Jenn

[Jonathan Kay @jonkay]

in defence of @acoyne…he never called for cancelling Canada Day

Instead, he asked us to feel ashamed about being Cdn; destroy statues of Macdonald; & atone for dead kids cast into (non-existent) "unmarked graves" at Kamloops etc

If u do that you will be "patriotic" apparently

[James Lindsay, anti-Communist @ConceptualJames]

The term "Palestine" until the 20th century referred to an administrative region without fixed or clear borders and with no national identity. The people who lived there before then were either regarded as Ottomans or as part of the Syrian region.

The term came from the final humiliation of the Jews by the Romans in AD 135, following the Bar Kokhba Revolt. The Romans put down the revolt and humiliated the Jews by renaming Judea, etc., "Syria Palaestina," which means "philistine Syria." Arabs and other Arabic speakers record this by naming the land of "Filastin" (ard Filastin) in their fatwas and some other writing.

While some Muslims used the term that we'd render as Palestine, and many Europeans did as a hangover from the Latin name for the region, especially given the general vacancy and irrelevance of the region to most world affairs, it was never anything more than a vague regional designation. There was no state, no province, no administrative district, even, referred to by any name that would render to "Palestine" today. There was, as noted, certainly no national or even sub-national identity, and any attempt to do so would have been shut down by seeing them as incorporated within the broader Syrian identity. The name carried roughly the same kind of specific significance as a term like the "Near East" would today.

Identifying people as "Palestinians" didn't really begin until the very end of the 19th century, and even then it was a reaction to Zionism and Jews starting to move into the region. The term was sort of mainstreamed as a political reality after the Ottoman Empire was broken up in defeat after World War I, and the region came under British control using the old Latin terminology as "British Mandate Palestine," meaning "the part of the Palestinian region under British control." That was roughly thirty years before Israel would declare independence as the sovereign nation-state of Israel as we know it today. At no point in this story is there a sovereign nation-state called Palestine or anything resembling it.

That said, the beginnings of an Arab "Palestinian" identity as oppositional to Zionism and British Mandatory control, developed from their previous 1890s beginnings to something more like a dedicated resistance identity when the Brits took over. Arabs didn't believe in British sovereignty or control over what they deemed Islamic land, either, and they were adamantly opposed to the Mandate's explicit Zionism, which was being acted upon to bring Jews into the region (even though the British were wishy-washy on this and then betrayed it during WWII, when it was arguably needed most).

The "Palestinian" identity at the time wasn't exactly national but quasi-national and born (and borne) only in resistance. It gained some crystallization as such in the mid and late 1930s after the failed Arab Revolt, significantly as a response (back-up plan) to the failure of Greater Syria to defend "Arab" interests in the region against British (and Jewish Zionist) control.

Still, it didn't acquire something approaching the identity status people might recognize today for about another decade. That had to wait until after the "Nakba" in 1948-49. This contested event occurred when five of the surrounding actual Arabian nations declared and LOST a war on the newly declared Israel. These were Egypt, Syria, (Trans)jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon.

Now, this war was the continuation of the same war being fought in the region before Israel's declaration of independence (May 15, 1948) following the late 1947 UN Partition of the region, which the proto-Israelis accepted and all the Arabs rejected. The Arabs started that war, too. Notice no state of Palestine was involved because there was no state of Palestine to be involved. Something like a "Palestinian identity" as a refusal of these developments took significant shape at the time, though.

The Arabs refer to this humiliating loss as a "catastrophe," THE catastrophe (Nakba), and rewrote history to create a "Palestinian" people who were displaced, harmed, and killed by the (defensive) military actions of the Israelis, which they see as an act of colonial aggression because they cannot admit or accept that they lost the wars, including WWI, which removed the land from Muslim control (which they believe is permanent). The "Palestinian people," whom none of these Arab states would absorb because they were more useful as a military-political weapon against Israel, came into existence as a tool to further their Islamic designs.

By the way, the UN Partition in 1947 (General Assembly Resolution 181) does not name the two states it partitioned "Israel" and "Palestine." It called them the "Jewish State" and the "Arab State." The Jews took for themselves the name "Israel" for that land, as they would. As for the "Arab State," it is not actually clear what would have been its fate. Jordan (Transjordan) viewed the Arab land by the Jordan River to naturally be part of its territory, not an independent state called "Palestine." The Syrians opposed this not particularly because they wanted the land but because they didn't want Jordanian expansion. As for Gaza, Egypt wanted administrative control but not to annex it. It is not clear what it's fate as "Arab State" would have been.

In all, in 1948-49, and following the "Nakba," these behaviors and conflicts reflected the broader pattern of inter-Arab rivalry more than anything else. The neighboring states were more focused on preventing a Jewish state and on blocking one another’s gains than on creating a viable independent Palestinian Arab state under the UN plan. The very idea of "Palestine" with a unique national identity and (fabricated) national history would have to wait.

Identity during this period (1949-1967) was still largely either "Arab" or as part of one of the Arab states, like Syrian, Jordan, or Egyptian, specifically, or just "Islamic." Movements like pan-Arabism and even pan-Syrianism were more relevant to the identity of the people today treated as "Palestinians" than was anything to do with Palestine, although the word was used. The biggest change in this period from the one before is that before this, the term "Palestinian" referred also to Jews in the region (under the Mandate), which more or less ended. Arab states also kicked out all the Jews (850,000 of them) during this time, and most of them were absorbed by Israel.

Even still, the idea of a "Palestinian nation," wasn't really invented in 1948. It didn't really gain solid identity in the global imagination as such until after the Six-Day War in 1967, which the Arabs (especially Egypt) lost badly to Israel. This second humiliation, referred to as the Naksa ("setback" or "relapse" or "defeat"), which displaced some 400,000 people* as Israel pushed threats out of its immediate vicinity by taking the lands from which they operated, changed the strategic needs of the resistance movement and fabricated a Palestinian national identity with a bogus history more or less out of thin air. That's the one defended to this day.

*These people were in large part there as a stand of active resistance against the existence of Israel as part of the aforementioned strategic refusal of any Arab states to absorb them, etc., so focusing on their displacement alone is complicated, to say the least.

The thing is, the idea to do this Palestinian national identity thing was largely due to Yasser Arafat, who was working with and getting aid and assistance from the Soviets (and arguably strategic advice in this regard, as the "Palestinian cause" strongly resembles elements of Soviet korenizatsiya programming, which has proved a useful wedge device all over the world). Moscow got involved after 1967 largely because it was only after the Six-Day War that Israel allied formally with the United States (and Western Alliance), which was the ultimate enemy of the Soviets.

Palestinian "national" identity has always therefore been a political contrivance designed to be used as a wedge and weapon against any sovereign control, especially by Jews, of any land in the broad region the Romans once declared "Syria Palaestina." A nontrivial part of this curious effort was an allied Soviet-Arab program to damage Israel and weaken American and Western interests in the Middle East (another regional designation term that isn't a nation, by the way).

That is, it's NOT REAL. It's a political contrivance meant to destabilize the region, kill and displace Jews, and fight Western interests. That's why it exists.

Since it's not real in the sense of being a genuine national identity stretching back into history in any regard, the culture that is assigned to it is also a fabrication. It is a blend of various Islamic and Arab cultural points with outright jihadist and Soviet-Communist radicalism and terrorism treated as though it's a culture. It's a culture of "resistance" and "liberation" in precisely the Communist uses of the terms. It's a "culture" in the same way "Woke" is a culture. In fact, it's basically the same thing, just Islamic and Third-Worldist Arab flavored instead of Western identity politics.

[James Lindsay, anti-Communist @ConceptualJames]

The Mondialists are still at it.

[Cory Morgan @CoryBMorgan]

Chinese spies using Canada as a portal to NATO.

Wonderful

[James Lindsay, anti-Communist @ConceptualJames]

Now that both Islam and Communism are really prominent and working together against our society, I frequently get asked, and have wondered myself, "was Karl Marx inspired by Islam?" and "is Islam the prototype of totalitarian systems?"

The answer in this case seems to be no. Karl Marx was probably not inspired by Islam, and there are pretty strong reasons to believe that. The parallels leave a lot of interesting things to say, though.

Marx himself was overwhelmingly inspired by French utopian socialism, French (Jacobin) radicalism (which was also inspired by French utopian socialism), German idealism and dialectics (which also had roots in the French Enlightenment), and revolutionary thinking across Europe. Islam doesn't seem to have been part of his scope, and he wrote little about them and that except in recognizing their (quasi)-religious nature being a backwards stage of development and needing to be overcome.

The same can be said for Vladimir Lenin, it appears, who drew his inspiration from Marx, Engels, and the early Russian socialists, and in particular from the French revolutionaries both during the French Revolution itself and during the Paris Commune ("the Civil War in France"), which he believed failed because it didn't go nearly far enough with its repressive violence. His dealings with Muslims mostly came later, by geographic necessity.

Marx, for his part, had his first real encounter with Islamic life late in his own life, when he traveled to Algiers for a time in 1882 (d. 1883, btw) for health reasons (chronic bronchitis, etc. etc.). He found it impressive how Communal Muslim society was but remarked extensively on how it relied upon an earlier form of historical development that would have to (dialectically) work itself out eventually, including getting over the backwardness of their belief in Allah as God.

This shows us that Marx was taken by surprise by the real state of Islamic society at the very end of his life, not using it as a model at the beginning of his career in the 1840s. It also shows us that while he saw bright lights in their society from a Communist perspective, he remained critical overall in the way that formed his first and central criticism of European life: religion.

We can conclude Marx was not, in fact, inspired by Islam in creating Communism.

Nevertheless, there are some striking parallels that seem to go back to the start of Islam, like that under Islam all (male) people (except Muhammad) are considered equal to one another, none ruling over another, as dictated by the Shahada (there is no God but Allah...). The point of this commitment in Islam is often recognized, in part, not just in a pious way but in freeing man from the tyranny of being (illegitimately) ruled by other men. Communism shares this idea, but not because of direct inspiration.

Another common point between the two is that both Communism and Islam claim to be tapping into the fundamental nature of reality and human life, which people simply need to accept as reality in order to live the ideal life. In Islam, every human is subject (literally subject, like submitted) to Allah and his divine path for life, called the Shari'a, but they persist in a state of ignorance of this until brought to Islam (submission to Shari'a). In Communism, human beings are intrinsically socialist but unaware (ignorant) of the fact by dint of private property causing them to be selfish and individualistic, which intrinsically leads to systems of exploitation and domination of one man over another. The goal is to return or transform man to his intrinsically socialist nature so that a true socialist society can evolve in history around him and through him.

These are strongly parallel concepts. First, and more centrally, there's the idea that the ideologies provide the absolute and correct expression of human nature and the nature of reality, and thus the relationship between them. In Islam, it is that Allah is God of everything, the Sustainer, so all must be subject to His laws, physical and moral (Shari'a). In Communism, it is that we're on our own but are intrinsically socialists who all work together for the good of one another, effectively by submitting to our true nature and what came frequently to be called "the socialist road."

Second, there's the idea that there are the awakened few who understand this, Muslims (those who have submitted) in Islam and Communists or "socialist man" in Communism, and those who remain in ignorance, Jahiliyyah (Ignorance of the Qur'an and Shari'a) in Islam and "false consciousness" in Communism. Both are said to be (a) ignorant of the real state of man and reality, (b) tempted by the prevailing antithetical culture around them, and (c) generally complicit in upholding the problem, especially once told about the Divine Science at the center of the ideological cults.

Basically: we have a true human nature as a part of the nature of reality itself, it is given by the ideology, and everyone who isn't on the program is both ignorant and a temptation/threat to those who are and its goal of universal application.

Additionally, there are other profound parallels, like the idea of Jihad in Islam as the manner of spreading the doctrine and revolutionary terror and violence being seen as necessities in Marxist Communism (and the Jacobinism that inspired it).

Another example is the basic organizational structure of the realized ideological society. In Islam, there are three kinds of people: Muslims (who have submitted), Dhimmies (who are subjects who pay tribute and have no real rights), and enemies (who are to be converted or destroyed by the faithful). In Communism, there are three kinds of people also: Communists (who have awakened), subjects of the state (who need remolding or transformation), and enemies (who are to be suppressed and destroyed by the people's democratic dictatorship of the proletariat).

In fact, this "friend-enemy" structure is the logical consequence of the ideology itself. If everyone who believes is in line with the exactly right theory of the universe that isn't actually real, everyone who doesn't presents an existential threat to the cult's ability to recruit and maintain itself. In Islam, especially Salafism, there's a doctrine for this: al-wala' wal-bara' (loyalty and disavowal). Communism doesn't have a specific name for it except to designate people as socialists and "class enemies," or some such, generally "the enemies of the people," who must be disavowed as part of being fully loyal to socialism.

These parallels are so striking that many people start to wonder if Islam, which predates (French) Communism by 1120 years and Marxism by an additional century, served as the inspiration for Communism, especially Marxism. Again, it is not so.

These parallels are best explained by what is called in the natural world "parallel evolution." What we see here are likely endpoints of the evolution of a totalitarian ideological project that might get expressed in slightly or even significantly different ways. That is, the totalitarian structure of the ideology evolves these specific ideas within it as it develops and applies them in practice because they're actually sort of the core model for how to control masses of people under totalitarianism. Only the specific justifications and some of the details differ. Thus, two things that look the same in a profound way and are the same in a profound way come about without anyone having to have taken the earlier idea as inspiration.

That said! There's more to say!

In our present day, at least following the Soviet Era in which Communism was first implemented in the world outside of small, failed communes, the parallels are partly explained by sharing in the opposite direction. That is, modern Islam has taken a great deal of its inspiration from Communism. In turn, modern Communism ("Woke") has taken a great deal of inspiration from the collaboration.

The Soviets, especially in the 1920s and 1930s, then after the Six-days War in 1967, took a great interest in Islam as a means to a geopolitical end: controlling the Near East or at least making use of it for Soviet geopolitical ambitions. Further, and not unrelatedly, the proto-Woke European Communists and their increasingly Woke ideological descendants in Western Marxism, have had a lot of interest in the region and its tactics, not just in seeing the Muslims as a useful "oppressed minority" but also in borrowing many of the tactics of Islamic activism, including playing victim, modern-era terrorism, and Jihad. These two relationships have shaped both ideologies in our day.

Much of the Woke Communist derivative we call Third-Worldism (or postcolonialism) derives from this relationship, with other developments from India and Indians, and lots from Southeast Asian and South American "liberationist" movements. These were Soviet inspired and proto-Woke developed. They also shape how the various Islamic "liberation" movements work. The strong alliance going back decades between the proto-Wokes (like Angela Davis) and the Woke of today with so-called "Palestine" as an object of "liberation" is a key example.

Other projects, upon which that depends, include the Soviet-created PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine -- notice the L word here again). The subsequent PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization -- that L word again) was partially a spin-off, partially its own thing, and started receiving significant support and help from the Soviets after the war in 1967 (when the U.S.-Israel alliance formally began). The "Islamist" ideology of the region has never been free from both Eastern (Soviet) and Western (Woke) Marxist influence since and should be considered a practical co-development that does not directly influence the doctrine of Islam but does influence its practice. (And this doesn't even touch the Shia stuff in Iran, which is its own complicated mixed history and set of alliances for similar reasons.)

On the other hand, it wasn't just direct Soviet and Western Marxist manipulation of Islam that got us here. It went the other way too. Particularly by the 1960s, when Hassan al-Banna's Muslim Brotherhood was being rehabilitated, we see the heavy influence of thinkers like Sayyid Qutb bringing his long experience with Leninism and Communism to bear on how the MB's Jihadi-Salafism should organize going forward. Players with strong suspected KGB ties like Yasser Arafat helped develop this entire modern line of "Islamist" thought. And etc.

So the evolution of both Western Marxism and radical Islam (and thus Islam overall) through the twentieth century and into our own now has taken advantage of a great deal of Communist organizational and operational thinking, while remaining strictly opposed to Communism as a dead, godless way of being.

The point is, in our day, this development has increased the similarities between Islam(ism) and Marxism, but given the original template of Islam (which predates the whole Communist experiment by 11-12 centuries) retains the same basic structural elements, Communism cannot be blamed for making Islam the way it is either.

Parallel evolution remains the best explanation with recent and contemporary co-evolutionary modifications tightening the similarities, though the fundamental differences remain and will be a source of conflict once the alliance-of-convenience (against their common enemy, us) ends.

This fact raises an incredibly interesting and important point. Parallel evolution in biological forms, such as eyes, usually indicate similar organs coming about to address similar underlying issues. In the case of eyes, it's to gather light-based information about the environment for all the obviously useful reasons.

If Communism and Islam share such deep parallel structures that Communism is often suspected of having been modeled on Islam, then we can surmise that they're operating in some sense for the same sociological purpose. That is, if they are in fact examples of parallel evolution, we can reasonably conclude that their similar features are artifacts of what totalitarian ideologies must do both as ideologies (theory, religion, belief, preaching, teaching) and in implementation (praxis, movement, model of government).

In my opinion, looking at this, I think we can start to derive some pretty fundamental ideas about what totalitarianism entails both ideologically and in practice. That's the real conclusion we can draw here.

[Winston Marshall @MrWinMarshall]

The Fabian society and the destruction of Britain - watch

[Michael O'Fallon - Sovereign Nations @SovMichael]

This is fantasy gaslighting.

I have been criticizing the Thiel-groomed Vance for over a decade and attempted to convince some of the members of the transition committee that any of the three last candidates (Rubio, Burgum, Vance) were horrible choices.

Conservatives in the U.S. deserve someone who is going to preserve and conserve our constitution - and not an anti-liberty advocate that will help with the transition into the 4th Industrial Revolution while facilitating integralism.

[Sam Cooper @scoopercooper]

BRUSSELS, July 25 (Reuters) - A Canadian woman of Chinese origin who was an intern at ‌NATO's military headquarters in Belgium has been arrested on spying charges, Belgian prosecutors said on Saturday.
"She is suspected of spying on behalf of a third country and of being a member of a criminal organisation," the ⁠Federal Public Prosecutor's Office said in a statement

[Jenn @Jennybean_85]

@globeandmail

[Insurrection Barbie @DefiyantlyFree]

After Mao killed 45 million people through incompetence, Mao spent the last decade of his life killing more, this time through deliberate cruelty. And this time, the killers were teenagers.

Mao mobilized China’s youth high schoolers, college students as Red Guards, empowered to attack anyone deemed “bourgeois,” “revisionist,” or “counterrevolutionary”

In Beijing alone, in August–September 1966 (“Red August”), 1,772 people were beaten to death, mostly teachers and school administrators, by their own students

On August 5, 1966, Bian Zhongyun, vice-principal of the Beijing Normal University Girls Middle School, was beaten to death by her own female students girls between 13 and 17. This event marks the start of “Red August” and is one of the most-documented single killings of the era.

Total death toll: between 1.1 and 8 million killed outright, depending on methodology, with the Stanford sociological estimate by Andrew Walder at 1.1 to 1.6 million killed and 22 to 30 million persecuted

A leaked internal CCP document places the toll at nearly 2 million killed and 125 million “struggled against” a euphemism for public humiliation, torture, and denunciation.

But sure keep listening to the Turkish Muslim brotherhood for what America needs.

[Jonathan Kay @jonkay]

2021: waving a canadian flag makes you a genocidal unmarked graves denialist

2022: waving a canadian flag makes you a trucker convoy fascist coup plotter

2026: conservatives are bad because they don’t wave enough Canadian flags

[Jenn @Jennybean_85]

@KevinVuongxMP We love ours!

[Jenn @Jennybean_85]

@KevinVuongxMP Recommend a Toyota Sienna with AWD 👌🏼

[Ryan Gerritsen🇨🇦🇳🇱 @ryangerritsen]

Two years ago Coyne was saying we should cancel Canada day.
Today he claims Conservatives have a patriotism problem.
Ok.

[Jenn @Jennybean_85]

@RobSchneider It’s even worse….

https://t.co/e8swGXw2z8

[Glen Motz @GlenMotz]

“The person would be brought to hospital and taken to an operating room, where they would receive the same sedating medications used with euthanasia. Except surgery would commence once the person was fully unconscious. Death would ultimately be caused by removal of vital organs.”

Canadians are watching the boundaries around #MAID expand again and again. Now, troubling questions are being raised about organ donation during an assisted death. We need safeguards that protect the vulnerable—not a system that continues down an increasingly disturbing path.

Conservatives will always fight to protect the vulnerable, strengthen palliative care, and ensure Canada's laws put human dignity first. #cdnpoli

[Jenn @Jennybean_85]

@LilaGraceRose https://t.co/e8swGXw2z8

[Glen Motz @GlenMotz]

“The person would be brought to hospital and taken to an operating room, where they would receive the same sedating medications used with euthanasia. Except surgery would commence once the person was fully unconscious. Death would ultimately be caused by removal of vital organs.”

Canadians are watching the boundaries around #MAID expand again and again. Now, troubling questions are being raised about organ donation during an assisted death. We need safeguards that protect the vulnerable—not a system that continues down an increasingly disturbing path.

Conservatives will always fight to protect the vulnerable, strengthen palliative care, and ensure Canada's laws put human dignity first. #cdnpoli

[Jenn @Jennybean_85]

@UnmitigatedAss

[Eyal Yakoby @EYakoby]

BREAKING: Miss Rachel, the viral kids’ content guru, has been revealed to be funding Abdul El-Seyed’s campaign.

Parents should know that their kids are being indoctrinated to be the next Antifa.

[Michael O'Fallon - Sovereign Nations @SovMichael]

The SDGs are the tool to disrupt and dismantle our current meritocratic, liberty-minded, free-market world.

The end goal is a gain of function mess of a blend of integralism, technocracy, fascism, *perfect communism*, eugenics, and a Malthusian embrace of transhumanism.

The steps to the end goals have been laid out for decades.

2030 is the year.

In 1970, after publishing his book Optimism One, Belgian transhumanist Fereidoun M. Esfandiary started using the name FM-2030.

In the year 2000, FM 2030 stated

"Conventional names define a person's past: ancestry, ethnicity, nationality, religion. I am not who I was ten years ago and certainly not who I will be in twenty years...

The name 2030 reflects my conviction that the years around 2030 will be a magical time. In 2030 we will be ageless, and everyone will have an excellent chance to live forever. 2030 is a dream and a goal."

[Logan Lancing @LoganLancing]

Social and Emotional learning ends with this.

Social position (real or invented) is used as leverage to create emotionally unstable children who can be more easily manipulated into adopting cult doctrine.