What grinds my gears

There's an adage recited in the 1995 movie The Usual Suspects that goes like: "The greatest trick the Devil pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist" (which is based on a similar line written by the author Charles Baudelaire in 1864, although that too may be based on similar earlier adages). This sentiment could be applied to the international group of people who call themselves "Antifa". One could arguably adapt the sentiment as: "The greatest trick that Antifa pulled was convincing the world that it isn't actually an organization." Indeed, whenever the leftist mainstream media, politicians or other influencers want to defend the group against accusations of organized terrorism, they will often argue that it can't be a "terrorist organization" because it's not an organization at all. Of course this is just playing with semantics. And the fact is that not only is Antifa a terrorist organization, it's a very organiz

Some time ago there was a viral video making the rounds of some protesters marching for abolishing the police. In the video, a car passes by and apparently the driver makes some threatening remarks to some of the protesters, who start saying "call the police". From the expressions and the tone of voice of these people it's quite clear that they are actually being serious. In other words, it doesn't sound like they are, like, saying it ironically, or with the meaning of "let's use their own weapons against themselves". They sound completely genuine, and their facial expressions and demeanor look like they are being completely genuine, being worried about their safety and instinctively telling each other to call the police to help them against this potential assailant. I get the impression that the average brainwashed social justice drone doesn't even fully comprehend what she's actually advocating for when she goes out there to shout "abolish

- The fact that if China and India really wanted, they could significantly reduce their pollution. China and India are some of the top countries in the world when it comes to pollution and harmful emissions. During the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, ie. during the strictest and most widespread lockdowns in those countries, significantly unusually low levels of emission were measured in both countries. Satellite imagery measuring pollutants showed a significant reduction of emissions in large parts of China. In the northern parts of India the Himalayas became visible from many cities for the first time in decades (the Himalayas had been for several decades completely and permanently hidden by heavy smog.) This goes to show that large amounts of pollution are not something inevitable. If these (and many other) countries really, really wanted to significantly reduce their emissions, they could. This pandemic proved that quite well. - Closing borders is not as impossible as sugges

Currently in the United States far-left extremists have been rioting for over half a year, causing several billions of dollars in property damage and dozens of deaths (some of them actual murders), one of their demands being a complete reform of the policing system in the country. Unsurprisingly, the entirety of the Democratic Party has joined this rhetoric. I think this might well be a case of being right (at least partially right) for the wrong reasons. Their rhetoric is extremely hostile, extremist, inflammatory, provocative, accusatory and outright racist. They are blaming the problem with the policing system on alleged problems, most of which are largely imaginary and exaggerated, such as "structural racism" and "white supremacy". They are completely blinded by any statistics or arguments given to them against there being a disproportionate amount of racist crimes and killings committed by the police against black people, compared to police killings and abuse o

In previous blog posts I wrote about the seemingly self-contradictory and self-destructive phenomenon of giant private megacorporations loudly and actively supporting the social justice ideology, socialism and anti-capitalism, even though on the surface that would seem to go against their own interests, as these corporations have got their riches very much thanks to capitalism, and socialism would take it all away. In Part 1 I explained how, at least in the case of some corporations like Amazon, this appears to actually be a form of so-called "4D chess" in that they have noticed that the more "diverse" their labor force is, the less likely their workers are to unionize (especially Amazon is infamous for opposing labor unions, but they are by far not the only American corporation doing so, they are just the biggest and most famous example.) Stopping their workers from unionizing stops them from becoming too strong and starting making demands (such as higher salaries

If there's one thing that the extreme far leftist social justice ideology loves, it's wordplay. It's taking existing words and changing their meaning (while retaining their positive or negative connotations they had prior to the redefinition). Perhaps the most prominent and archetypal example of this is the redefinition of the word "racism". In fact, they have redefined it several times, every time making it more and more the exact opposite of what it meant originally. (Indeed, we have reached a point, since a few years now, where not distinguishing people by race, not discriminating against people based on their race, and treating people equally regardless of their race, is "racism". Not even kidding. 10 years ago this idea would have been absolutely laughable.) There are many other examples (such as the word "democracy", which the far left has been avidly redefining), but one I would like to pay especial attention to is "free speech&qu

Some months ago I wrote a blog post about how, out of curiosity, I checked the Twitter feeds of people who had responded to some (100% non-political) tweet about some computer stuff, and deliberately avoided the feeds of any users that had pronouns in their Twitter bios (which can be seen when hovering people's Twitter handle at the top of their posts), or anything else even remotely political. In other words, only people with 100% neutral Twitter bios. I checked something like a dozen people, and in only one case it was someone who hadn't a single political tweet. Every single one of the other people's twitter feeds were stock full of political posts. Many of these feeds were absolutely vile and toxic. Recently, for some unfathomable reason, perhaps out of morbid curiosity, or because I have gone insane, I decided to cross the line and actually check some Twitter feeds of people who do have pronouns in their bios. Not only that, but whose bios are completely toxic all in

Derel Chauvin, the police officer who allegedly caused the death of George Floyd, has been convicted on all counts that he was charged. Many have pointed out how most of the charges made no sense and shouldn't have been even allowed by the judge, because they don't fit the actual events (ie. the judge should have proactively motioned to dismiss them, because they don't apply). Third-degree murder is for cases where someone deliberately kills someone, but without targeting a particular person. The archetypal examples are throwing a big rock from a bridge onto a highway, causing a lethal accident, but without targeting any particular car or person. Another example is shooting at a crowd, not at a particular person in a premeditated manner, but just to kill anybody, any random person that happens to be there. Quite clearly Chauvin was not there with the intent to kill some random person, nor were his actions those of a person intent on killing a random person. This accusations

The modern "social justice" neo-Marxist ideology has been on a path to destroy western nations one by one, from the inside, and they are being astonishingly effective. But how? Here's a step-by-step guide. The main tactic to do this, without firing a single shot or driving a single tank or detonating a single bomb, is to use the divide and conquer tactic. As the saying goes, "a house divided against itself cannot stand." This is achieved in many diverse ways: Destroy the sense of national identity, culture and history. A nation is strong when its people have a lot of things in common, a common past, a common history, a common culture, a common set of ideals, customs, traditions and views. A shared past is a source of camaraderie and a motivation to work together and to help each other, to make society thrive. Thus, one of the cornerstones of destroying a nation from within is to destroy this common history and common culture. Vilify it, demonize it, make the pe

About three years ago I made a blog post about how much personal information you should really give social media websites . My recommendation? Don't add any such information. And if you have made the mistake of doing so, go and remove all of it. Well, what do you know, recently Facebook leaked personal information of millions and millions of users. I hope you weren't one of them. One of the most devious things about Facebook in particular (or at least this was so a few years ago, I don't know if they have changed it later) is that it entices their users to enter as much personal information as possible. At least some years ago when you logged into Facebook, if you hadn't entered much personal information the website would pester you about it, enticing you to fill an extensive form asking all kinds of personal questions (such as which schools you have gone to, who you are related to, and so on and so forth). Maybe Facebook has wisened up since, but at least back then i

When Biden took office earlier this year, someone of some visibility twitted "we toppled a dictator". Many other people repeated that sentiment. Many people responded by making fun of such a tweet, about how voting someone else into office via a completely normal presidential election is, by definition, not "toppling" anybody. "Toppling a dictator" would mean a forceful removal of the head of state, usually via military force. It does not mean a normal presidential election held at its normal time, to normally elect the next president, as has been done for centuries. The Democratic Party surely tried to "topple" Trump from office via a kangaroo court, but they failed (because the system actually still somewhat works in the United States, as the far left has yet not achieved enough power). But anyway, if I could, I would really like to ask that person who wrote that tweet why she thinks that Trump was a "dictator" when he was in offic

The answer is pretty simple: Because it's indoctrinating and misleading children and teenagers into it, and it's more than mere psychological abuse. It would be one thing if it were just a psychological thing, like a religious cult or a live-altering and anxiety-inducing conspiracy theory. If the person ever learns better, he or she can get rid of it and start living a normal life. In some cases it may take several years to unlearn the indoctrination and learn to live in a normal society, and to unlearn all the bad habits and all the anxiety, etc. Some people might be psychologically scarred for life, but quite often people can get out of it and become healthy adults who live a normal healthy life. Such psychological indoctrination would be bad enough, but in many, perhaps most cases, it will not have life-long effects, and people can recover. Not so with the "trans" ideology, though. That's because in more and more countries, at an ever increasing pace, it's

Among the myriads of tactics that the modern social justice ideology has come up with over the decades, historic revisionism is, rather naturally, one of them. Since in their view white people are a separate all-evil subhuman species that's only destructive, has never created or invented anything, and has always only stolen and oppressed everybody else, and all the other races are ascended superior angelic beings who have never done anything wrong, rather naturally history needs to be changed to reflect that fact of nature. Of course they have not yet come up with or published one single Holy Book of revised history that lays out their new improved history (that paints all white people as rats and cockroaches, and all non-white people as perfect superior beings). However, over the years and decades their narrative has in increasing manners going into a particular direction. If you were to believe what many of these social justice warriors are saying, slavery did not exist before wh

Derek Chauvin is the police officer who possibly caused the death of George Floyd. He is being prosecuted for it and the trial has been going on for a few days as of writing this. It's just a matter of fact that this is nothing but a show trial. A charade. Normally such incidents would be dealt by internal affairs, in an internal investigation. Even when police officers break the law in performance of their duties, it's usually the police department itself that's taken to court, not the individual officer who broke the law. Regardless of whether you think that's good or bad, that doesn't change the fact that this case, where the individual officer is on trial for murder, is nothing but a show for the masses, caused solely and exclusively because of the billions of dollars in property damage by rioting and looting. Nothing else. This is nothing but appeasement to a mob, and this particular police officer has been chosen as the sacrificial lamb for this charade. The m

Because of the "all white people are racist, only white people can be racist, and by definition non-white people cannot be racists" narrative that the regressive left has been pushing onto society, they are in increasing manners facing the problem of how to approach when non-white people commit acts of racially motivated aggression against a different non-white race. When a white person commits an act of aggression against a non-white person (completely regardless of what the motivation for the aggression was, even if the motivation had absolutely nothing to do with race), it's a jackpot for the regressive left: It's yet another magnificent political weapon for their arsenal. When a non-white person commits an act of aggression against a white person, the regressive left still blames the white person. Surely this act of aggression was caused by the racism of... the white person, of course. It's just retribution. It might not be completely acceptable (at least not

The concepts of "Communism" and "Fascism" are forms of government, and these concepts deal mostly with the economic policies of the government, and how much power the government exercises on the country, its people and its means of production. However, modern far-leftist social justice ideologues do not care about this, and just call everybody they don't like a "Fascist". Most of them believe Communism to be the best form of government, and think that the USSR was a paradise. The USSR was, in fact, the epitome of Communism pretty much to a T. The USSR did indeed implement all of the fundamental principles of Communism pretty much to their maximum extent. But let's examine what the USSR was like, from the perspective of the social justice ideology definition of "Fascism", and how well it fits. For starters, homosexuality was banned in the USSR, and could lead to harsh punishment, including jail sentences. Assuming the state police didn'