#extreme left

Left wing people are notoriously incapable of logical reasoning and abstract thought.

The average Democrat / Liberal craves stability in a scary chaotic world. They need clear structure and easy to understand beliefs, hence anything they touch ends up becoming a cult.

Any dissent scares the Left wing, which is ironically how they depict the Right wing.

Every late night show host, tv show, movie, cartoon that is made by woke dei lesbian gay bi or severely mentally ill narcissistic homosexual crossdressing men depicts right wingers, blue collar workers, country folk (the only correct use of folk is in relation to country or your parents) and in general just capable kind and good men as complete backwoods slack jaw degenerate rapist psychotic low iq having creeps.

I get it, you cant help it when all you are ever exposed to is the same consistent propaganda narrative.

Every message you get fits in a neat framework and even when the message doesnt, they will make it fit by gaslighting you until you accept it.

Men are Women

Fiery but Peaceful

Abortion is Life saving healthcare

We need immigrants for low skilled labor

Blue Collar men are ignorant and Evil

Educate yourself (accept my ideological beliefs without question)

Be nice or Shut up (please stop I cant handle reality I need my comfortable Lies)

And people wonder why you NPCs think it is Evil to point out that Transgenderism is a mental disorder akin to Body integrity identity Disorder?

No consistency, just ideology.

But I hope this post will also get as many notes - because we found the guilty party. We know who did it and... gosh, it sounds like a fucking joke but it is not, and it just proves how complex the situation is, and how dangerous the times we are living are.

If you recalled the obvious guilty party, the first suspects, the ones that seemed to have done that were the so-called "pro-Palestinian" activists that in fact are just antisemitic people disguising their hatred under the pretense of "fighting for Palestine". It is well-known that the pro-Palestinan manifestations, events and representatives in France have all versed at one point or another into very antisemitic comments or actions, and the movement is currently being parasited by antisemitism - ranging from actual antisemites who use "Zionist" as a way to designate all Jews, including French-Jews who never saw Israel in their life ; to people who are taking back antisemitic slogans without knowing they are antisemitic in the first place.

The reason the investigation directly was aimed at them was very simple: the red hands, or red handprints, is a symbol that many pro-Palestine manifestants have been using recently. Which, in itself, sparked a whole new debate - about whether it is an antisemitic symbol or not. Because while for some it is the universal "You have blood on your hands" symbol, for others it refers to the blood of a soldier of Israel on the hands of his murderer, during the second Infifada... And while attacking the Wall of the Justs would have been a new low and a new step for these left-leaning antisemites (because so far they only attacked Jews, now they would attack those that saved Jews and assorted Nazi victims during World War II), it was in line with a new form of radicalization of the movement - see the "Block Out" phenomenon on Internet, a cancel culture aimed at those that did not support enough Palestine... As a personal note I will say: where was all this energy and effort when the it was time to defend the Uyghurs against their wiping out by the Chinese regime? It is still time today, their suffering is still going on... But as a prominent Uyghur activist said (I think it was Rebiya Kadeer, but I do not have my notes with me so I might be mistaken) - people care less about the Uyghurs than Palestinians for one simple reason "Because it isn't Israel that is killing us..." It is China, and as a result nobody really cares...

Anyway, I digress... So while it is known, confirmed and recorded that the so-called "pro-Palestine" activists in France are slowly oscillating and sinking into antisemitism, it isn't actually them who did these red handprints. No, they're not guilty this time.

In fact it is something I talked about when I made my original post: there was another very likely suspect which would have surprised nobody. Neo-Nazis. Because while the pro-Palestinian movement is currently crystallizing in France the entire antisemitism wave that has been on the rise for a decade now among the extreme-left, the extreme-right political groups have also been gaining terran and strength for quite a long time, and now, we have actual neo-Nazi parties very vocal and active today... Due to the ungodly amount of terrorist attacks France had to face, due to the frightening strenghtening of radical and extreme Islam in France, due to the whole endless debates about immigration in France, and due to the hyper-violent civil unrests that are clearly just to cause chaos and nothing else (like the riots following the death of Nahel Merzouk, which clearly were not about the Nahel case and just to cause as much destruction and steal as much things as possible)... Well of course, when these types of problem arise, who gains the upper-hand? The extreme-right.

And so now we have far-right candidates so popular they have a good chance of being elected as the representatives of France, and we have many groups of antisemitic Christian fanatics popping up everywhere, and we have neo-Nazi movements literaly returning like some perverted phoenix from their ashes... As such, it was thought that maybe these red handprints could have been the work of a neo-Nazi movement, who would use the current situation to perform their antisemitic deeds while blaming the extreme-left for it... After all, the two movements have been currently doing the exact same thing. Before the Hamas attack, far-right groups were defacing Jewish cemeteries and soiling Simone Veil's grave with Nazi swastika ; and today far-left activists are "denouncing" Israel by... tagging on Jewish temples drawings mixing the six-point stars with a swastika...

So, you know, the typical horseshoe effect. The two extremes are literaly doing the same things, and as such we have a hard time differentiatng one from another.

But no... Turns out it isn't them either! Turns out... it isn't even French people who did this.

And here's where the dark joke comes... You know who did it? FUCKING RUSSIA OF COURSE!

We forget to so easily that Putin is literaly sending his agents in every friggin' political or social event that goes on in the world right now... And in fact that's the whole point: Putin wants us to be so obsessed with the Israel-Hamas conflict and how Gaza is trapped in it all, so that we forget about how Russia is currently destroying Ukraine.

The investigation found out that the people who painted these red hands were three men that had recently arrived in Paris from Bulgaria... They were staying at an hotel and the very day following their crime, they left France for Belgium (Bruxelles to be precise). Now... You're going to say "So they're just Bulgarians? They're not Russians, nothing proves its Russia". Except for one thing... While yes the involvment of Russia has not been "confirmed", Putin's Russia is not known for its vivid imagination... And they have literaly done the same thing some times ago.

If you recall, I posted about it before... It happened last october. Right after the Hamas attacked the music festival, causing the whole madness we are into today, blue David stars were painted on buildings where Jewish people lived, echoing the dark times of the Nazi Occupation in France... Here is the post I made back in February, and I couldn't guess how far things would go back then... While everybody was getting scared about the return of French antisemitism turned out... It was a group of people from Moldavia that was paid to paint those stars everywhere. Paid by... a pro-Russian, pro-Putin Moldavian businessman, Anatoli Prizenko.

You can read more about this on my old post, but investigation concluded it was indeed an operation where Russian forces used the Moldavians as puppets. All to cause fright and chaos in France. When you consider that Bulgaria, like Moldavia, is unfortunately today one of the "screen-countries" Russia likes to use to shield themselves when doing their dirty chores... Blue stars, red handprints... This is clearly the same thing, done all over again.

And where the "joke" part comes out even more - in the sense of a perverse, venomous, fetid joke part of some putrid dark comedy... Russia has currently been truly harassing France through all sorts of operations, each more outlandish than the next, and yet all working in their own way to cause fear and chaos... More specifically two cases are regularly being brought up.

Case 1: The Doppelgänger operation

In June of 2023, the French authorities warned about what was called the "Doppelgänger operation". A massive campaign of Internet misinformation created by Russia. The purpose was simple: create mirror-websites to the official websites of French information networks, newspapers and TV channels. They were almost identical to the official news outlet of France, to the point many mistook them for the real thing - sometimes the only difference you could spot was in the URL. ".fr" became ".ltd", and ".com" became ".cam".

And all those fake websites shared articles about the Ukrainian-Russian war, articles written purposefully to spread misinformation about Russia. Some claimed that the Ukrainian population were in full distrust of their government and wanted to see it brought down... Others wrote that all the Ukrainian operations were disasters and failures. Some invented fake tragedies and disasters in Russia to try to paint Ukrainians as the villains. And others yet wrote about how the donations of Europe to Ukraine were either wasted by the Ukrainians, or would cause economic crisis in European countries...

Case 2: The bed bugs hysteria

In september of 2023, the discovery of bed bugs on several public places in Paris was shared on social media. Some were discovered in a movie theater, the presence of others was attested in some subway lines... The social media being what they are, it became a hot topic talked about by everybody, shared by everyone - and the facts were exaggerated, and rumors started spreading, and soon an entire mass hysteria started overtaking France. It wasn't just Paris anymore, but all the big cities that were supposedly infested by "bed bugs". People claimed to find them in every public places - every theater, every subway line, every hotel, even in hospitals...

Turns out, there wasn't as much bed bugs as the social media wanted us to believe. It was mostly a sanitary mass panic, echoing the fear caused by the Covid epidemic and fed by the worries about the upcoming Olympic games. And... and also fed by Russia. Investigations revealed that there was a lot of fake accounts, troll accounts and bots created by Russian servers and Russian URLs, and who spent their entire time spreading and sharing bed-bugs articles, writing fake articles twisting the facts, and spamming everybody with news of this mass hysteria..

This is the sore and infuriating conclusion. Remember, everyone, that this isn't just about Israel and Palestine... It isn't just about the Hamas or Netanyahu... And we already knew that, because already in Europe it was clear this wasn't truly about what happened in the Middle-East - it was also about the shadows of antisemitism and the wraith of the Nazi presence, it was about the extreme-left movement spreading from the USA university down to European ones, it became a fight about the Jewish and Muslim populations in Europe rather than in Palestine and Israel - and even more, a political fight between the far-right and the far-left across the continent... But it isn't just about that anymore, because now Putin is in the dance and Russia is gleefully putting oil on the fire in hope it will burn everything... This is a fucked-up chess game with many, many players... That all look the same in the end, somehow, so it becomes hard to identify which one does which move.

Peter Strzok FINALLY was fired by the FBI last Friday, but the news of it only came out today. That makes Comey down the drain, McCabe down the drain, and now this Manchurian Candidate wannabe down the drain.

The guy is truly indefensible, unless you’re a Democrat and/or a regressive liberal. Yes, I said that right...regressive. The key words in the plethora of texts  are the following:

1. No, no he won’t. We’ll stop it.

2. Insurance policy

3. One-hundred million to one.

And still the IG report states there was no evidence of bias on this traitor’s part as pertaining to his actual ‘investigative’ work. Give me a break. Strzok went so far as to claim he, almost by himself, could keep Donald Trump from being president and would use that power...whether real or perceived...to do just that. On the other proverbial hand, we have him helping Comey draft a letter of exoneration for Hillary Clinton two months before she was interviewed. It was Strzok who changed the terminology from gross negligence to extremely careless. This was to avoid language that could be used for indictment purposes. That’s called ‘protection’ from the law by the law for a certain individual who may have broken the law. And that, my friends, is called BIAS. And the evidence is staring the IG office in the face. Incredible.

Of course, Strzok’s attorney comes out and bemoans the ill treatment of this man, and how it’s all about politics and how Christopher Wray was being unjust, going against the recommendation he should only be demoted and suspended for sixty days. Now, we all know he doesn’t believe that. He’s being paid by his client to represent him in a positive way, and to portray Strzok as the most pitiable, victim-like person on the planet. However, any of us who watched Strzok’s congressional testimony know what he really is. Notice I didn’t say ‘who’, but ‘what’ he is. 

What he is, is a traitor to his oath, a traitor to the Constitution, a traitor to his craft, a traitor to his fellows, a traitor to all Americans, and a traitor to America itself. He sat there, defiantly smug in his superior minded bureaucratic elitism, and showed the mindset that exists in the upper echelon of the FBI and the DOJ. They hold our representatives, our senators, our high court, our executive office in complete contempt, crowning themselves as the protectors of the Republic and claim ultimate power to hide, deflect, deny, delay, lie, cheat, and ‘collude’ to even interfere in a national election because they thought they knew better than the American people. That shows a total disdain for the rule of law, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. 

Extreme Left, Safe Spaces & Censorship with Reverend Raul A. and Brandon Phinney

Saturday, September 2nd / 1pm MST

Speak of the Devil presents Third Side intelligence. Reverend Campbell is joined by Reverend Raul A. and Brandon Phinney to discuss the extreme left, safe spaces & censorship.

There has always been an extreme reaction to political dominance. Sometimes that reaction turns into a movement and defines the future of political discourse, for a cycle at least. The last reaction was the Tea Party that can be felt in congress’ inaction to this day. But there has been an equal and opposite reaction to the perceived-or-valid injustice to the majority and that is the topic of this episode.

Sign Up to the Email List

Subscribe to the YouTube Channel

Give a Rating & Review

Strong Female Characters/Roles and views which subvert their impact

If you are reading this, I’m sorry. There really are better expository pieces out there about Female Lead Roles, but I wanted to share my reaction to types of opposition and extremism about two projects with strong female leads: Wonder Woman and Doctor Who. (spoilers ahead)

1. Wonder Woman (and the Conservative Curmudgeons)

I saw Wonder Woman multiple times from opening weekend up until today, in English and Spanish, with friends, by myself, and nothing has lessened my joy each time I watch. The movie has foibles in plot and some action sequences, but not when it comes to well written, acted, character, and that for me gives lots of leniency toward other missteps. Chris Pine is wonderfully genuine and generous in his acting to support the project and help everyone else shine, as do the other actors. Gal Gadot does not have much dialogue to carry, but she is expressive and really captures Wonder Woman’s youthful exuberance which was so refreshing. I loved the color grading, I loved the balance of big action and small moments and, DC movie fans can hate me all they desire, I love how it felt like a ‘Marvel movie’. Don’t get me wrong, I have liked some DC movies (Man of Steel, BvS, etc), but from recent experience I think Marvel has been stronger at building characters, relationship dynamics, and ensemble and letting them tell a story, whereas DC has been stronger at building plots, conflicts, action points, and then dropping characters in so that we as an audience watch them react and witness individual character growth. In that sense Wonder Woman felt ‘Marvel’ due to the character focused lens. And overall it was a solid 'A' because it was fun, spirited, passionate, and it filled the tank of enthusiasm as I left the theater each time.

But recently I confronted a group of women, and upon sharing my love for the film (casually in conversation of course *not*, it’s wasn’t as if I steered the conversation with a truth lasso *I totally did*) I was met with a lukewarm response. Still I pressed on trying to get to the source of resistance, countering each potential concern- 

> “I loved it. 1. Even if you’re burned out of superhero movies, I think you’ll really like this. It’s character focused, and while it has a ‘mission’ the focus is really on two characters and their ‘we’re not in Kansas anymore’ stories. 2. If you like DC movies, you’ll like this, and if you’ve been disappointed by DC movies, you’ll still like this/ you should give it a chance because  it’s not your typical origin story, it has a strong ensemble, it’s well paced for the most part (it doesn’t feel like a 2+ hour film, it flies!!!), and it’s a feel good film. 3. This is a passion project for all of those involved, you can really tell because it’s not a good superhero film, it’s a good film period.”

>>At this point, their reservations thawed and they asked “it sounds interesting, what’s it about?” 

Now my mind is blown, because I realize they don’t know who Wonder Woman is from comics or hype, they haven’t seen articles or promo pics or previews (how is this possible), and I’m in charge of the classic elevator summary.

>“Oh, well it’s about Diana, aka Wonder Woman, she grows up on an island of amazon women sheltered from the outside world by Zeus, honing her skills as a warrior under the guidance of her aunt and mother to be on guard for Aries God of War. This all changes when Diana saves a human man, Chris Pine-” 

 >> “He’s from Star Trek, right?”

> “Yeah, sure. He’s a pilot who stumbled through the barrier from WWI and she joins his return to the war against the wishes of her family, because she believes she’s on Aries’ trail. So they get to the war and she helps fight back against Dr. Poison and the Germans…”

>> “Woah, she’s fighting Nazis. That’s too political for me. I don’t like it.” 

> “But…but…you haven’t seen the trailer or gotten to know the characters.”

>> “Why does everything have to be about Nazis?”

> “That’s what I am saying: it’s not about Nazis. Its superhero fiction, it’s about fighting injustice whether it has a real world context or not.”

>> “I’m not going to see it, it sounds like it’s trying to make a statement or be trendy.”

dfggdjfjfklkghjdghghjdghjtkh,jkknfgkgfdghbdf,hvhgdjutg!!!!!!!!! AGGGGGH! Wonder Woman has been an icon forever and a day, and the best you can call her is trendy?!

For the love of god, you are ‘entitled’ to your like/dislike opinion but only on the contingent of citing the source material. Watch a trailer, and critique a movie intelligently for its content: acting / writing / pacing / shot selection/ cinematic style, or draw comparisons to other films for context. If you form an opinion without any ‘research’ I guess you’re allowed, but I’m allowed to call that opinion (not you as a person, but that particular statement) ignorant, ill-informed, fledgling, and flippant.

2. Doctor Who - 13th Doctor (and the Heel Draggers and Super Enthusiasts)

The casting of the 13th Doctor suffers the same kind of character undermining, but this time from men and women on both extreme ends of the spectrum. We’ve got, in a similar vein to the curmudgeons but at least more informed, the heel-draggers: 

>>“1) Why do they have to cast a woman just because it’s PC/ a stunt/ publicity, 2) why do they have to shove an agenda in our face and 3) insult the traditions of the show I love. I’m not watching anymore.“

> I hardly think it has to do with the dreaded, often misused, recently catch-all term that we call political correctness. Out of all the regenerations, the dice isn’t always going to land on the same side. Secondly, believe it or not, all stories have an agenda called plot or arc, each writer/director/show runner has one. A casting choice of a different sex is not an agenda. And lastly, the show/fandom has many traditions; the fandom becomes richer as those traditions evolve, and the mark of a good writer/director/show runner is knowing the balance of constancy and change, and applying changes carefully with character or plot driven purpose. Sonic shades, sonic screwdriver, both? Converse or loafers? Raggedy or disco? As long as the Doctor is still the Doctor, still travels in the TARDIS, still values the same things, still has their past, and still has a companion, we might just survive!

But we also have the super enthusiasts who will fire first and ask questions later at any sign of dissent over the 13th Doctor. -

>>“1) The future is Female! Yes! Protect Jodie Whitaker at all cost. 2) Why are you worried about this casting, why aren’t you excited, you just don’t want the Doctor to be a woman. 3) Why don’t you like the trailer, you just don’t like change. 4) Power/ Control, we’ve got your superheroes, Doctors… 4) NOW A WHOLE BUNCH OF YOUNG GIRLS CAN COSPLAY AS THE DOCTOR (caps not mine, copied from a post)”

>Yes, the future is female, but a) that’s under the assumption she identifies as female and b) puleeeeasse Jodie Whitaker can protect herself as she feels so inclined, as can the whole Doctor Who creative team. Listen to opposition and evaluate if they have a valid point before you leap. Secondly, I’m not excited because I didn’t want the casting to be spoiled for me and it was, not because a woman was cast. And I’m not worried about a woman being cast - I can envision actresses in the part. I have concerns about Jodie Whitaker’s casting in conjunction with other circumstances outside her control.  Every regeneration is always a gut check, and change is by nature uncomfortable: I’ve enjoyed and grown used to the male Doctor and companion dynamic, it doesn’t mean you should assume I hate the idea of a female doctor. Jodie in particular presents a challenge because I know her and associate her with roles that bias me, including Broadchurch and The Assets. Again, my bias = no one’s problem but mine. I think she’s mega talented, but in this case her notability makes me more uneasy as opposed to a hypothetical niche-known actress of equal talent; I like Doctor Who’s recent track record at finding someone “new” and Jodie is not as ‘new’ to me as I had hoped. I would have been more enthusiastic for someone who, unlike Jodie, hadn’t worked so recently with Chibnall, the new showrunner, to inject fresh excitement. Or at least if Bill, Nardol, or even Missy were still around to ease us in as a focal point that the audience can transition through, like Rose for Tennant or Clara for Capaldi. So ultimately its the culmination of ‘clean slate’ circumstances that I find most unnerving, not solely the new Doctor. And I still have to get over the “Doctor Who Stages of Regeneration Grief” for Capaldi before I can form a passionate opinion of a new actor. 

Thirdly, I don’t like the “Introducing Jodie Whitaker” trailer because of the marketing choice - I find it boring and ‘too easy’ to build hype only to show Jodie’s face out from under a hood. It sends the absolutely wrong message for me that she’s a woman, not she’s the Doctor. Eccleston got to speak, Tennant got to speak, Matt Smith same, John Hurt same, Capaldi didn’t, but his first marketing intro was in the context of an episode in action, saving Gallifrey, being the Doctor, so it felt right. This felt a little cheap. And to those who see this as an opportunity for a female to be in power/control of the title role, give me a break. We’re not watching the same show. Doctor Who has never been about the Doctor being in control, more often than not it’s the TARDIS or companions, a majority of which have been played by actresses, that demonstrate force, a guiding hand, etc. I’m happy to have a female in the title role, I’m not happy with the fans who have narrowed the scope and don’t recognize the power that female characters have had all along in Doctor Who. Lastly, SWEET RASSILON ALIVE, girls have already been cosplaying as the Doctor since time immemorial because they identify with the character first not the actor/actress. I’m happy you’re happy that girls have an easily identifiable role model, but if you are going to praise the value of transcending gender roles assigned to a specific sex, its gotta work both ways or you are diminishing the character value.

My biggest grievance common to the people in all three points of opposition is the inability to simultaneously: 

Have their own preferences while at the same time stepping outside their perspective to role play someone else’s view 

Realize that both views can exist without invalidation of each other and

Undervaluing the IMPORTANCE OF THE WELL-WRITTEN CHARACTER. 

People like that (*gestures vaguely to tumblr, you know where*) don’t actually care about defending your rights. All they care about is fighting the majority so that they can feel like individuals.

So if fifty blogs are talking about how important it is to send the message that, you know, we’re not going to let ten million people die without a fight, those SJW blogs will adamantly post that we need to protect Nazis’ civil rights.

If you were to all suddenly decide that punching Nazis is wrong, those blogs would be the first ones making posts about how important it is to throw punches.

That’s why I’ve always been wary of SJW culture, even though by definition, I can be a SJW myself (I can be self-aware). 

Because at the end of the day, everything that these blogs post suggests that they wouldn’t ever actually be willing to fight for you unless it benefits them, the way they feel about themselves, and the way others view them.

There’s a reason people say the two extremes are so similar.

The problem of course is that right now, the world and mentalities are so split that the majority opinion keeps shifting which means these SJW blogs keep shifting their stances.