London and Tokyo. Between the lines he was foreshadowing the second phase of America’s postwar global dominance. In 1971, Volcker implicitly told his audience, America dismantled the monetary system whose integrity Europeans had foolishly undermined. Its next move would be to bring about a highly imbalanced global system that the United States controlled fully because, rather than in spite, of America’s twin deficits (its trade deficit and its federal government budget deficit).
The price for that new system, which would extend America’s dominance, was high: weak people and fragile countries were, once more, left to their own devices, suffering not what was globally optimal but that which they “must??? in a world economy unrestrained by New Deal–like rules and institutions. Politics would become toxic, social solidarity would weaken, international relations would turn nastier, abject poverty would multiply in Latin America and Africa. Nonetheless, the United States was bound to emerge as a net beneficiary of this painful “disintegration???…
I can’t do the book all the justice it deserves. At best, I have cherry-picked pieces with which I have great affinity. Yet there is much food for thought here from every angle and you must read “And the Weak Suffer What They Must? Europe’s Crisis and America’s Economic Future” yourself.
The morning after “Brexit” our “elites” were wringing their hands in opinion pages everywhere over how Leave delivered to Britain’s “elites” an epic punch in the face.
But did you notice that while the “elites” were doing all the explaining, excusing and bemoaning, there was no initial invitation to let any people who felt they had to throw that punch to the public speakers table?
For examples of the shunning of the common pariahs, you only needed to look at the opinion pages of the New York Times. One of the six-figure explainers, Roger Cohen, delivered no less than two condemnations.
From the first, it’s final bit: “My nephew wrote on Facebook that he had never been less proud of his country. I feel the same way about the country I grew up in and left.”
Ashamed and shamed, from the gold-plated opinion-maker to the upper crust Facebook lad to the hoity-toity ice cream vendor.
But where was opinion from the winning side? Missing entirely.
A day later, Owen Jones, author of “Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class” was in the Guardian:
“Above all else, it was about immigration, which has become the prism through which millions of people see everyday problems: the lack of affordable housing; the lack of secure jobs; stagnating living standards; strained public services. Young remainers living in major urban centres tend to feel limited hostility towards immigration; it could hardly be more different for older working-class leavers in many northern cities and smaller towns.”
The sentiments are familiar. The “social problem” is here, too, quite obviously so.
The betters have had years to extend a hand. Telling people to suck it up, get more education and not be bigots because your station comes inevitably as a result of your choices and talents. That worked for awhile. Now it’s seen for what it always was, a fob.
This is what destroyed the GOP. And it’s what threatens the Democratic Party and the predicted inevitable presidency of Hillary Clinton. They have no answers, either. In fact, they’re pretty much all right with how things have turned out, Brexit, a mere inconvenience in this hemisphere.
We have to work together, not tear each other down, they say. The words are hollow.
Having just read “Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class” by Owen Jones, I’d expect the Brexit vote to break along class and perceived class lines. Older, northern England, shafted by the Tories and New Labour for exit. Everyone else for staying.
“Louise said she understood the pressures that immigration placed on schools and hospitals. But leaving the European Union worried her, she said, because it risked wrecking the economy and making it hard for young people to secure employment. It took her eight months to find work as a barista, she said.”
This is all through “Chavs,” the updated edition which I have, dating from 2012.
As in the US, government policies, in the UK, starting with Thatcher, made the British economy lethal for millions of its workers. “Chavs” explains the result in terms of the UK not being able to generate sufficient jobs, period. Those that exist pay very poorly.
If it takes eight months to find work as a barista, it seems to me the underlying problem of simply finding even subsistence work is so severe that it won’t be affected by either staying or leaving.
And the argument left out of the anecdotaly New York Times piece, which I did not know, is that a number of Tories vigorously support Brexit because a vote for leaving the E.U. will allow them to apply even more pressure to the working class.
“But, all over Britain, people have fallen for the scam. In the Brexit referendum, we’ve seen what happens when working-class culture gets hijacked – and when the party that is supposed to be defending working people just cannot find the language or the offer to separate a fake revolt from a real one. In many working-class communities, people are getting ready to vote leave not just as a way of telling the neoliberal elite to get stuffed. They also want to discomfort the metropolitan, liberal, university-educated salariat for good measure…
“I want to have one last go at convincing you that leaving now, under these conditions, would be a disaster. First, let’s recognise the problem. For people in the working classes, wages are at rock bottom. Their employers treat them like dirt. Their high streets are lined with empty shops. Their grownup kids cannot afford to buy a home. Class sizes at school are too high. NHS waiting times are too long …
“But a Brexit led by Ukip and the Tory right will not make any of these things better: it will make them worse. Take a look at the people leading the Brexit movement. Nigel Farage, Neil Hamilton, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove. They have fought all their lives for one objective: to give more power to employers and less to workers. Many leading Brexiters are on record as wanting to privatise the NHS. They revelled in the destruction of the working-class communities and cultures capable of staging real revolt.”
JUAN GONZ??LEZ: And, Thomas Frank, to get to Donald Trump, as well, and his appeal, obviously he has focused a lot of his attention on these trade deals, on NAFTA and the Pacific trade partnership. What about the appeal of Trump to working-class voters? Is that real or not, from what you can tell?
THOMAS FRANK: Well, it’s real, but it’s—I mean, it’s shrinking fast. I mean, this guy is—this guy is a gold-plated buffoon, you know? What we have to—what we have to consider here with Donald Trump is we have to understand that what’s happening with Donald Trump, this is not—you know, there’s all sorts of different ways of describing it, but what we’re really seeing here is a reaction to—I mean, you know, to inequality. This is what it looks like when vast parts of America are—you know, when the economy has basically dried up and blown away. You know, this is what deindustrialization—at the end of the day, this is what it looks like, when, you know, Democrats go around celebrating this wonderful new information economy that we’re in. And by the way, they’re doing it today on The New York Times op-ed page; they do it all the time. They celebrate that. And the other side of the coin is that, you know, the middle class is shrinking. Wages never go anywhere. You know, the percentage of the gross national product that is—that goes to labor these days is the lowest it has ever been since World War II. You know, look, for a lot of people, the promise of American life is over. It’s gone.
And this is only going to get worse under a Hillary Clinton presidency. And, well, it would get much, much worse under a Donald Trump presidency. But what I’m getting at here is that this phenomenon, inequality, is going to get worse. All the problems that we’re looking at today, our economic problems, are going to—are going to get worse. And four years from now, you’re going to have another Trump.
Owen Jones, at the end of Chavs, writes (remember, this is 2012):
It would be tempting to make all sorts of doom-laden, apocalyptic predictions about what will happen if such a [global labor movement] fails to get off the ground, and warn darkly of riots and revolutions. The reality is just downright depressing. The working class will remain weak and voice-less. They will still be the butt of jokes at middle-class dinner parties, detested in angry right-wing newspaper columns, and ridiculed in TV sitcoms. Entire communities will remain without secure, well-paid work, and the people that comprise them will continue to be demonized for it. Living standards will go on stagnating and declining, even while the richest rake it in like never before. Ever fewer working-class people will bother to vote. Right-wing populism will tap into growing disillusionment and fury at the manner in which working-class people have become so despised. Mainstream politicians will continue to focus their energies on satisfying the demands of a small, wealthy elite, while growing ever more indifferent to the needs of an increasingly apathetic working class…
At its heart, the demonization of the working class is the flagrant triumphal ism of the rich who, no longer challenged by those below them, instead point and laugh at them.
Join any conversation with members of the Democratic Party and nine times out of ten, right now you’ll hear the same mockery and total dismissal of those supporting Donald Trump.
Much of the HRC campaign will be devoted to eye-rolling at the demagogue and his followers. The message, plain as the nose on your face: Look how pathetic and unfit for anything they are.
A small detachment of the White Gun Bully of America Army has started the rebellion and asks for your help in continuing the war against tyranny in the outback of Oregon. Grab your AR-15s and ammo, your Don’t Tread on Me yellow flags, jump in your truck and help fan the spark seen round the country into a mighty flame.
It’s time for heavily armed middle-aged white men in camos and funny hats and who are really angry at everyone not like them to take back a national forest state park established by famous dictator Teddy Roosevelt.
I know, as a sovereign citizen who believes in the natural rights of our people, you’re ready to fight. As incentive, we’re handing out free copies of The Turner Diaries, each signed by the Bundy family and their patriotic lieutenants.
Here at Retired from WhiteManistan, we’ve seen it all for years, about two decades worth. The White Gun Bully of America Army is now at full wax.
And it should come as no surprise that one of the ring-leaders is a member of a demographic covered at length here: White people who self-publish end-of-America fiction featuring doom through electromagnetic pulse and the subsequent ritual of purging of all the infidels that occurs when the leftover real Americans fight for what’s right. And their families.
Lavoy Finicum is one of the leaders of the cohort that has taken over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, according to TPM.
And Mr. Finicum has written an end times novel entitled Only By Blood and Suffering, one that falls in with the hundreds of other self-published books, by right wing white supremacists and preppers, about the fall of the United States after an electromagnetic pulse attack throws the country back to the time of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.
It is an allegedly five star book.
One reader enthuses:
After reading more than 650 such novels, I can say without a doubt that this author is much more than a great author. He is a great philosopher and his knowledge of mankind and history is vast. I agree 100% with him that this novel could come true. He KNOWS the good and the evil in man. He is man of honor, and his portrayal of evil is startling. All this happens in America. Everyone should read this book and KNOW that we may be looking at our future! The Federal agencies that have STOLEN our freedoms while we have been asleep have done and in time of national disaster such as an EMP will act just as depicted. Already the Government at all levels is ignoring the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. I am risking my freedom even posting this review, but I do not care! I am old and remember when we had more freedom and were mostly left alone. Read this novel and see our future should a terrorist country take down the grid (which the Feds refuse to harden, but spend our taxes on non-essential projects.) The author is a TRUE PATRIOT in the manner of our FOUNDING FATHERS.
Another, equally fulsome:
Only By Blood and Suffering is both entertaining and eye-opening. It is one of those truly impactful books that stays in your thoughts for a long time after reading it. I was able to visualize everything that happens in the book very well and that for me is the mark of a good book. The first half of the book is captivating, as it relates the various accounts of family members journeying home during a crisis. “Preppers” will love the survival experiences and dilemmas described. If you’re not a prepper, reading this book will turn you into one. The hopeful aspect of this book is that we can prepare in advance and ease the difficulties that inevitably will come, and this author completely succeeds in that effort.
The main theme of this book is the fight for freedom. Finicum doesn’t just tell the reader why this is important, but he shows over and over again how slippery and dangerous this threat is and how to regain it. This book is uplifting and realistic (while still being appropriate for all readers).
The second half of the book focuses on the hero and freedom fighter, the father and his strategic defense of his home and family. I highly recommend this book to anyone, those who love apocalyptic literature, of course, but especially to those who wouldn’t consider themselves avid “end of times” readers, because I sense the cause for which the book was written, was to truly warn and help those who are in the dark about these things.
“Ten or 30 rounds, what difference does it make???? one fellow tells the newspaper. “I can change a clip in 1.5 seconds.???
Another keeps a thirty-round magazine-equipped AR-15 in his house for protection. In case a couple of squads attack, one presumes.
Keep your hands off, gun grabber, or a “sizable population” will start a revolution, another tells the Times.
Perish forbid, I would never think of grabbing their junk.
I don’t have to write much about WhiteManistan anymore. Why bother? The newsmedia has to wrestle with the ways of the good Americans, daily.
In the meantime, do enjoy a fond look back at PARIAH, the magazine that caught the spirit of it way before the big dailies had their noses rubbed in it. It was ahead of its time.
Art, ruin, revenge and white supremacy — all wrapped up in a magazine that coulda shown up Garden & Gun.
Amid a new round of debate over gun control, Californians have already bought a record number of firearms in 2015, including major spikes in sales on Black Friday and the days after the San Bernardino attacks, an analysis of new federal and state data show.
Firearms purchases in California triggered 1.51 million federal background checks in the first 11 months of the year, breaking the previous annual record of 1.47 million set last year.
And December typically brings even more firearms purchases than any other month, whether for holiday gifts or getting ahead of new gun restrictions the new year might bring.
The gun dealers’ holiday season got off to a rousing start.
The newspaper interviews the head of a gun dealers trade group. And gets the standard book on the subject:
“Every single time the politicians start talking about firearms bans or increasing regulation, folks start to realize, ‘This is a right that if I don’t exercise it, I may lose it,’ “ said Craig DeLuz, spokesman for the California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees, a gun dealers’ trade group. “It’s not the sole motivator, but it’s a significant motivator.???
As he was shopping for some ammunition Saturday at San Jose’s new Bass Pro shop, longtime gun owner David Palava said the sales spike “is not hard to figure out.???
“Thirty years ago, guns were a hobby,??? said Palava, 62, of East San Jose. “Now they seem more necessary. … We have terrorists here being imported by our government.???
The government is the enemy.
And this is even as it has failed, or barely even tried, to do anything at the federal level on gun control. Insane booms in gun sales have occured at regular intervals and after every fresh massacre. The presidency of Barack Obama has also been fuel for increasing mass gun buys. Racism is the inspiration.
The other, the newspaper reads: “The number of background checks conducted each year in California — which fluctuated through the early to mid-2000s — has risen steadily each year since 2008, when President Barack Obama was elected and rhetoric about ‘gun-grabbing’ politicians began to fly in earnest.”
The newspaper asked the gun dealer, DeLuz, which California laws his trade group found “most egregious.”
These are “prohibiting concealed-carry permit holders from bringing guns into schools or onto college campuses; banning the sale of kits to convert legal magazines into high-capacity magazines; and increasing the period of time for which a person is prohibited from having a firearm because of a mental illness or threat of violence …”
“The Turner Diaries” is America’s premier piece of hate fiction. Published in 1978 by a white supremacist neo-Nazi for a large audience of white supremacist neo-Nazis, a lot of its eliminationist tone and philosophy, minus only the male romance fiction on dispatching all enemies, is noticeably mirrored presently in the Republican Party, the National Rifle Association and gun fanatics. Years ago, the book was often found at gun shows.
“The Turner Diaries” was literature for an underground white supremacy hate group. Today, the GOP, the NRA, gun fanatics, the American authoritarian right are a collectively large white supremacy hate group.
“Light the motherf**ker on fire,??? is the latest thing caught on videotape at a Trump rally yesterday.
“I would not only not piss on him if he was on fire—I’d throw gas on him.” said another raging white guy about the President, in a Frank Luntz focus group on the enthusiasm for the strongman.
“The Turner Diaries” tells the story of a violent overthrow of a “tyrannical” government and the mass revenge killings of black people who have been given advantage and positions over white men by a predatory government, according to the author.
However, lots of groups, races and classes are in for the deadly reckoning: Jews, any people of color, white people who marry or consort with any people of color, academics, elites, foreigners and, of course, government workers. The list of those marked for retribution and executed by the book’s freedom fighters basically encompasses everyone who isn’t Christian, white and a gun owner.
An excerpt:
All that brave talk by patriots, “The government will never take my guns away,” and then nothing but meek submission when it happened.
On the other hand, maybe we should be heartened by the fact that so many of us had guns then, nearly 18 months after the Cohen Act had outlawed all private ownership of firearms in the United States. It was only because so many of us defied the law and hid our weapons instead of turning them in that the government wasn’t able to act more harshly against us after the Gun Raids.
“The list of persons to be raided, it turned out, had been compiled primarily from firearms sales records which all gun dealers had been required to keep,” it continues.
Ten days after the San Bernardino shootings, thousands came to the Del Mar Fairgrounds to check out the latest deals on firearms and stand in line for discounted bulk ammunition.
While the shootings, which killed 14, were a common topic of discussion Saturday, there were a mix of interests and motivations at the Crossroads of the West Gun Show, which runs through Sunday. Some, like [a fellow from Poway], said recent talk of further gun restrictions from federal and state-level politicians following the San Bernardino shootings made them think now might be the time to buy.
“It definitely makes you wonder how long before it’s time to pick up and move because they’ve already infringed on so many of our constitutional rights,??? [the Poway fellow] said.
The Sheriff’s Department has reported an uptick in the number of applications for concealed weapons permits in recent weeks. A federal appeals court is still considering whether to open up concealed carry to all law-abiding citizens in the state …
[Another man from Pacific Beach] said many who come to the show are simply concerned with the trends they see in the world, from the ongoing drought to terrorist attacks at home and abroad…
“People are worried about having things taken away from them.”
