Xi Xinping Thought is Like CRT But With More Coercive Power Behind It

Xi Xinping Thought is Like CRT But With More Coerv

Xi Xinping Thought is Like CRT But With More Coercive Power Behind It

Mark Clouse September 3, 2021

Opinion – Chairman Xi has been moving forward aggressively reshaping the socio-cultural reality reinforced with state lethality control, strict and broadly applied death governance power.

He has been working diligently to clip the wings of the nuveau-riche billionaires of China’s Silicon Valley. He ended, in 2017, the three-person council as the final word of the current Communist Policy and made it all about his edicts alone. He revised the Maoist custom of writing “Thoughts,” really dicatates to the society about what society indeed was and the general pentalties for violating what the society is as defined by these thoughts. Mao had his Mao Thoughts and now XI, in 2017, issued his own Xi Thoughts.

He adds to the thoughts as he sees fit. But, until now, the distribution of Xi Thoughts has not been especially forced on others. A whole generation has little knowledge as to what Xi Thoughts even are and what they might even mean. But now, all this has changed, as now Xi seeks to inject his particular version of society to the children, and to the adults, with companies now coming under scrutiny for violating the beliefs, the ethics, really, of Xi Thoughts.

One can see some parallels between the DNC pushing its particular remedy to solving injuustice and inequality, whatever you want to call it (as of the writing of this article, the going favorite label is ‘Critical race Theory,” but, as usual it’s more complicated than that, even though there is enough truth in that label to use that phrase from here going forward), and the CCP pushing Xi Thoughts to all ages through coercive means.

In the case of the DNC, the real power limits on their ability to move as nearly unopposed as Xi will be able to move is a shadow of what Xi is capable to do from the beginning of an idea to the execution of an idea.

He can do that in a nation-state that has 3 times the people within it that we Americans do. For good or for ill, Xi has the power to make the dream real at a a massive scale, and with great haste, far beyond what any human being has on this planet in the here and now. He is the apex of all apex existentials within our earthly frame.

And he is about to become, for the generation in primary education age, the very DNA they will either build a lifetime of options around, or a lifetime of overcoming. This is also what falls upon many of the children in America today, but Americans, at least for now, have the venue to dissent from the presupposutional ethos of the authorities that choose to inject such beliefs into our public schools.

How America comes out of this, or doesn’t, remains to be seen, but at least, for now, we still have options and the power to dissent.

Xi Jinping Thought, for children

From www.economist.com
2021-09-02 14:48:27

Excerpt:

Sep 4th 2021

ASK MEMBERS of China’s elite—from senior officials to academics at leading universities, well-known commentators or bosses at big companies—to explain the beliefs of the country’s leader, Xi Jinping, and their replies are surprisingly unhelpful. Even simple questions elicit waffly answers. Take an ongoing campaign to clip the wings of some of China’s largest firms, notably technology giants. The authorities have variously accused such businesses of seeking excessive profits, harming national security with a cavalier approach to data, abusing workers, bullying smaller firms or exploiting young consumers with addictive video games and online fan clubs. Is Mr Xi revealing himself as an ideologue, bent on re-imposing Communist Party control over the economy at the expense of growth? Or is he more pragmatic than that: a nationalist strongman who is helping to make China stable at home and mighty abroad? There is chatter among the country’s grandees, but no consensus.

Given such confusion among grown-ups, this is a bold moment to issue a new series of textbooks to all students in Chinese schools, colleges and universities, with the aim of explaining Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for the New Era, as Mr Xi’s political philosophy is formally known.

As the academic year began on September 1st, teachers and lecturers began distributing these books, tailored for each age-group, down to children as young as six. The use of stand-alone schoolbooks devoted to a serving leader marks a break with decades of caution. The last time that hundreds of millions of youngsters clutched books devoted to the wisdom of one man was under Mao Zedong, the object (and instigator) of a disastrous personality cult.

Books for the young are especially revealing, for they have to keep their messages simple. Primary schools have long taught the general rudiments of ideology. Via courses with names like “ethics and law”, children have studied…

Read Full Article

The Delegitimizing Nature of The Afghan Debacle

Bill Collier September 3, 2021

Our Union is at risk because the Federal Government is led by corrupt leaders who are failing to do the most basic functions of the Federal Government.

Our Federal Government, today led by Joe Biden, a man connected to many uninvestigated instances of corruption, abandoned what may be thousands of Americans in Afghanistan, despite his and the media’s claims “only” 200 were abandoned. But, basically, the Federal Government abandoned Americans, thus negating its very right to exist by betraying its most fundamental reason for existing.

The question keeps arising: would Trump have done better?

Those who assume Trump would have done better may forget that the way this was negotiated and the way the Taliban was legitimated came directly from a Trump policy that also looks like a cut and run policy. The standing down of manpower and resources which led to the collapse began under Trump.

On the other hand, it is reasonable to say that Trump’s withdrawal plan, which would have also led to the collapse of Afghanistan, was more focused on removing Americans and Afghan allies, then equipment, and then troops.

Biden’s bumbling plan saw the removal of troops to a very low level, not all Americans and few actual Afghan allies, and not most of the equipment. He did inherent a bad deal, but he also inherited a more aggressive and reasonable exit strategy, near as we can tell. He kept the bad deal but he scrapped the exit strategy.

But Congress, which allegedly oversees all this, has failed in any meaningful way to change the dynamic and to make sure the Executive Branch is doing its job. The problem of corruption and the failure of the Federal Government to do its basic duties is owned by Congress as much as any President who could not operate in such a manner withour Congressional acquiescence.

The Federal Government collects massive taxes, spends inordinate amounts of money on credit, and is the largest most hazardous threat to the rights and prosperity of Americans that exists in this world through its bloated law code and regulations and through rapacious taxes and wasteful spending. But we tolerate it because it does at least have a strong capability to protect its citizens. However, with this move to abandon hundreds of Americans in a terror state who the present and past administration legitimized, the Federal Government has made a hash of its essential justification for existence.

This doesn’t mean we would advocate for any secession, insurrection, or rebellion, our concern is with the consequences to the country if the Federal Government does not take strong steps to reassert its legitimate basis by forcefully if necessary removing all Americans from this terror state that we as a country alone bear responsibility for creating.

The Federal Government cannot continue forward over and over again to undermine its legitimacy through such failures to perform its basic duties without long-term serious consequences to the country. Various groups and movements could emerge over time with aims that are harmful to the Union, ranging from outright terrorist groups of various persuasions to secessionist groups, to race-based groups, and more. All could exploit the failure of the Federal Government to perform basic duties to not only delegitimize that government but this country itself.

This doesn’t mean such delegitimizing is eminent. While people are outraged at the debacle, they seem to blame only one man, Biden, and then his generals, particularly General Milly, and also Secretary of State Blinken. One suspects more uninvestigated corruption is driving these insane policies.

The warning however is warranted because history shows that such incidents begin to act as a growing weight that strains the bindings between the government and the people until, unless checked and repaired, the bonds break and sentiment turns to dangerous alternatives. This may not happen this decade, but it could happen eventually if the trend is not changed.

The Federal Government abandoned Americans and this is yet another stone of broken trust that weighs on the public mind and threatens eventually to undermine our Union.

There is a Mass Breakout of YouTube Tourette’s

Paul Collier September 2, 2021

Editorial – Psychiatrists noticed that there seemed to be an uptick of people being diagnosed as having Tourette’s. Some of them started to developing a trend. Many of these people had been diagnosed as having Tourettes despite the fact that the symptoms they were manifesting don’t actually align with Tourettes. Rather, as they would eventually allegedly discover, this seemed to be a phenomenon that was taking place through YouTube, where a whole group of youths were developing these sortsof Tourrette’s like symptoms that can be seen in many content creators that cater to this demographic,

It is possible, theoretically, that YouTube has experienced its first viral oubreak of the sociogenic category, that is, socially created patterns of behavior that produce unstabilizing patters to the world around the action. Somehow, a whole subgroup within this larger demographic has developed a new Tourrette’s like disorder that emerged from the culture the YouTubers had created.

Perhaps Twitter has been feeding a sociogenic virus for a long time, called Woketarianizm, but that’s another story, still, the connection is not unmerited. Twitter’s culture creators are the moderators and the rules they use to justify their actions, actions that affect people at existential levels given the domination of Twitter in a social media space where a vast swathe of major institutional public discourse takes place. And if you’re not on Twitter, you’re not talking to America, let alone the world,

That type of influence on the habits of human action is far more profound than what ever could have emerged in this YouTube culture that produced their own sociogenic virus. The severity and breadth of the sociogenic illnesses these platforms can crearte when in the hands of ideologues, in general, well, I could say it would be frightening but we are in the midst of the fruit of that reality.

Better for the acceptable orthodox media, of which iflscience.com is one, to attack the smaller sociogenic viruses that emerge from the result of wanna-be tyrants to distract from the much larger and more invasive and consequential sociogenic viruses these platforms have been creating.

Psychiatrists Report Mass Outbreak Of Sociogenic Illness Spread Via Social Media Videos

From www.iflscience.com
2021-09-01 14:58:00

Excerpt:

A team of psychiatrists has reported what they’re calling “the first outbreak of a new type of mass sociogenic illness” that is spread by social media alone.

Published in the journal Brain, the team reports that they have seen a “remarkably high number” of young patients who had been referred to their specialist Tourettes clinic in Hannover, all displaying “nearly identical” movements and vocalizations. The patients not only had similar movements but also said a lot of the same words as each other when experiencing a “tic”, regardless of the language they were speaking it in.

Words included “fries”, “bomb”, “flying sharks”, and, most concerningly, “Heil Hitler”.

Another strange aspect to the tics, and not seen usually in Tourette’s patients, was that their vocalizations shifted pitch whenever they had a “vocal tic”, their voice becoming much lower than usual.

Though all the patients had been diagnosed with the childhood-onset chronic combined motor and vocal tic disorder, Tourette’s syndrome, before being referred to the clinic, the team noted that the tics were unusual, and unknown in Tourettes syndrome. However, they had seen the tics before: on the YouTube channel “Gewitter im Kopf” (“Thunderstorm in the Brain”).

The channel, presented by Jan Zimmermann, documents life with Tourettes syndrome.

“Judging from the videos, he indeed suffers from a mild form of Tourette syndrome,” the team write in their paper. “On this YouTube channel, however, he shows a countless number of movements, vocalizations, words, phrases, and bizarre behaviours that he claims are tics, but are clearly functional in nature.”

“For the majority of the shown symptoms, there are obviously strong situational contexts with exclamations of long sentences with insults, swear words, and obscenities that are in this form unknown in Tourette…

Read Full Article

SCOTUS Ruling Creates Eviction Spike Disaster

Parker Davis September 2, 2021

Over 8 million Americans are living under borrowed time, in rent arrears, previously protected from eviction by a CDC edict. The Supreme Court rightly, within a Constitutional frame, ended the CDC-defined and enforced mandate on eviction moritoriums, though the harm it will do to millions is not much mitigated by such ‘comforting’ notions.

The problem itself was created by the mandates that led to the necessity of eviction moritoriums in the first place, the intentional halting of the ability of humans to consensually exchange value with one another. The state put a ban hammmer of all ban hammers on human living, which meant humans couldn’t MAKE a living, let alone have a living, so to speak.

If the state wanted to solve the problem, then they should have paid for the problem, but they didn’t, they burdened one group of people, the landlords, with the task of funding a state assistance program. The program itself still leaves the renter in tremendous debt, and the landlord, the landlord eats the expense of the upkeep of the building, the paying of taxes, none of these expenses change.

And now, even if the ruling was just from a constitutional sense, it sets in motion actions that will produce decidedly unjust results, people who get evicted, landlords that are forced to choose between not evicting people in debt who still can’t pay the rent, and their own means to make a living for their families, children of all of these people caught in the trauma that such things cause, all because, from the start, the state was not willing to pay for the cost it was literally forcing at gun point on all of us, to shut it all down, without also shutting down the bills that keep coming while the incomes no longer flowed.

Millions Could Face Eviction Following Supreme Court Decision

From www.usnews.com
2021-08-31 16:06:00

Excerpt:

The Supreme Court blocked the Biden Administration’s most recent moratorium on evictions in a late night decision on Aug. 26, leaving hundreds of thousands of Americans at risk of losing their homes amid a surge of the deadly delta variant of the coronavirus.

The court’s decision stated that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which originally instituted the eviction moratorium, did not have the authority to extend the suspension of evictions without congressional approval.

Census Bureau survey data shows that more than 8 million people are behind on rent payments. The survey also found that more than 3.5 million people said they were “very” or “somewhat likely” to be evicted in the next two months.

Read Full Article

SCOTUS to Rule on Maine Barring Faith from Education Funds

Freedomist Editor September 2, 2021

EDITORIAL – The state of Main has passed a law that bars any state funds be used by organizations of faith to produce a service for the state, such as running a tuition program for kids of need. A Christian school had previously been given state subsidies to run a tuition program, but then was cut off from applying because they were a faith-based organization.

The Supreme Court will decide if the state can prevent faith groups from creating state services, which is essentially what happens when the state grants a non-government entity a grant, or a subsidy, or a no-interest loan that doesn’t have to be paid back if you meet the need the state wanted you to meet.

The question is, does the Separation of Church and State mean the state can cut off the church (any faith group, Muslim, Brahman, Zoastrian, etc) to seek state funds to provide a service to meet the needs of those who are found needing? If the answer is yes, then the separation of church and state might as well be changed to the hostility of state against the church.

As we experience the types of faiths that have no agentic presence outside of existentiality, we will come to understand (and for many, they already do understand) that ‘faith’ groups are not just about sky daddies, they’re about moral authoritrain assumptions wrapped around some narrative that makes one group the angels and the other group the demons. They’re about a lot more than that, but all ‘faith groups,’ whether they have sky daddies or not (and there is a pretty healthy mix of the two at this point), that fit into this category are the ones that are easy to produce proscription lists, lists of people who are, on a merciful day, worthy of being completely excommunicated from any way of making any type of decent living, and on a usual day, should possibly be inspired to drink a gallon of ‘kill me immediately’ poison that would kill them so bad their grand grand grand kids would also instantly die, ending their wretched heritage.

Then we might come back, if there is mercy enough to give us the grace to do so, and revisit this whole question of church and state and, perhaps, we will conclude that so long as there is a state there must be a state religion. The question is, can we build such a thing, a religion, a habit of action assumption between a people based on a narrative anyone in that group can enter into, that can reflect the diversity of the religions and non-religions that America currently represents?

I believe we can, and I believe that religion is built aroound the American narrative of an idea overcoming a human flaw, to give in to the temptation of majorityism, to use coercion to attempt to assure your conditional advantage, unearned on the main, should be protected, by any means necessary, from further competition.

We as a people, a people of the world, found ourselves by little effort on our part, the benefactors of an idea that, for a variety of practical reasons, created a significant choke on the power of the winners of the exchange of value from coalescing into ever larger spheres of influence controlled by ever smaller individials.

Our narrative recognizes the contributions of many peoples of the world with influences that range from the Koran to the Upinishads, from the Bible to the Annalects. All of the wisdom traditions of the world have found themselves in part influencing the America that we have become, and all have been given that space to cross-hybridize one another thanks to the creation of a civic space that allowed all of our fundamental differences to be non-relevent when getting down to the simple act of exchange value with one another.

Where we exchange value with one another, for whatever reason, our exchange in this space should be the same whether we are dealing with one of our own tribes or one from a tribe that our tribe detests. Whatever we feel about Dallas Cowboys fans, when they come to our stores in Philly, we serve them and treat them well.

We can exchange value even with people we hate if we honor one another’s bills of rights in all the spaces in which we exchange value with one another outside our consensually created specific fellowship associations. In other words, if we are addressing or serving the public, we are operating in civic space.

The Bill of Rights, and how they emerged, an honest look at how they emerged, not an ideal one, is a compelling story in and of itself that all of us in this nation can enter into. The way in which so many people among us were pressed by the fact that our use of slavery, our definition of human beings as being 3/5 of a person were so violently and vulgarly out of line with these bill of rights standards that, for so many others, had brought checks on state power in ways few realized at that time.

The few that understood what the Bill of Rights did to empower the weakest of us against the most majority of us, be it in numbers or resources or both, knew that so long as a land with such a power-flipping tool as the Bill of Rights continued to allow the weakest, the most vulnerable, of their land, the coerced sojourner, if you will, to be denied the Bill of Rights protections of the land, to be enslaved and defined as non-human, the power of the Bill of Rights was dying as these people died, under the same oppressive whip.

Thus America struggled to overcome its utter failure at the most crucial place in society, to assure that the weakest, the most hated, the most vilified, are afforded the same Bill of Rights protections as the most powerful, an ideal that surely is never to occur, though, if your starting point does not at least give myth to this goal, then your sense of fear of the outrage of the people you allegedly serve will be significantly reduced, and your authoritarian solutions to authoritarian problems is only sure to multiply upon itself.

It would be too much for the Supreme Court to fundamentally revisit the whole question of separation of church and state, since it is based not on the letter of the Constitution, but on the letters of Jefferson to a Church that was concerned the state would be encroaching on the church. The separation of church and state phrase itself was directed at assuaging the fears of the church that the state would impose itself on them. Jefferson was assuring them that the church was separated from such an attenpt.

Regardless, as I stated earlier, in some part, the notion that the state can exist withoout a church is simply not possible. The state must have a myth and an ethos that emerges from that myth that the vast majority of peoples it governs can enter into. The real question is not a separation of church and state, but can the state create a church without an answer to a creator or non-creator that has standards that allow humans of diverse faith and non-faith views to exchange value in open, non-coercive ways despite these fundamental differences in ‘belief’?

My assumption is you can, and the honest American story as a hard, diffuclt path, one we have yet to overcome, but are seeking to get to, building a consistent space in all our civic arrangements reflect the values expressed in our Bill of Rights, where humans are sovereigns in and of themselves insofar as they do not generally first aggress on others.

U.S. Supreme Court to hear Maine dispute over religious schools

From www.reuters.com
2021-07-02 07:00:00

Excerpt:

July 2 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday took up a challenge by two families with children attending Christian schools to a Maine tuition assistance program that bars taxpayer money from being used to pay for religious educational institutions in a case that could further narrow the separation of church and state.

The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, agreed to hear an appeal by the families of a lower court ruling in favor of the state that concluded that Maine’s program did not violate the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. The eventual ruling could build on other decisions by the court in recent years allowing public funds to go to religious institutions.

It was one of 10 new cases the justices added to their list of ones they will hear during the court’s next term, which starts in October. Friday’s announcement on cases was the final action in the court’s current term, which culminated in a major 6-3 ruling on ideological lines on Thursday that could make it easier for states to enact voting restrictions.

Read Full Article

95 Percent oof Ocean Surface to Change by 2100 on Current Carbon Path

Parker Davis September 2, 2021

A secret group of researchers called US-based researchers have produced a theory that, based on current carbon emission projections, by 2100, 95 percent of the oeath’s ocean surface will change, which, they say, will lead to this terrifying conclusion, “Without (emissions) mitigation, novel and disappearing climates in the sea surface will be widespread around the globe by 2100,” said Lotterhos. (from article linked below).

Nowhere in this article does this suggest the death of life in the oceans, rather, it suggests changing of life in the oceans. Perhaps scientsts have a hard time arguing that the biological life patterning throughout our known existence as a planet is capable of adapting and producing new patterns where new circumstances arise.

Carbon emissions will change ocean surface climate by 2100 by 95 percent: Study- Technology News, Firstpost

From www.firstpost.com
2021-08-30 12:22:56
Agence France-Presse
Excerpt:

Up to 95 percent of Earth’s ocean surface will have changed by , tthe end of the century unless humanity reins in its carbon emissions, according to research published Thursday.

Ocean surface climates, defined by surface water temperature, acidity and the concentration of the mineral aragonite — which many marine animals use to form bones and shell — support the vast majority of sea life.

The world’s seas have absorbed around a third of all carbon pollution produced since the Industrial Revolution.

But with atmospheric CO2 levels increasing at a rate unprecedented in at least three million years, there are fears that ocean surface climates may become less hospitable to the species it hosts.

US-based researchers wanted to see what effect carbon pollution has already had on ocean surface since the mid-18th century. They also projected the impact of emissions through to 2100.

To do so, they modelled global ocean climates across three time periods: the early 19th century (1795-1834); the late 20th century (1965-2004); and the late 21st century (2065-2014).

Read Full Article

Nation-Building At Home Through A Spiritual Air Force

Bill Collier September 2, 2021

To nation-build at home, The Freedomist plans to create a country-wide “spiritual air force” of freedom building activists within every US Congressional District and County/Parish. This spiritual air force will be based around very local Freedomist Guard Flights of 10-20 activist freedom builders who conduct peaceful local activities to build freedom locally first and foremost.

As the US learns the lessons of foreign nation-building in a land that rejects the values upon which that effort is based, what about the situation at home where a majority of people at home lack trust in major institutions? Who will engage in and upon what basis will they engage in nation-building in America’s neighborhoods and communities?

Nation-building at home is all about building or restoring LOCAL institutions, including entities that influence government and other institutions or that have a public trust, and making them trustworthy in the sense they protect and honor the human dignity, human rights, and human flourishing of every person in that community, showing no favor or prejudice toward any, and with both the individual’s good and the common welfare in mind, always.

Too many efforts to nation-building at home are disjointed, narrow on focus, and not broadly backed by an organized polity of any kind. Often, projects we may call aimed at nation-building and freedom and prosperity building efforts, are hit or miss, reactionary, and short-lived in their scope and impact. People suddenly respond, rally, demand something, and are usually ignored, then the moment passes and the issue becomes another in a long line of frustrations until the next dramatic rally.

To nation-build at home would demand the deliberate gathering and organizing of a cohesive polity who are capable of influencing a strong plurality of voters and consumers who will take their cue from them and actually vote, petition, demonstrate, boycott, or buycott, en bloc. Building a strong polity of freedom loving people who can and will act as one with discipline and focus is a necessity that must presage the rallies, votes, and etc that are often launched by a few vocal people as a strong reaction to a controversy or offense.

It is argued that one needs a cause or issue to elicit the kind of response upon which to build a movement. It is certainly easier to use an issue and generate meetings, activities, and rallies. But it doesn’t last without a serious outlay of funding and professional leaders and organizers being paid. An army of all volunteers motivated by an issue of the moment is ineffective in the long-term.

The war we are fighting is a war against diverse ruling class factions, to the left and the right, who desire to own our possessions and suppress our God-given human dignity and human rights and to thereby deny our human flourishing. We must gather a country-wide digital army of freedom builders in every Congressional District and County until we have depth and breadth on an unprecedented scale.

The Freedomist List, for now, is gathering people interested in our content but we aim to find, gather, organize, and mobilize Freedomists in every US Congressional District and County until all these places have at least one active Flight of 10-20 freedom builders and on Club of 120 or so activists and we can mobilize over 100,000 Americans for any visible rally, event, or peaceful demonstration at any time or location.

If we do not focus on building both a volunteer and professional activist corps of freedom builders then we will always be at a disadvantage to our diverse opponents and those masses they have fooled into following and fighting for them. If we want to nation-build at home we must begin with building a virtual-to-local Freedomist corps of freedom-building activists who have a presence in most all or all Congressional Districts and Counties.

Just what this network does will be as diverse as one may imagine. They may enage in a boycott or buycott, they may conduct an awareness and education campaign with public events or parades, they may canvass for ballot initiatives, they may perform opposition research on the ground and/or virtually, they may lead local efforts to pass a Freedom Sanctuary Resolution or Ordnance in their municipality or county, and the list goes on.

The main concept here is sort of like a spiritual air force, organized like an air force but the only “weapons” are things like prayer, peaceful public events and outreach, information, legal actions, and the such. Still, however, the spirit and vibe should come off as a sort of spiritual air force and not some hodgepodge, indisciplined, “leaderless movement.”

We want to find, train, and fund leaders, organizers, and experts/professionals who will support the many millions of people we envision joining this “spiritual air force” to wage unrelenting spiritual and then information, economic, legal, and political warfare, albeit 100% peaceful and within the law, to defeat the freedom taking factions that rule this land right now. We aim for a total transfer of power from the top and center to the People in their families, free associations, local communities, and the states and away from the Federal power and monopoly corporate powers.

Subscribers to The Freedomist will be crowdfunding this effort.

Organizationally, we plan to find provisional leader candidates to help, on a voluntary basis, build the core infrastructure of this spiritual air force, consisting of chartered clubs and chartered Freedomist Guard Flights of around 10-20 activists.

The Flights are more active freedom builders who are committed to making a visible showing for freedom in their locale, including participation in parades, setting up booths at events, providing ushering and basic unarmed security for events like rallies, doing door to door canvassing, and assisting people with things like understanding gun laws, home safety and security, amd disaster and emergency preparedness.

The Clubs will also be activists and freedom seekers and will focus on creating a local mirror structure to hold all government and other entities with a public trust accountable to the Bill ofRights, gaining the signature of voters for the Freedom Sanctuary Resolution and to get them to take The Freedomist Pledge, and having a space for gatherings and social activities.

If we say the Freedomist Guard is the “military” branch of our movement, we don’t in any way mean anything beyond a spiritual warfare and the symbolism of a spiritual air force. We are not advocates for any kind of militia that isn’t regulated by local, state, or federal authorities and we are definitely strongly opposed to violence in any form or fashion. But we do believe that a “military theme” in our approach engenders the spirit of our efforts as a form of peaceful spiritual and information warfare in defense of freedom with justice for ALL Americans of every demographic grouping or identity in this land.

Through our spiritual air force, the Guard, and our parallel civic/social structures in the form of Clubs, the Freedomist aims to build a strong freedom movement built on Judeo-Christian values while respecting the human dignity and human rights of all fellow Americans and promoting universal human flourishing for them as well. Our cause is to build the Freedomist as a strong and well organized, if also decentralized, movement for freedom that serves all Americans without exception.

What this movement does, the battles it fights, such as so-called “critical race theory” or the lying corpostate press establishment, or specifically ballot initiatives and candidates it supports, will emerge both through leadership and through the People engaging in the decision-making process whereby these priorities are set.

But FIRST we must BUILD THE MOVEMENT!

Building the Freedomist Movement through The Freedomist, as crowdfunded by our subscribers, is the key to nation-building at home.

See Your Unborn Baby in 3D Virtual Reality

Paul Collier September 1, 2021

A new device that’s billed as a tool to help Mothers bond with their unborn babies is promising to deliver a virtual reality encounter with a pregnant woman’s unborn child. The tool will also allow you to create 3D models of the unborn child, but, more impactfully, it will allow you to virtually interact with your child in physical space, and you can watch your child grow and change inside you week to week.

But the tool will also have another impact, one that many will have already figured out before they read a word I am writing here right now. This tool will disarm the efforts by pro-choice advocates to dehumanize the unborn, to make of them something that can be disposed for any reason, any reason whatsoever, up to and including even birth. A tool like this, if it spreads, and more and more people share their experiences on social media, the humanization of the unborn will become more and more apparent, and harder and harder to ignore.

The necessity to subhumanize is required in a land where the aborting of life is not only legal, but the corporate powers that be overwhelmingly assumes should be the moral right of the land, a moral right that might even be worth protecting from dissenting views alone.

Pregnant women can soon use Virtual Reality to ‘meet’ their unborn babies

From www.mother.ly
2021-08-31 15:05:06

Excerpt:

Meet baby via VR: A virtual reality rendering of your unborn baby from Motherly on Vimeo.

Using a VR headset, (did Santa bring you one this year?), you can hear your baby’s heartbeat and, by moving your head, study the baby’s anatomy—examining whether your little one has your eyes, dad’s lips, or grandma’s cute nose.

Here’s how the RSNA describes the technology’s capabilities—

Researchers in Brazil created virtual reality 3-D models based on fetal MRI results. Sequentially-mounted MRI slices are used to begin construction of the model. A segmentation process follows in which the physician selects the body parts to be reconstructed in 3-D. Once an accurate 3-D model is created—including the womb, umbilical cord, placenta and fetus—the virtual reality device can be programmed to incorporate the model.

Read Full Article

News Creators Have Yet Another Reason to Abandon Facebook

Parker Davis September 1, 2021

At some point, we in the news world became largely dependent on traffic from social media sites rather than placement in google search results, especially those of us in the bottom tier of scale as far as newsing is concerned.

Twitter was once a relaible source for traffic to news websites, but, in time, it became more and more difficult for smaller scale operations to get any results worth any time that might be spent to get those results. Facebook, however, continued to be a great driver of news traffic to news websites, such as ours. And even as I write this, Facebook continues to be a major driver of traffic to this site as well, though not nearly as signficantly as it once was.

We at The Freedomist have been working on other methods of traffic generation with an awareness that Facebook should not be looked upon as a secure space to set up shop for any significant period of time. We have in our network multiple Facebook pages, some of which have well over 100k likes, but we view these almost as ghosts still able to produce a few worthwhile results for a little while longer.

WIth the news that facebook will be throttling political content, which is most news these days, since everything is political now, we can expect to have even less traffic from Facebook than we already have, and many other operations such as ours will as well, which might cause some short-term for some (some more than others), but will produce longterm gains in terms of leading more and more people to build social media sharing platforms that are more stable and more free speech rooted in their method of governance, and more fundamentally aligned with the spirit of the Bill of rights and not the CCP or DNC or even GOP for that matter.

Facebook’s continued zeal to be the moral gatekeeper of socety is leading it to conclude its poor uneducated roobs that utlize its platform are hardly smart enough to discern for themselves what they find offensive, what they find misleading, what they find good, what they find bad. For this reason, Facebook will try to hide all those flame-shooting links that might upset the poor delicates who can hardly dress themselves each morning let alone think for themselves.

This means the political links gots ta goes, and Facebook gives the primary drivers of traffic to their platform, news creators, more incentive to develop better non-Facevook ways to get traffic to their websites.

Facebook to downrank political content, hurting news publishers

From www.washingtonexaminer.com
2021-08-31 16:08:42
Nihal Krishan
Excerpt:

Facebook will reduce the amount of political content on its news feed due to negative user feedback, a move that could hurt news publishers and those that post about politics, according to reports Tuesday.

The social media giant will reduce political content by not relying so heavily on its content engagement algorithm, which focuses on the likelihood that a user will share or comment on a post based on past behavior, Axios reported .

It will also start to experiment with limits on how much political content people outside of the United States will see on their news feeds, including countries such as Costa Rica, Sweden, Spain, and Ireland.

Facebook announced in February that it would look into ways to reduce political content on the platform to better meet the needs of users, it said. According to the company, an average of 6% of a user’s feed represents political content.

“There has been this trend, I think, across society…

Read Full Article

GETTR, the Safe Haven for Conservatives, Has a Heavy Ban Hammer

GETTR, the Safe Haven for Conservatives, Has Censored Roger Stone

Parker Davis September 1, 2021

It appears the so-called safe space for conservstives, specifically Trump conservatives, Gettr, is having a hard time managing its content creators. From the beginning, it was promised that Donald Trump would build a social media answer to all the baddies, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube. That became a blog site that Trump sometimes posts stuff on. Later, we heard about Gettr. Initially, it was thought to literally be a Trump-led project, but, in fact, it had no real affiliation with Trump at all, it was just a social media platform that marketed itself as a free speech social media platform specifically friendly to Trump supporters, especiallly those that had recently been axed from one of the baddies, Twitter, Facebook, etc.

The recent Gabs by Roger Stone, another free-speech-promising platform, this one billed as an alternative to Twitter, suggest that the site is using its power as a gatekeeper not unsimilarly to how the baddies use their position of power advantage as gatekeepers of little accountability to the ones they serve.

Roger Stone is complaining about the free speech platform, Gettr, silencing him, censoring him, because, he alleges, he said something bad about the Gettr founder, Jason Miller, as well as Steve Bannon. Given what Trump has said about Bannon in the past (he essentially called him an amateur, he threw Bannon under the bus hard), one is doubtful that even Trump would have that much of a problem with anyone talking smack about Bannon. This appears to be about protecting a certain faction’s particular useful narrative, and that faction might just be a Bannon faction. Regardless of what Jason Miller represents, making factional gatekeeping decisions makes you one of the baddies, sir.

Of course, all of this suppses Stone is being totally truthful and transparent in what he relates as his version for why Gettr has censored him. The story itself though is telling in that one member of a larger faction, the Trump faction, seems willing to cast into doubt the legitimate credentials of Gettr as a bastion for conservative safe-spacism. This would not be done lightly, even by Stone, so that leads me to believe there was some degree of real throttling of this man’s voice on Gettr because he broke a factional narrative, this one being, at the very leas,t the Jason Miller faction, which might just be Jason Miller alone, given factional power, so to speak, by share weight of his controlling of the filter on the Gettr platform.

Gettr, to me, is yet another example of a good idea for a group of people, say, a faction, to get behind, the idea of building a people-reaching free speech platform to counter the controlling social media platforms we now have, and a few people with deep pockets or relationships with networks of people with deep pockets, slap together some stuff to co-opt the idea and turn it into a quick money maker and/or prestige builder that ends up being an unprofessional cringe fest that implodes within a couple or so years (if not sooner) leaving everyone highly discouraged at ever trying the actually good idea ever again.

Let’s hope Gettr doesn’t discourage others for finding way to build such social media platforms, but don’t let’s make them just safe spaces for conservatives, make them actually as extremely free speech as human to human contact on a digital platform can be.

Trumpist Gettr Social Network Continues To Speed Run Content Moderation Learning Curve: Bans, Then Unbans, Roger Stone

From www.techdirt.com
2021-08-26 16:45:00

Excerpt:

Remember Gettr? That’s the Trumpist social network run by former Trump spokesperson (and vexatious lawsuit filer) Jason Miller that promised to be supportive of “free speech.” As we point out what happens with every new social network that jumps into the space with promises to “support free speech!” and “not censor!” before long they will begin to realize content moderation is required to keep your site running — and soon they discover that content moderation will involve difficult choices. And, sometimes, it involves making mistakes.

Of course, whenever Twitter, Facebook, Instagram or whoever else note that they made a “mistake” with a content moderation decision and reverse it, there are always some people who insist it couldn’t possibly be a mistake and must be [insert conspiratorial reason here]. So I find it hilarious that on Wednesday, Gettr got to experience all this as well. First, Trump buddy and admitted “dirty trickster” Roger Stone went on Gab — another such social network — to whine about how he was “censored” by Gettr, claiming it was because he had made what he believed were disparaging remarks about Miller (and Steve Bannon).