Conspiracy Theories 101 Series
Part 11 of 12:
The Media
Part 1
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 1 of 12: Introduction
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 2 of 12: The Deep State
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 3 of 12: Conspiracy Theorists - Part 1 and Part 2
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 4 of 12: Pedophile Rings
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 5 of 12: The Surveillance State
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 6 of 12: The Banking State
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 7 of 12: The Environmental Movement
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 8 of 12: Breaking Up the Family Unit
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 9 of 12: The Conspiracy Against Women - Part 1 and Part 2
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 10 of 12: The Conspiracy Against Visible Minorities - Part 1 and Part 2 and Part 3 and Part 4
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 11 of 12: The Media - Part 1 and Part 2
Conspiracy Theories 101 Series Part 12 of 12: The Stigma of Being a Conspiracy Theorist - Part 1 and Part 2
By: Shawn Alli
Posted: October 10, 2017
Updated: July 2, 2022
*This article was updated in July 2022 because the original web pages were too large to be indexed by Google.
*Note: I use the term liberal trifecta to refer to liberals in general, liberal/progressive/neo-liberal media outlets, and Democrats.
Fake News
Polices of the Trump Administration
Islam
Fake News
Let's get right into it. Fake news is just the new term for propaganda. And propaganda in the media has existed for decades (see The War Against Journalists in Whistleblowers: True Patriots of Humanity). Substitute the word fake news with propaganda and it's the same thing.
While fake news is barely trending in October 2017, after Trump's 2016 win, it's all that liberal media outlets can talk about after his win. Almost every liberal article begins or ends with the issue of fake news. Why? Because liberals lose the 2016 election very badly. To lose the House, Senate, and White House is one thing.
But to lose it to Donald Trump is just...sad. The period after the election was the ideal time for liberal mainstream and alternative media outlets to find their soul and get their bearings. Sadly, they fail to do so and prefer to stay in the loving arms of their ideological bubbles.
It's unknown if the Democrats can even win the House and Senate in 2018 under Nancy Pelosi, despite Trump's crazy antics. And that's the rub. While liberal media outlets constantly throw mud at Trump hoping something will stick in the eyes of the voters, currently, nothing has stuck.
The Democrats are 0-4 for special election wins despite massive rallies and protests against Trump. What's happening? The actions are not translating into votes for Democrats.
The mistranslation concept is very easy to grasp. Liberal media outlets write articles critical of Starbucks, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, and Facebook for scummy (but legal) tax avoidance schemes. Does that stop them (along with liberals in general) from using products or services from them? No.
Why not? Because criticism of a company doesn't necessarily translate into significant actions against it. Why not? Because generally speaking, liberals are fakes. They're disingenuous in what they write vs. how they act.
Sure, they talk a big game in their articles, but they don't apply those ideologies to their daily life. Hence, a disingenuous life. And as you should know this by now, the disingenuous life isn't worth living.
I'm sure that some of them secretly buy cases of water while criticizing the futility of the bottled water industry relative to chlorine and fluoride filled tap water. I can get a case of 24 bottles of water (500 ml) for $1.49 (CAD). That's less than 7 cents for one bottle. Peace of mind and less fluoride and chlorine only costs 7 cents a bottle? Yes sir, I'll take that deal. And I'm sure that a few liberals will secretly take that deal as well.
The same applies to criticism of movies for whitewashing the roles. Does that criticism stop the liberal trifecta from paying the $15.00 to see the movie? No. They may give it a bad review, but they're tacitly supporting the movie by paying for it. Again, the ideologies get lost in translation. Why? The liberal trifecta is (more or less) disingenuous in what they say, what they write, and how they act.
The same concept applies to sexism in academia and science. When liberal media outlets expose university departments as fostering a hostile environment of sexism, does that translate into less students enrolling in the specific department or the university? No. Why not? Because liberals don't really care. While liberals care about combating sexism in theory, in reality that fight takes a back seat to one's career goals/aspirations.
If you're liberal and reading liberal media outlets on a constant basis, you're following disingenuous people. That's one reason why you're constantly shocked about reality. How could Trump win when all liberal media outlets said he would lose badly? How could the Democrats be 0-4 when almost everyone in the US and the world is against Trump? Because liberal media outlets are disingenuous. And that disingenuous nature is causing liberal media outlets to lose their ability to condition the public.
If you're liberal and addicted to social media...if you can't stop liking other people's Facebook posts...if you need to hire someone to monitor your Facebook page...if you need to reward yourself for staying off of social media...you lack character, have no genuine purpose, and have completely given yourself over to liberal conditioning. You are completely lost.
But there's good news for you my lost ideological liberal friends. Instead drugging yourself with pharmaceuticals as usual, you can turn to radical dualism. Best of all, it's free. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain (see Philosophy of Mind in Philosophy Reborn Part I: Purpose and Autoimmune Diseases for Everyone in Part IV: Naturally Unhealthy Big Pharma & Big Media).
While conservatives are also disingenuous in many of their actions, a good deal of conservatives are genuine in their actions. If they find out that Starbucks supports Syrian immigration instead of hiring American workers, they’ll take action and boycott the store.
Of course, it's a bit of a stretch to claim that conservative boycotts are responsible for the closure of Starbuck's Teavana chain. But I'm sure that it makes a small but significant difference.
Getting back to politics, Democrat losses are not a major concern for Democrats at the moment because the Republicans can't even pass a piece of legislation while controlling both the House and Senate. What a joke. For the love of god, can Republicans just pass something? Pass the ketchup, the salt, the Courvoisier...whatever, just pass something.
And yes, the liberal trifecta is free to rub that fact in the faces of conservatives. And conservatives are free to remind liberals that they won the House, Senate, and White House when all the polls showed that Trump was going to lose badly.
In an October 2016 article in the Guardian, former executive editor of the New York Times (NYT) Jill Abramson says that Hilary Clinton will almost certainly win the presidency. [1] The NYT even started the election results with an 80% chance of Clinton winning. [2] How embarrassing.
What the liberal trifecta don't seem to understand is that Americans don't care about bullsh*t issues (despite liberals trying to condition them to care). Most of the American public doesn't care about Trump's personal life, his Twitter spats, his character defects, or even withdrawing from the Paris Accord.
Contrary to what you may believe, deep down, most people around the world (including the liberal trifecta) know that excess carbon dioxide and methane won't lead to the end of humanity or the planet. How do I know? Because they would all be vegans, driving electric cars, living in an apartment or condo, and living a minimalist lifestyle.
But they're not doing this. Why not? Because they know that the climate change movement is complete bullsh*t. They're just going along with it because it's socially acceptable and the current norm (see The Environmental Movement).
And this bullsh*t even includes rich liberal media outlets, board of directors, and liberal celebrities. All of these so-called climate chance believers live a life of luxury, a life of waste and massive excess. As an opponent of the climate change movement, I know what it is and it isn't. And it's not about living a life of luxury, waste, and excess. It's about a vegan minimalist lifestyle, period. There's no debate.
Today's genetically engineered plant based meat, chicken, and fish (packaged as cultured meat, chicken and fish) provide climate change believers with a free pass. Is it cheating? Yes, but it's the climate change movement. They'll move heaven and earth to bend science, or rig the system so only their ideologies count as supposed objective science.
But let's get back to politics. Prior to the 2016 election, both parties are disingenuous and hollow. Both are completely out of touch with the American public or just lying to them outright. Trump is the more genuine candidate (relatively speaking) to fill the void. Of course, electing someone to make decisions for you isn't democracy. It's a false democracy (see Philosophy of Governance & Economics in Part I).
And just in case you're wondering, even if Bernie Sanders wins the nomination, he wouldn't have won the election. Why not? Because he's toxic to the mainstream Democratic brand of Big Pharma, Big Biotech, and Big Industry. He's not beholden to Wall Street like Hilary is.
Sanders' advocacy of socialism is nice in theory, but in practice wouldn't work well in North America in the 21st century. While Sweden's socialism case is on the positive scale (aside from the political correctness), Venezuela's case is on the negative scale.
And with the negative Venezuela stories trending in the past and present, Sanders would have lost. But it would have been interesting to see the supporters from both sides battling each other because both sides are genuine. And yet liberal media outlets, Hollywood, and Wall Street all bank on the disingenuous candidate. Hilarious.
After the huge election loss, instead of liberal media outlets stepping outside of their ideological bubble, they wrap themselves tighter as they claim that fake news stole the election. While it's understandable for most people to deflect blame when they lose, it's disingenuous. And the liberal trifecta (along with Hilary Clinton) are disingenuous in doing so.
One of the turning points in the fake news debate is when Trump calls a CNN reporter fake news in January 2017. [3] In that moment, intelligent journalists realize that they just created a monster. Fake news turned against them.
Sadly, in their struggle to profit from news, media outlets only have sound bites. Or more correctly, Trump is all they have. If Clinton had won the election most media outlets would be closer to bankruptcy or mergers. Or if they're lucky, they'll get bought out by a bigger fish that still sees value in them.
Of course, fake news is a sliding scale. The best propaganda is lies mixed with truth. And this is the tactic that liberal media outlets have adopted. The US economy is a good example. From January 2017 to September 2017 the US economy is strong with good to excellent numbers for unemployment.
Liberal media outlets can't deny this. But they can skew the interpretations.Yes, it's good but it's not because of Trump. At the same time, they'll blame trump for anything bad that happens in the US economy. That's disingenuous. And the American public knows it.
Hurricane Harvey? That's Trump's fault because he withdrew from the Paris Accord. This is the level that liberal media outlets are at. They're desperate to interpret anything and everything negative with Trump. That's not accidental. That's intentional. Why? Because the liberal trifecta is fake and disingenuous.
To be fair, conservative media outlets are definitely stuck in their ideological bubbles. But most conservative media outlets don't really count as news. The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) is the only exception.
I'll be honest and admit that I use a double standard in liberal vs. conservative media outlets. The bar is raised higher for liberal media outlets. Why? Because of their claims. Liberal media outlets claim to be the only check against corruption. And to be fair, that's true.
Conservative media outlets wouldn't know investigate journalism if it slapped them in their face. Again, the WSJ is the only exception. But the world can't survive with just the WSJ's investigative journalism.
Personally, I have an axe to grind with liberal media outlets because I'm a visible minority. Liberal media outlets constantly claim that we're a strong advocate for visible minority issues. But that's false. They're an advocate in theory only. And most of it is token support instead of genuine support (see The Conspiracy Against Visible Minorities).
But let's get back to the liberal interpretation of the US economy during Trump's administration. My apologies for the tangents, but that's just the way I write.
When the employment numbers and stock market are good, the liberal trifecta usually claim that Trump shouldn't get the praise. When the numbers are bad, the liberal trifecta pounces on Trump. He's destroying the economy. He needs to be impeached.
That's disingenuous. The retail environment today is super toxic in 2017. Well established retail stores are going bankrupt and laying off thousands of employees (without guaranteeing their pensions). I don't even need references to support this claim. It's self-evident in almost every part of Canada and the US.
The fact that the Trump administration is able to achieve good to excellent numbers in jobs and the stock market is very impressive. The fact that the US Federal Reserve raises interest rates in June 2017 is proof.
But in the mind of the liberal trifecta, it's not because of Trump. Even if a moderate rate occurs they'll say oh, it's only a moderate increase. It's nothing spectacular. In fact it shows that Trump's economic policies aren't working. Umm...what? Clearly, these liberals are cracked in the head.
The liberal trifecta has to denigrate Trump. Aside from the ideological war, they fear a successful Trump administration. They fear that his policies will strengthen America, be it socially, financially, economically, and internationally.
To be fair to liberals, GSIGs are the ones pulling most of the strings in their failed liberal policies of the past and present. GSIGs are the ones making the big decisions and profiting from both sides (see The Deep State).
Another example of fake news is terrorism. Again, the liberal trifecta doesn't deny the events or the perpetrators. But sometimes they skew the wording. Instead of Muslim terrorists shouting Allahu Akbar, the liberal trifecta says God is Great. Why?
Because they don't want to paint Muslims in general as the enemy. Nor do they want to paint Muslim extremists as practicing real Islam. To be fair to liberals, conservatives blaming Muslims for completely fabricated events is a real problem. This is due to unethical conservatives and conservative media outlets.
Aside from the small stuff, the liberal trifecta interprets and reinterprets context in order to paint Trump as the real cause. If the liberal trifecta could bend time, they would blame Trump for the rise of Hitler. That's how desperate they are in their ideological reporting.
To be fair, conservative media outlets would do the same. Why? Because controlling the narrative is key. You control the narrative from the starting gate and you'll have a better chance at convincing people that your story is correct.
When the liberal trifecta reports on Muslim extremists and liberal protestors, the editing process goes into overdrive. When conservative media outlets report on white supremacists and conservative protestors, the editing process goes into overdrive.
Both ideological camps are doing their best to spin the narrative in their favor. Hilarious and tragic at the same time. Remember, ideological bias is a strong factor in ones perception of reality.
The UVA rape story and false sexual assault allegations would also count as fake news. But I'll get into that in the feminist series in the future. For now, we can get to fake news via historical events. While liberal media outlets vilify alternative facts or alternative history, in reality this is true for all history.
The Manhattan Project, eugenics, Aboriginals, the Vietnam war...most of the information at the time is completely false. And not just accidentally false, it's knowingly false for various reasons (religion, national security, the good of the nation, and such). The truth, or versions of the truth only come out years or decades later. That's a real problem.
In theory, historical writers are objective about their discipline. In reality, they ignore or downplay information they don't like. If Canadians take a look at their 20 year old history books, they'll find that there's no mention of Aboriginal cultural genocide or negative facts about residential schools. That's not accidental. That's intentional.
If people go back further, they'll find that racism and eugenics are taught to students as facts and being beneficial for the good of the nation (see Philosophy of Education in Part I). And yet, all of this is fake news/fake history. The events are real, but the content is fake news.
The truth is that history is made from different ideological points of view sprinkled in with a few facts. Even today, it's just as bad. Be it school textbooks or the internet, there are multiple versions of history. Just because an institution says it's correct doesn't mean that it's correct.
In the past, the hierarchical structures are absolute and unquestionable. Beginning in the 1970s, people start to question anything and everything. And that's good...but a person can easily get lost in a sea of ideological points of view. And no, the correct point of view is not a liberal or conservative point of view. The objective point of view is when there is no point of view.
While such a thing doesn't exist today, it doesn't mean that it can't exist. It's not just about a video camera recording the events in an objective manner. It's about a video camera recording all events on the Earth (and perhaps the universe) from all points of view. And when you have all points of view recorded (no exceptions), that's when you truly have no point of view. There's your philosophy lesson for the day.
Today, it's not that there are 20 articles about one issue. The problem is that there are 20 articles about a single claim. How do you know what's correct? How can anything be objectively correct from the point of view of a human being? Lots of problems and very little solutions.
It will be interesting to see how automated computer programs deal with this. Of course, a computer program is only as good as it's programmer, and the programmer can program their intellectual bias into the software. But it remains to be seen how successful and objective robo journalism will be in the future.
To make matters worse, we have sponsored content on liberal media outlet websites (CNN, Newsweek, Rolling Stone). And sponsored content is more or less fake news.
Polices of the Trump Administration
The liberal trifecta works overtime to point out that Trump continually breaks his campaign promises. Trump said X but does Y instead. What a horrible president. Sorry, but that's just the same old. Obama the candidate and Obama the president does the same. Every politician breaks their campaign policies. It's just the norm, and Trump is no different in that regard.
And no, politicians can’t be held legally responsible for breaking their promises. But what do you expect in a false democracy with political courts?
In fact, Trump doesn't even have to deliver that much. If another Supreme Court Justice retires during Trump's administration...if Trump delivers on tax reform and financial deregulation in 2017...Republicans will call it a day. That's more than enough. If Trump can manage that, he doesn't need to win the 2020 re-election. If he does, it's all gravy.
And just to burst the liberal trifecta's bubble a little more, Trump has access to top secret information. And not only top secret information, but Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI). After he leaves the presidency (whether it's in 2020 or 2024) that top secret knowledge will potentially maintain the Trump legacy forever.
To be fair to liberals, Trump isn't unique. He's more or less the same old in his conservative policies. While Trump claims that he's not beholden to multinational corporations, the Israeli government, and special interests...as the president, he is. Don't believe me? See for yourself:
On Thursday, the CEOs of Corning, Merck, and Pfizer pharmaceutical companies were welcomed to the White House by President Donald J. Trump...
...This partnership will drive significant United States manufacturing and job creation, investing $4 billion and creating more than 4,000 new high-tech jobs for Americans in the coming years.
The return of pharmaceutical glass manufacturing to the United States was made possible by collaboration between the three storied American companies and support from the Trump Administration. [4]
When you want private corporations to invest in jobs nationally, you're beholden to them. In addition, while Trump agrees to investigate the alleged theft of intellectual property from the Chinese government and Chinese corporations, [5] it's unknown whether that will actually bring about any significant changes. And Trump's beholden status continues:
...the bill's passage in the House, by 233 to 186, keeps alive the Republican Party's dream of unwinding one of President Barack Obama's signature accomplishments.
...rolling back Dodd-Frank represents a major part of the Republican agenda. The Trump administration hopes that by unshackling businesses from burdensome regulations, renegotiating trade deals and cutting tax rates, it can help the economy grow faster and well-paying jobs will become more plentiful. [6]
Investors in Bayer AG have taken heart from President Donald Trump's apparent support for the German pharmaceuticals and chemicals firm's planned $57 billion takeover of U.S. seed giant Monsanto Co. and are cautiously optimistic the deal will pass regulatory muster. [7]
US reinforcements could start arriving in Afghanistan within days, a US commander in the region said in the wake of Donald Trump’s decision to raise the US stakes once more in the 16-year war.
In a televised address to troops at Fort Myer in Virginia on Monday night, Trump did not say how many more soldiers he was willing to send to Afghanistan, but he made it clear he was going to increase the US military presence there. [8]
It was not long ago that U.S. President Donald Trump declared Afghanistan "a complete waste."
This week...Trump made an open-ended commitment to keep spending money in Afghanistan that his predecessor Barack Obama never would.
...According to the CIA's World Factbook, U.S. military spending ranks ninth in the world as a percentage of total economic output. But in absolute terms, the country is clearly top dog, in 2016 spending about three times as much as China and approaching 10 times as much as Russia... [9]
Of course, Obama is also beholden to GSIGs just as much during his administration. To be fair to Obama, he succeeds in his defense of the LGBTQ community, creating a new healthcare legislation (heavily flawed of course), and ending the stop-loss policy (extension of military service).
The fact that US courts allow the stop-loss policy to continue prior to Obama ending it shows injustice and the broad interpretive powers of the US Supreme Court/Supreme courts in general.
As the president, Trump supports Big Industry like all of the other Republican idiots. He supports Big Pharma and Big Biotech just as Obama and Republicans usually do. He supports warrantless NSA surveillance over everyone in the world just as Obama and Republicans do. Trump supports private prisons just like Obama and Republicans do. And no, Obama's plan to phase out private prisons doesn't count as a significant action. It's merely the appearance of one.
Trump supports war and invasions as long as it shows American dominance. And just so we're clear, any place where US troops deploy, they never leave. They always leave a permanent base (Vietnam, South Korean, Iraq, and Afghanistan). And with that base comes American ideologies. I'd love a McDonalds and KFC here. And that American hegemony tends to spread into agriculture, economic policies, financial policies, and such. It's a win-win situation for the US government and industry and it's still working today.
Contrary to what you may believe, Americans in general love a good war. They yearn for it. I don't mean a bullsh*t US invasion of the Middle East. No, that's for p*ssies. No, Americans want a good war with a powerful foreign government to challenge them. Patriotism, racism, and sexism will all skyrocket during such times because this is the period where political correctness goes out the window and people can do and say what they really mean with minimal consequences.
And what will mainstream media outlets (liberal and conservative) be doing during a real American war? They'll be salivating for more. American media outlets also love a good war because it increases sales and more journalistic awards.
On the surface, liberal media outlets pretend not to love war, but behind the scenes, they love it just as much as conservatives. They just go back and forth for the public. We have to leave the Middle East. We can't leave because we've already lost too many. We're all in. It's all nonsense for the sake of appearances. Remember, media outlets in general thrive on sensationalism and war. Correction, for-profit media outlets thrive on such things.
And no, North Korea is not a significant problem. It's just made to appear that way. It has zero chance against the US military. And the American public don't like going to war against opponents who have zero chance of winning. They like strong opponents like the Chinese or Russian government.
If the Trump administration takes military action against North Korea, it will be a good distraction from his gong show administration. The public and media outlets tend to fall in-line when the bombs start dropping.
Generally speaking, white Christian conspiracy theorists love war but have to pretend that they don't. While they may be critical of the war, they'll always claim that people need to support the troops or get out of the country. Sigh.
Of course, since I don't have an audience, I have no problem upsetting everyone by telling them the truth. That soldiers are just useful idiots to governments. Their lives on the battlefield are worth less than the dollar store products made in China but sold in North America.
Military families who believe that their loved ones are protecting us while being deployed in the Middle East are conditioned to believe such nonsense (either by peers or their own conditioning). It's almost too stupid to believe. But they have to believe the lie in order to justify the actions of their loved ones. Even though their actions are disingenuous, it's understandable nonetheless.
While Trump as a candidate is not for sale, as the president, he's a shill for GSIGs. As a conspiracy theorist, I had hoped for better, but that's the way it is. The election of a new president in theory represents the changing of the guard.
But in reality, it's the same guard serving GSIG ideologies. It's the same guard protecting the same garbage interests. And that's not accidental. That's intentional. How much backroom dealing, corruption, favors, and political jockeying will it take for you to realize that we live in a false democracy that doesn't work?
But Trump is evil for ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. No, he's not evil for ending it. Obama is wrong to use his executive powers to create it in the first place. And parents are wrong to put their children in that position.
Allow me to be clear. Illegal immigration negates the legal immigration process (which takes years). Liberals who believe in DACA are really saying that the legal process doesn't matter. And that's a problem.
On the plus side, these people are more than welcome in Canada. I recommend such people start making plans to move to Canada while the liberal Trudeau government has a majority government. And besides, it's better for visible minorities to live in Canada than the US.
In the US, visible minorities (in theory) have the strongest rights. In reality, they'll get screwed over financially, economically, socially, and mentally before their supposed rights kicks in. While Canada has a few bad spots for visible minorities (Winnipeg, Thunder Bay, Edmonton, and Regina), Toronto is a city of immigrants and visible minorities. All peace loving immigrants are welcome and will generally face less discrimination than they would in the US.
Another reason why the liberal trifecta loves war is because they believe that only the US government and industry can solve the problems of poor people all over the world. While they repudiate the US government as the world police, they secretly see them as the world's protector.
Hence, when a good war comes around, they play their docile role and become a cheerleader for war, without it being too obvious for the American public. Liberal media outlets will denounce the Trump administration for any action, but when it’s war, they secretly tell themselves that the US government knows best. Only the US can end poverty and fix all the problems in the world.
Don't believe me? Take a look at free trade agreements. The liberal trifecta supports all free trade agreements. Why? Because they don't believe that developing nations can become developed ones on their own. They don't believe that they're capable of doing so. Of course, they don't say it like that, but that's what they believe.
They believe that people in developing nations working in slave labor like conditions represents empowerment. Sorry, but that's not empowerment. That's disempowerment. Yes, they may be in a better position financially or economically at the time, but it's only due to the sympathy of white people/owners.
As a visible minority, I can feel that sympathy from time to time. Be it in a grocery store, a public event, or a retail store, I can feel the sympathy card from white people when they go out of their way to help accommodate me.
It's not wrong of course. I don't say anything. Why not? Because sympathetic actions usually make white people feel better about themselves. I went out of my way to accommodate a visible minority. I deserve my chocolate cake today.
It's not my place to burst their bubble. But generally speaking, sympathetic actions from the liberal trifecta will never lead to the empowerment of visible minorities (see The Conspiracy Against Visible Minorities).
And just so you're aware, by supporting free trade agreements, you're supporting Big Industry, no exceptions. Free trade agreements only work via Big Industry. The beneficial trade policies are implemented via massive multinational corporations.
Sure, small local ones benefit, but only because the rewards to Big Industry are so huge. Hence, the liberal trifecta (by association) supports Big Industry. Liberals who think otherwise are delusional and live in their own ideological bubble where all of their actions can be justified.
And that free trade argument also extends to the Chinese government. By supporting trade with the Chinese government, Americans and the liberal trifecta also support the Chinese government's policies of denying human rights, slave-labor like conditions, censorship, obedience to the state, and lack of a free press.
Conditioning people in Mexico and China to do the same work for 5 times less pay than North Americans isn't accidental. It's intentional. Why does it occur? Because GSIGs (via the liberal trifecta) are conditioning these visible minorities to believe that the actions represent empowerment, despite the pay cut. In reality it doesn’t. It's just visible minority slaves toiling in the fields for the benefit of their white masters.
On the surface, liberals appear to be supporting visible minorities and fighting for the little guys. But in reality they don't. They support unethical governments, Big Industry, and censorship...all in the name of empowerment for visible minorities.
And that's part of the two-faced nature of the liberal trifecta. Generally speaking, when you're dealing with a conservative, you know what you're getting. But when you deal with the liberal trifecta, you expect that you're getting X, when in reality you’re getting Y. And that's disingenuous. And that disingenuous nature is not accidental. It's intentional.
You need to understand that the liberal trifecta doesn't support democracy. They support a false democracy where they have power and can do whatever they want. The liberal trifecta doesn't even like referendums (a characteristic of a real democracy) because their side usually doesn't win (Brexit, 2016 US election, and UAW Nissan union vote).
And why does the liberal trifecta keep losing? Because they're losing their ability to condition and influence the public (which they're desperately trying hard to get back). And why are they losing their ability to influence the public? Because they're disingenuous and living in their ideological bubble. Or simply put, they're cracked in the head.
It's hilarious to see the liberal trifecta attack Trump and Ivanka for products made overseas. Umm...is your clothing made in the US? What about the desk you're sitting behind? What about the technology gadgets you're currently using? What about the furniture in your house? Is that made in the US? I doubt it.
During my heydays of big money (so long ago) I buy made in Canada clothing. And it's good clothing. But today, it's rare to find and too expensive for my budget. When I become super rich (not as a conspiracy theorist of course), I hope to buy more made in Canada, US, and Europe clothing and products in general. That is if the market still exists from the massive decline and consolidation of the retail environment.
It's questionable whether Trump's nationalist policy will pay off in the 2018 midterms or 2020 election. Trump is banking on the explosion of growth from American corporations with incentives from his government.
While that's already underway, the main problem is the trillions of dollars that US corporations are keeping in foreign tax havens. In order to continue his nationalist policy, Trump needs those corporations to repatriate their money back to the US. With US tax reforms coming soon, it remains to be seen how these events will play out.
Of course, repatriating trillions of dollars doesn't necessarily mean massive expansion in the US. But doing so will embolden Trump's nationalist policies. Lots of players, lots of interests, lots of ideologies, and everything changing from day to day. Interesting times. If Trump is able to pull it off, the liberal trifecta will be eating crow in 2018 and 2020.
The fact that the liberal trifecta use the term protectionism instead of nationalism is powerfully unethical. In the past, nationalism represents a good thing. It represents a country being self-sustainable. Today, the liberal trifecta denigrates the term by calling it protectionism.
Try not to be fooled. There's nothing wrong with nationalism. Even though I advocate for a global skoparxist government, that's only in the final phase. The first phase is a strong national skoparxist government (see Philosophy of Governance & Economics in Part I).
And just so you know, the Chinese government only believes in trade globally while it advocates nationalism at home. It's not wrong. In fact, their protectionist policies that prohibit foreign ownership are quite impressive. The Chinese government has been able to profit fiscally and socially from their economic policies. Other governments should look into such forms of national protections for their national corporations/industry.
Islam
I could have used the subheading "religion" instead of Islam, but we all know that the biggest religious problem is Muslim extremism. If all Muslim extemists, closet extremists and sympathizers on the planet disappeared tomorrow, there would be more peace in the world. Actions by White supremacists are usually reactionary. Most stay hidden if things are going well.
Let's start off with awareness. Being against Islam is not racist. Islam is a religious ideology. Racism is an ideology against one's race/ethnicity. See the difference? You'd be surprised how many liberal journalists call people racist for being against Islam. And just in case you've forgotten, I'm anti-religion. Which means anti-Christian, Judiasm and Islam. To the Muslims around the world, please don't put me on your list for suicide bombing.
Why am I against Islam or any religion? Because I'm a rational person. Contrary to what you may believe, all of the heavy hitter atheists (Dawkins, Harris, Randi, and Tyson) would back me up. Sadly, most of them now stay silent on the issue in order to prevent the liberal demigods from giving them hell. And just so you know, I'm also anti-atheism, but I'm pro-spirituality...so it's all good.
Aside from Trump's Muslim ban (which most people secretly support), the issue for the liberal trifecta is free speech against Muslims.
We can't allow hate speech against Muslims.
And that's the rub. Unfortunately, the liberal trifecta only says such things because they fear Muslim extremists (like everyone else). In theory, people fear Muslim extremists but welcome Muslims in general. In reality, people can't tell the two apart. A Muslim extremist can be masquerading as a regular Muslim. And a regular Muslim can be a closet Muslim extremists that supports bringing Sharia Law to the world.
Hence, the blanket fear and suspicion. And just in case you're wondering, yes, I support Trump's Muslim ban. And yes, it is a Muslim ban. The travel ban from various Middle Eastern countries is just for legal purposes because you can't legally discriminate based on one's religion. While freedom of religion is a good freedom to defend, the safety of people trumps the freedom of religion. If your religion involved the murder of innocent people, you can't use the freedom of religion card to defend your actions.
And out of all of the major religions, Islam is the most f*cked up. Don't believe me? Aside from all of the actions of Muslim extremists on a regular basis, you only have to look at the 2005 Danish cartoon incident or the 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting. When people can't draw Muslim characters in a derogatory manner, that's when you know that Muslims are given a token pass by the liberal trifecta.
The fact that Muslims around the world (including regular peace loving ones), called for the death of the Danish cartoonist is proof that Islam is a religion of war that has zero tolerance for any criticism. Any criticism equals death or the threat of death. And that's a problem. But the greater problem is the liberal trifecta.
Well...maybe you shouldn't be drawing those cartoons. It's insensitive. Maybe you got what you deserved.
The liberal trifecta won't actually say this, but that's what they really believe. Why? Aside from being cracked in the head, they fear the reaction of the Muslim community/Muslim extremists. And that's where we are in 2017. We live in a society of fear from all directions.
The fear of losing our jobs.
The fear of not having enough money to make the next mortgage payment.
The fear of our partners cheating on us.
And the fear of the Muslim community when one person criticizes their religion harshly.
Though we all have hopes and dreams and usually look at the world through a positive lens, all of this fear still exists in the background, and sometimes out in front.
Still don't believe me about the fear from the Muslim community or Muslim extremists? I’ll prove it with a challenge. The Young Turks (TYT), Salon, Mother Jones, and HuffPost are the most vocal alternative liberal media outlets.
We prefer the term progressive.
Whatever. So many useless labels, so much misunderstanding. Sigh.
I challenge the TYT, Salon, Mother Jones, HuffPost, and any liberal media outlet (mainstream or alternative) to create a one minute animation that shows derogatory/inflammatory visual images against Muslims (worse than anything on South Park).
Animation is an interesting genre. Writers can get away with more than they can with live-action. Hence, animation is the perfect medium for our little experiment. I challenge liberal media outlets to create the one minute animation and put it out on YouTube or embed the video on their homepage website (maybe with HTML5).
Currently, YouTube is giving into liberal censorship.
It offends me. You have to take it down.
Whatever.
In March 2017 Canada even passes a motion to condemn Islamophobia. [10] Apparently, religious discrimination is now as bad as racial discrimination. What a joke.
And after the video is created, the liberal media outlet has to email conservative media outlets (mainstream and alternative) to say that the video is complete and online. All people who worked on the animation must have their first and last name posted at the end of the animation. And let's say that liberal media outlets have to keep the video up for at least 7 days.
Let's recap. We have a one minute animated video showing derogatory/inflammatory content to Muslims. All of the names of the participants are at the end of the animation. It's posted online. Conservative media outlets know about it. And the video has to stay up for at least 7 days. Will any liberal media outlets do it? Of course not. Why not? Because they fear the wrath of the Muslim community and Muslim extremists. Death threats will become the norm for any media outlet that hosts the video, or even links to it. That's how bad the fear is. Liberal media outlets won't even provide a link to the site in the name of sensitivity. When in reality, their actions are done in the name of fear.
Some liberals will counter and say that the video is offensive to create. But free speech means that offensive videos are allowed. And there are many offensive videos to the Christian community that liberals love to watch.
But getting back to the video, the longer the video stays up, the more intense the hatred, and the greater the damage (be it personally, professionally, financially, or socially). While the Middle East isn't known for its hardware, the younger Middle Eastern generation excel in software and hacking. Whatever names are attached to the animation will become targets for hacking. All of their personal information will be posted online, including their family, as well as images of family members, addresses, phone numbers...the works. But that's damage from a distance. The deeper impact will be the social one. The liberal trifecta enjoys claiming that they have so many Muslim friends even though they're not Muslim themselves.
Yah...all of that will disappear and turn ugly once the animation and the names of the participants involved comes out. Why?
Because religious friendships only work in ideal times. When things go bad, one's true beliefs and genuine actions start to show.
Liberal participants will lose their Muslim friends in a heartbeat. Why? Because Muslims are thin-skinned p*ssies. They can't handle any criticism of their religion whatsoever. It's similar to the Chinese and Russian government. They can't accept any form of criticism of their government and will attack with hatred and malice anyone who speak ill of them in a public manner.
In Middle Eastern and South Asian Muslim countries, people are killed for blasphemy against Islam. Just blasphemy alone. And you don't want to know about the pedophilia and rape in Muslim communities. Oh dear god. Note, that I didn't say Arab communities. Why not? Because Arab Christians are (more or less) peaceful people.
Do you want to burn a Koran on your lawn? Oh dear god. The president/prime minister of your country will personally call you and ask you to stop. That's how bad it is. That's how deep the fear runs. The liberal trifecta needs to stop pretending that Islam is a religion of peace. It's a religion of hatred, war, jihad, and submission. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can begin a more genuine life. And just in case you're wondering, none of this is accidental. It's all intentional. Why? Because this is how Global Special Interest Groups (GSIGs) want it. Why? Because it serves their interests. How? Because Islam is a religion of submission, not empowerment.
While all major religions are religions of submission, Islam takes the cake. And the obvious reason why Muslim extremists serve the interests of GSIGs is because the greater the fear, the greater the amount of influence that GSIGs have on the global population and individuals. The loss of rights, privacy, and more are just manifestations of the fear that GSIGs use to their advantage.
Though I'm anti-religion, I see Christianity as the lesser of the evils. If you create an animation that criticizes Christians or Catholics, they'll pray for you. That's the difference. They'll pray for their god to show you his loving grace. There will be very few death threats or hacking. You might lose a few Christian friends, but you may also gain others who enjoy the challenge of preaching to non-Christians.
Still not convinced? Take film and comedy for example. As of 2017, there's no significant film industry in Muslim countries. That's why Hollywood doesn't really care if their movies offend them. Their share of the box office market is insignificant. Movies are a creative endeavor. Unfortunately, creativity is not exactly a high priority in Muslim countries/in the lives of Muslims. Aside from LGBTQ Muslims, genuine self-expression in the arts doesn't exist in Muslim countries. Why not? Because Islam is about devout faith, submission to their god, tradition, ritual, and treating women like property.
The liberal trifecta's attempt to transform Islam into a more acceptable 21st century religion is hilarious and tragic. Islam is over 1000 years old. Western-European (WE) white women wearing hijabs in solidarity is not going to change that. I'm sure that if these WE white women went to Muslim countries, they would come back (if they came back at all) with a very different perspective of Islam. And just to be clear, liberal academia and science in the 21st century have a deep hatred/suppression of women just as much as religious believers do (see The Conspiracy Against Women).
And then we have comedy in Islam. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it doesn't exist. While Muslims like to pretend that they have a deep sense of humor, they don't. Personally, I don't know any Muslims that even have a basic sense of humor. A basic sense of humor means that you can laugh at almost anything (be it religion, race, sex, gender, politics, or social status). But Muslims can't laugh at jokes about their religion or politics. They can only laugh at jokes demeaning women because women are property to be bought, sold and traded in their eyes.
And no, liberals can't say that Muslims really respect women.
It's just a cultural issue. It has nothing to do with religion.
Sorry, but it has everything to do with religion. Religion and culture go hand in hand in Muslim communities/religious communities in general. The hatred/suppression of women has its foundation in patriarchal religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism). Pretending that it doesn't is disingenuous. And disingenuous actions can never lead to the growth and development of humanity.
Muslim men (and religious men in general) only tolerate women for their life-giving abilities and because their life would be miserable without them. That's it. That's not genuine equality. That's not valuing women. That's hatred/suppression of women by religious people. And that's not accidental. That's intentional.
Getting back to the Trump administration and Muslims, if there are no major Muslim attacks during Trump's term, the liberal trifecta will say that Islam is a religion of peace and his hard-line policies against them are wrong. If there are major Muslim attacks, the liberal trifecta will say that it's because of Trump's hard-line policies. Either way, he can never win with the liberal trifecta.
Continued in Part 2.
References:
[1] Abramson, Jill. Hillary Clinton is almost certain to be president. Guardian. October 20, 2016.
[2] Live Presidential Forecast – Election Results 2016. New York Times.
[3] TRUMP BLATANTLY IGNORES REPORTERS: "You're FAKE News" - CALLS OUT CNN – FNN. YouTube video. Posted by: Fox 10 Phoenix, January 11, 2017.
[4] $4 Billion Investment and 4,000 Jobs from Corning, Merck, and Pfizer Initiative. White House. July 20, 2017.
[5] Phillips, Tom. Donald Trump soft pedals after earlier threats of trade war with China. Guardian. August 15, 2017.
[6] Rappeport, Alan. Bill to Erase Some Dodd-Frank Banking Rules Passes in House. New York Times. June 8, 2017.
[7] Alessi, Christopher. Investors heartened by Trump's apparent support of a Bayer-Monsanto merger. Wall Street Journal. February 20, 2017.
[8] Borger, Julian. Trump to expand US military intervention in Afghanistan. Guardian. August 22, 2017.
[9] Pittis, Don. The military-industrial complex is booming in Trump's America: Don Pittis. CBC News. August 24, 2017.
[10] House of Commons passes anti-Islamophobia motion. CBC News. March 23, 2017.
[11] Mark Ruffalo calls for Donald Trump to be removed from office as he marches against white supremacy. Fox News. September 1, 2017.
[12] Ornstein, Norm. Rewriting the Rules of Presidential Succession. Atlantic. March 26, 2017.
[13] Burman, Tony. We now know how the Trump presidency will end. Let's hope we survive: Burman. Toronto Star. August 3, 2017.
[14] Tasker, John Paul. Justin Trudeau steps into 'Brexit' debate, says Britain should stay in EU. CBC News. May 19, 2016.
[15] Stewart, Heather and Khomami, Nadia. Barack Obama issues Brexit trade warning. Guardian. April 25, 2016.
[16] Stein, Jeff. "Sick of mind": ex-GOP senator says Trump must be removed before he can start nuclear war. Vox. August 11, 2017.
[17] Rosen, Jeffrey. The 25th Amendment Makes Presidential Disability a Political Question. Atlantic. May 23, 2017.
[18] Marinucci, Carla. California Democrats lead attack over Trump's mental health. Politico. August 23, 2017.
[19] Silverstien, Jason. Congress members getting worried about Trump's mental health. New York Daily News. August 20, 2017.
[20] Blake, Aaron. Questions about Trump's mental health are spilling into the open. Let's be careful. Washington Post. August 23, 2017.
[21] Urback, Robyn. It makes zero sense to be a Canadian Trump supporter: Robyn Urback. CBC News. September 8, 2017.
[22] Holloway, Daniel. Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes Defends Public Theater's 'Julius Caesar,' CNN at Shareholders Meeting. Variety. June 15, 2017.
[23] Bajaj, Vikas. Julius Caesar, Another Opportunity for Outrage. New York Times. June 14, 2017.
[24] Wahlquist, Calla and Beckett, Lois. 'This is violence against Donald Trump': rightwingers interrupt Julius Caesar play. Guardian. June 17, 2017.
[25] Fondacaro, Nicholas. MSNBC's Malcolm Nance Nominates Trump Tower Istanbul for 'ISIS Suicide Bombing.' Fox News. April 19, 2017.
[26] Wong, Herman. 'I'm glad he got shot': Nebraska Democrat caught on tape criticizing Rep. Steve Scalise. Washington Post. June 23, 2017.
[27] D'Zurilla, Christie. Madonna clarifies 'blowing up the White House' comment: 'Taken wildly out of context.' Los Angeles Times. January 23, 2017.
[28] Resnikoff, Paul. Bow Wow Could Face Felony Charges for 'Issuing Threats' Against Melania Trump. Digital Music News. March 16, 2017.
[29] Kathy Griffin's photo shoot with bloody Trump mask not first time celebs have joked about harming the President. Fox News. May 31, 2017.
[30] Parker, Ryan. CNN Apologizes to Trump After Crew Caught Joking About His Plane Crashing. Hollywood Reporter. December 2, 2016.
[31] More than 12,000 tweets have called for Trump's assassination since the inauguration. Daily Mail. February 3, 2017.
[32] LA Times Correspondent Fired For Trump Death Tweet. CBS San Francisco. November 3, 2016.
[33] Kennedy, Mark. Johnny Depp apologizes, says Trump assassination quip was 'bad joke.’ Associated Press. June 23, 2017.
[34] Missouri politician posts online that she hopes 'Trump is assassinated.' Associated Press. August 18, 2017.
[35] MSNBC, ABC hosts deem Trump inaugural address as 'militant,' 'anti-Semitic.' Fox News. January 20, 2017.
[36] Concha, Joe. MSNBC's Chris Matthews: Trump inauguration speech 'Hitlerian.' Hill. January 20, 2017.
[37] Silva. Cristina. Trump Boy Scout Speech is Nazi Hitler Youth Rally, Left Says. Newsweek. July 24, 2017.
[38] Starnes, Todd. Teacher compares Trump's 'Make America Great Again' slogan to swastikas. Fox News. September 4, 2017.
[39] Singh, Anita. eBay founder Pierre Omidyar commits $100m to fight 'fake news' and hate speech. Telegraph. April 5, 2017.
[40] Spangler, Todd. Jeffrey Katzenberg's WndrCo Invests in TYT Network as Part of $20 Million Round. Variety. August 8, 2017.
[41] Get Me Roger Stone. Netflix. 2017.