BrainPop - Leftist Resource for Teachers

They definitely LEAN Left.

The site's offerings hit all the high notes:

• Systemic Racism
• ALL the Black Dead were Honor Students, Good Fathers, and Just Average, Law-Abiding Folks - Honest!

The linked animation shows a robot listening to an explanation of these issues - ALL from one perspective (that of a young Black girl). It's assume that ALL normal people will be on her side - and, that this understanding comes from "getting Woken up about racism".

Hmmm. Woke. Where have we heard that before?

The BLM leadership was mentioned - although not quoting any of their fiery rhetoric (Oooops, is that triggering to use the adjective "fiery"?). Some of the incidents that led to its founding are mentioned - Travon Martin, Michael Brown, George Floyd. ALL were completely innocent Black people whose death was STRICTLY for racist reasons.

The initial link to Brainpop was found on The Gateway Pundit.

I Have to Admit I Like This - Turn the Tactic Around on Them

Tucker Carlson suggested this:

Carlson noted that masks were “purely a sign of political obedience like Kim Il-Sung pins in Pyongyang” and that the only people who voluntarily wear masks outside are “zealots and neurotics.”

He then asserted that the tables should be turned on Biden voters who have been harassing conservatives for almost a year for not wearing a mask in public.

“The rest of us should be snorting at them first, they’re the aggressors – it’s our job to brush them back and restore the society we were born in,” said Carlson.

“So the next time you see someone in a mask on the sidewalk or on the bike path, do not hesitate. Ask politely but firmly, ‘Would you please take off your mask? Science shows there is no reason for you to be wearing it. Your mask is making me uncomfortable,” he added.

“We should do that and we should keep doing it until wearing a mask outside is roughly as socially accepted as lighting a Marlboro on an elevator.”

DO it! 

This Study Isn't Surprising, But May Not Show What it Says

This study shows more stops and arrests by White police than by Black police.

The author seems to think this means that the Black police are more sensitive to the Black community's needs, and that would indicate that they are more effective officers. Few arrests, better community relations, right?

Well, maybe not.

What it does show is that Black police are more likely, when the suspect is engaging in 'Iffy' behavior, to ignore it and not challenge it.

Do they do it because they have a better 'sense' that it's just a random cultural difference, and - for the good of community-police relations - they should accept the different norm, and move on?

Possibly.

Or, perhaps, they value being accepted by the community more than they want to uphold order.

Can't tell from this study - it may be all some, all, or none of the stops/arrests were valid. It might be that the Black police officers were ignoring 'petty crimes' - precisely the type that have gotten many officers into a major confrontation, and subsequent community uprising.

This isn't new. Many of the riots of the past were touched off by a relatively small incident, that, when the officer pursued his investigation, resulted in widespread rejection of the right of the police to do their job. In Watts, it was a minor traffic stop on a car that lit the flames of outrage. In that case, a resisting offender, rather than quietly go, fanned the crowd to widespread outrage.

Some of that was because the resistant suspects were popular in their neighborhoods. Arresting a guy with friends/allies is dangerous (as it was with many of the Italian mobsters of the 1930s). For that reason, the current practice of stop & frisk can lead to arrests, but when many people are on the streets, and their potential allies are around, this is dangerous.

Like it was when the Federal government insisted on making their confrontation with Koresh at HIS place. Or, Randy Weaver. Or countless others.

Should we ignore crime?

No. But, when in 'Da Hood, it pays to make that arrest quietly, with minimal disruption, and not hang around. Such a prolonged process gives local activists time to gather, the fellow's relatives time to show up and make a fuss, and video that will be used in a damaging way to be collected.

It's not the video of the incident that always causes the problem, it's the vocals accompanying it. Anguished cries of "Let him go! He didn't do anything" and "She's a woman! Don't hurt her!" - doesn't matter that she tried to eviscerate that Black girl, she's an Honor Student! (who spent much of this year avoiding school, and whose grades did not bear out that claim).

Fortunately, the community didn't go gonzo on that officer. But, the activists TRIED to make it Yet Another Flashpoint for Riots (YAFR).

The initial incidents aren't manufactured completely - there is always a base confrontation.

It's just that tactics have to be revised, to minimize the public confrontations. Sweep in, grab the guy, and remove him from the scene. Handle it without giving the crowd a chance to gather. And, for God's sake, don't have multiple cops just standing around. Detail them to gather information from bystanders - including checking their IDs. A few of them will have outstanding warrants or other issues that will persuade them to leave without a fuss. More importantly, get them off the sidewalk/street, and work on defusing their outrage/getting their side of the story.

Biden's Speech - the "Worst Attack on Our Democracy"?

Not even. Here's a link to a list of just SOME of the prior attacks. And, pretty much ALL committed by Leftists.

It Always STARTS as an "Option"

When a "compromise" is reached, those who started the whole fight, and continue to dissent NEVER lose. Instead, the Will-Not-Be-Appeased agree - grudgingly, and only after a lot of drama, hurling of Hate Words (Hater, Racist, Sexist, Homophobic, Transphobic, etc.), and publicity that puts THEM in the position of Officially Injured Party - to be given a Separate (but Equal?) organization.

Paid for, BTW, with the same funds that only official organizations have access to.

That's just the first step in the long fight.

You see, they have now gotten the funds, and official recognition, to fuel their continued Long March. That phrase, BTW, is taken from the story of Chinese Communists, when, after defeat on the field, the rebellious forces retreated to their new headquarters, from whence they began to plan their final takeover.

The New Long March, through the institutions of the opposing side, has been ongoing for a long time. The person who came up with the slogan was influenced by the Italian Communist, Gramsci, (see my work on explaining Gramsci, Part I, and Part II).

 a slogan coined by Communist student activist Rudi Dutschke around 1967 to describe his strategy for establishing the conditions for revolution: subverting society by infiltrating institutions such as the professions. The phrase "long march" is a reference to the prolonged struggle of the Chinese communists, which included a physical Long March of their army across China.^[1]

 Dutschke also got support from Marcuse:

Herbert Marcuse corresponded with Dutschke in 1971 to agree with this strategy, "Let me tell you this: that I regard your notion of the 'long march through the institutions' as the only effective way..."^[4]

 And, as I said, a major part of the grab for public funds is intentional subversion, and eventual control, of those institutions.

The long march includes the concerted effort to build up counterinstitutions. They have long been an aim of the movement, but the lack of funds was greatly responsible for their weakness and their inferior quality. They must be made competitive. This is especially important for the development of radical, "free" media. The fact that the radical Left has no equal access to the great chains of information and indoctrination is largely responsible for its isolation.

Now, how will this happen at UT?

Note that the Left has pressured the university to set up an Alternative Power Center - the "alternative" band.

From that publicly-funded power base, the students - and their Leftist leaders - will grow in size. They will do that through a variety of ways:

• They will suggest different insignia on their uniforms - a badge, an armband, a scarf - and conspicuously wear it in performances. They will also use it to try to gain 'allies'
• Allies are those who aren't ready to commit to directly working with the organization, or who actually have no interest in their aims. But, by asking for a small commitment, such as wearing the same color, periodically, or putting a button/sticker on (it doesn't matter that it's not on the official band uniform, it matters because, once they buckle on one little matter, they are on the slippery slope).
• They will join with other organizations to provide public support, and further marginalize the UT band.
• Eventually, the band members will find themselves shunned by other UT students. Particularly for the women, this is a profoundly uncomfortable position. Some will cave.
• Eventually, the pressure will mount for a joint performance - "in the interests of Unity". Funny, that unity never involves THEIR making compromises - they are obdurate. All change must come from the other side. Their only assent to Unity will be their "gracious" acceptance of the other side's words of "Unity". Unity, my A$$.
• This may well be a multi-year project. It doesn't matter how long it takes, it just matters that the Left never give up.

And, speaking of Never Giving Up, I understand the the Dodder-in-Chief was able to stay awake long enough to deliver a speech to Congress.

I didn't watch it. Forcing that kind of torture on an old lady is some kind of Human Rights violation, I'm told.

For those who care, here's a synopsis of the speech.

It's worth reading the report from Fox News, that mentions a telling phrase that relates to the tactics I mentioned at the start of this post.

 He got a rather icy response from Republicans when he pushed for bipartisan negotiations on his "American Jobs Plan," a spending plan the White House is selling as an infrastructure effort. 

"I'd like to meet with those who have ideas that are different, they think are better. I welcome those ideas," Biden said. "But the rest of the world is not waiting for us. I just want to be clear, from my perspective, doing nothing is not an option."

In other words, we are Fine with Compromise, as long as you accept that the line is moving - in OUR direction.

Little by little, like a horny teen edging his hand further and further into the Forbidden Zone.

Until - SUCCESS! 

Something to Think About

When we think about the 2nd Amendment, do we consider that, without strategic control of resources, it may be worthless?

This commenter got me thinking:

Start looking at where you could get food, clean water, and power/fuel, should the State decide to play Dictators and Citizens.

There is a Reason that Free Speech is in the FIRST Amendment

And, a good place to start learning out why, and how that right is under threat, is here.

Threats against those using that right to say things you oppose is just ONE of the actions that is designed to make sure that, even if the Right to Speak Freely is not officially stricken from the Constitution, it is neutered.

I strongly suggest that you view the actual video of the event. It has so often been reported to be a White Supremacist, Nazi-supporting speech, that the truth will astound you.

The fact that the leadership of this Cancel Culture is female is deeply painful to me. We have come a long way - down a very dark and dangerous road - from the days when women seeking to empower themselves sang "I Am Woman, Hear Me Roar".

For Modern Women, it is "I am a TERF (But Don't Hate Me Because of That), Hear me Whimper".