If you come here regularly it is almost proof positive that you are seeking answers that main stream media is not willing to provide. You know that they are lying to you. You might even know that they are all liars and criminals. But who do you believe? Who do you trust? Where do you find that truth that you seek?
I hesitate to offer this video for several reasons but find that it is so compelling that it needs to be widely disseminated and this is the only platform that I have. Yeah, I know that it is one Jew talking to another Jew. Yes, I am almost sure that it is one gay guy talking to another gay guy. But you would do well to watch this to the end, and I would also suggest that you watch the second half when it pops up.
Once you watch it, from beginning to end, then you can help us all to interpret what Michael Malice is telling us.
Part 2 dropped.
Gay anarchist. Umm, no. I think I will grab a Scotch and clean lint out of my navel instead.
You’d think so, but I get some of the best legitimate news from gays: Glenn Greenwald, Justin Raimondo. Peter Thiel got it. Milo. I often check the Twitter feeds of Greenwald, Raimondo & Michael Tracey (about whose sexual preference I know nothing). Google is apparently so fearful of Greenwald letting the truth out that if you Google “twitter.com/ggree” they start auto-suggesting OTHER GREENWALDS (whose twitter handles don’t even contain “GGREE…”.
In other words, they try to send you down a dead-end.
You fag
HR lost credibility when he said everybody he hates is Hitler or EC.
Two fag Joos kvetching? Ummmm, NEIN!!!
(But, thanks for the heads up.)
Cowards.
,
That dude’s suit reminds me of …
I gave it a good fifteen minutes. It was difficult for me to overlook the faggy voice, flashy lapel pin, pink socks, etc. because those things are giant red flags that something is wrong with the creature. I have a visceral response even if I can follow along with the logic. But I managed to listen to him carefully and came away with a few observations-
1) Never heard of him. Not that I know everyone and everything, but this is in my bailiwick and I can’t imagine having never encountered a guy who portrays himself as an authority on this particular topic and movement.
2) He doesn’t even come close to explaining the origins of this ideological debate. 1992 Murray Rothbard and Pat Buchanan? Wow, somebody missed the first 200 years that preceded that. Massive miss.
3) His little bit on Andy Kaufman as the first troll was quite insightful, but it didn’t have anything to do with the rest of the topic, especially the purpose of Internet trolling of political opponents as opposed to a comedian leading an audience towards a payoff. Interesting but irrelevant.
4) His name dropping is a carbon copy of the Vice/HuffPo/NPR list of alt-right names. Unoriginal and missing the really significant ones in order to highlight the really lightweight figures.
5) The interviewer appears to be intelligent enough to understand the topic, but is either completely stupid or grossly unprepared for this interview.
He strikes me as your mid-level opportunist cashing in on a trend with little or no real understanding of what’s really going on but a showman’s ability to fake it till he makes it.
“An anarchist with no adjectives.” What’s not to like? Well, maybe the in-your-face flash, but when the guy talks about gov’t as being irredeemably bad in all its forms, cut him some slack — unless you believe that gays are so irredeemably damaged that nothing they say can matter to you however insightful. We all have our biases and enjoy the comfort they afford, but I sure did like his comments on the trolling done by Trump and Kaufman, among other things.
i gave it fifteen minutes, entirely too much time spent commenting on his sartorial splendor or the lack thereof, there rest was a mish mosh of word salad with nothing new or eye opening…