I. Daniel Burke is a Very Online Person

discussing Malthus. Praising Putin. and Chavez and Maduro… I think. And this is all good and well, but what does it have to do with yoga?* Arguing with white nationalists. Making anti-Einstein signs. Surely this one will go viral any day now. Big opponents of Entropy. Unique scientific belief that Man is not Animal.. Opposition to pi. Another insulting of The Beatles. Weighing in on Abortion. The totally anti Plato Spenglerian figure of Cory Booker (nevermind no one mentioned him.)

* Regretfully, I lost this Twitter link, but it was a ridiculous “try to catch them all” response to someone talking about yoga.

The perceived competition, false gatekeepers touching on at least some of Larouche arguments, gets dismissed with a “Solutions???” charge. Lest RCam fall out of line and fail to find the Rosicurcian premise of the pseudointellectual malarky.

And the people are responding to this massive deluge.

Or, at times, not, as all roads lead to China’s government. (Curious firebombing attempt here — would Burke like to sell his William Blake interpretation to this thread?)

And all roads lead to a variation of this: You seem too closed, and unhappy, perhaps, to have an honest dialogue. You studiously avoid my central argument. Have a good rest of your day. Passive aggressive to the max!

Anti-gaming comments give Burke that “Boomer” insult. Burke assault on video games gets a gamer suggesting a compromise, but Burke is not having it.

Everyone finds out where that “race doesn’t exist” line gets you. Funnily, this Daniel Burke selling Larouche to the argurer of people who put on right jackasses and not left jackasses. See where that gets him.

Har de har, it is to laugh. Here goes a popular response to Daniel Burke on a conspiratorial webcast:Is LaRouche still alive? Da fuq. . Yeah, well… At 30 minute mark we get discussion of how he plays at Trump rallies. Lee Greenwood blaring, the gaudy patriotic music blares somewhere out of 432 range. Somehow we have not written the trash reality tv ethos of Trumpism as a defining characteristic of a Trump rally.

Oh, and what is this? China loves Larouche.

Tis official. LORG disowns Trump. Oh, wait. Helga goes on to throw Trump some support… Still, somehow, despite Greenwood, despite “China Virus”, despite… So, do we see here a new splintering in the offing? With Daniel Burke turning on his own away from Trump, And reiterating the “fallen off a cliff” mantra.

Nay. After a bit of wobbling, LORG’s final statement on Trump comes out: Had Trump exonerated LaRouche of the false charges brought against him, by the same corrupt Department of Justice which was out to destroy Trump’s presidency, and had he openly collaborated with the LaRouche organization in the global effort to end the British Imperial “regime change” war policy and its “Green New Deal” destruction of industrial progress globally, and called for a New Bretton Woods conference with Russia, China and others to put the bankrupt western financial system through bankruptcy reorganization, with Hamiltonian credit policies available in all nations—had he had the courage to do that, he would still be President, and the world would likely be on a road to recovery and perhaps a new Renaissance. Wait — does this mean that, like Trump finally at last, LORG is admitting that Biden did in fact win?

Lol LaRouche.

The cultural war remains and now comes front and center… Disillusioned by Greenwald at a Trump rally, we turn now to the Video Game Plague. And the postulation goes — video game playing = acceptance of mass death.

Everything rolls into a rush. I mean, some twitterers are here too busy playing video games to be there where People are grabbing copies; we’ll have gotten out several hundreds within another couple of hours. Yeah, the New Federalist going out like hot cakes! — but not to these dudes. And it is Adventures in Crisis mongering — 12 Minutes til — Bring out the spectre of Bertrand Russell, or a strawman version thereof.

Nazis have nothing on Elizabeth. We are very close to Thermonuclear extinction. Sane people must combine to create a way out.

Basically what we see here as Daniel Burke fights the video game is a guy who loves Humanity and not so much People. Over the last four years there was a genre of books published — sitting aside and somewhat a subgenre within the usual genre of anti-Current Guy in Charge books that always proliferate during any President’s tenure — which can be considered “anti- anti Trump books”. It is one which speaks somewhat to me — looking warily at a President who until that last month in office I could always say “preferable to W Bush” and get a tongue lashing for this from people who consider themselves “The Resistance”. And where our gamer arguing with Burke commits a faux pas by referencing Edgar Allen Poe as ” classical” — no idea if he picked him by knowing that Poe is on Larouche’s list of “good” — the idea remains, expressed by David Shield in ” Nobody Hates Trump More Than Trump” in staring down various Artistic Resistancers — I quoted on my blog here.

In Vimi Bajaj’s essay on V.S. Naipaul in the “Writer’s Chronicle,” she argues that he was a great writer only early on, when he was compassionate, and is now no longer of interest, because he hates most of humanity; such a formulation would eliminate everything from Petronius’s “The Satyricon” (1st Century A.D.) to Michel Houellebecq’s “Submission” (2015).

Reminds me of reading, in the wake of Trump’s election, a Literature professor declaring that she was now going to emphasize empathy in her syllabus selections.

Back in the day I had a comic book fan and Larouchie commenting on this blog, who had (has?) a web page of prized comicbook artists’ commissioned work that he’s bought over time. Horror of horrors, he reiterated time and again against any contradiction of following the Larouche line on things against Larouche’s highfalutin fight against lower culture — his assembly of what must be emulated to be considered Art. But here we find Daniel Burke trashing The Batman Animated Show of the 1990s, as against some Twitter comments disliking more contemporary popular items and with a suggestion of introducing it to his children at an age appropriate time. Evidentially Burke holds that such a time exists not at all, lest we suck the kids into “porno popular culture”. I will not be able to explain how you raise your kids through the oft rough terrain of the culture at large, but the answer lies somewhere short of Burke’s Larouchian “show no visual medium but classic paintings before the age of 25” and describing every tasteless item as Aristotilian or “Bertrand Russell ‘s popular culture”.

Most useful thing i have found about LaRouche’s cult is their articles and material on based industrial projects and how asbestos is good actually because of their belief the secret bong oligarchy is holding back progress to make us all serfs in the form of hippies

Proceeding with the “Anti-Malthusian Front” — Yeah, this attempt at an equivalence argument on Chinese versus American tyranny chimes false with the reference to Larouche. On the comment: China’s government is not Malthusian. It is Vernadsky-an. And I admit I had to go to Wikipedia to catch up on where China’s government has shifted to from its one child policy — we are now up to two children! With maybe more loopholes and room for “nudge” economics– but it all rings pretty Malthusian to me, and not shuffled over to a long departed Mao.

Oh, what else can we say with Daniel Burke’s domination of Larouchie Twitter? Hm. Zhang Heqing doesn’t.

Spoke with NYC mayor candidate, split amicably.

this Blackrock thing is really drawing out the Larouchies and goldbugs in the NIMBY caucus, ain’t it. Great response here from Leapingbaath. Daniel Burke continues beating that drum.

But again with the this: Keep thinking this way, and you will find yourself licking the Queen’s backside in hell for eternity. Repent, and join humanity in the effort to lift every human being out of poverty, famine, and disease. Have a good day!

You know, Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, celebrated by the Larouche movement for about a decade and maybe half. And, y’know — on this “My friend Bill Ferguson’s anti-Obama poem called “b-ball” — full of an anti-Obama stance that is in its own world — observation: Obama also played a lot of golf… Like his predecesdors and guy who followed. (I don’t know about the current guy — who is, uh, a little old). Why no golf reference — instead we focus on basketball?

II. Notes from the Civil Wars

Hm… Meanwhile, over at LPAC… It is Barbara Boyd charging Exxon with getting taken over by the greenies. Huh. Yeah, well, they are positioning themselves as Fox News is getting soft — not hyper-critical enough against Biden, though as against Putin it leaves everyone in a bind. And then there is Susan Kokinda keeping the Trumpet faith at the big Trump rally in Ohio. We llll!wait for Trump to hold forth against The British.

Inviting a scrimmage in the civil war against LPAC (though this person is unaware of such a thing), it must be noted that we continue to see scrimmages in the schism which started it all — when Larouche broke from Trotsky — so this account from Daniel Burke of exchanging religious dogma disputes with a Trotskyite can be viewed as just a continuation of a 50 year Civil War.

III. Chris Hedges Ignores Diane Sare

Outside of Daniel Burke’s Twitter feed, there is no coverage of Diane Sare being cut off at a Chris Hedges q and a session. The takeaway from the Larouchie faithful is of Chris Hedges getting EXPOSED as a gatekeeper — and shutting Diane Safe from popular consciousness. (“Cancelled”?)

Meanwhile, the usual suspects give Chris Hedges a thumbs up.

Curiously, at least one Twitterer has sourced Larouche material to arrive at the conclusion — Assange and Snowden are parts of the conspiracy. How this jives with him seeing EIR sell “Free Assange”, dunno.

The Larouche Movement has yet to respond to this challenge. I want a rumble!!!

IV. Daniel Burke Scopes Out NYC Party Scene

Daniel Burke wants to know: Where do young people in NYC go to bars, on Friday nights in June 2021? I want to campaign where there is a flood of young people. Hm. I hear the kids are into the Goth these days. And the Techno. Check out the Goth Techno scene… Surely you will pick up new Larouchies there.

Hm. To make a revolutionary discovery, that individual will have to overcome every assumption in the theorem lattice of their society—so, it is true that even in a degraded culture (like our own), this potential exists. Imagine the world where everyone, or the mass of people, are making revolutionary discoveries, and revolutionary discoveries all the time at that. Such a world can not exist, as revolutionary discoveries will be devalued (degraded, possibly) to the point where they cannot be considered revolutionary discoveries — BY DEFINITION. Or maybe we will end up with a revolutionary discovery inflation… Like, how every new youth get defined as the “trophy generation” for feelings of entitlements.

Hey, though! We do find people receptive to Larouche’s message: Once the edibles start kicking in in earnest, should I start watching Lyndon LaRouche videos? Maybe a cannabis cafe is the way to go. The conclusion: Okay so watching Lyndon LaRouche campaign ads while high was fucking amazing and I have no idea whether I should take them seriously or ironically and no idea whether to agree or disagree. Once the decision is made, there is merchandise available.

Hm. Whether or not the stoner crowd goes for the LORG, gotta get there before LPAC comes in with their material — whether or not it is as Daniel Burke derides — Nah that’s the pathetic evil break off crowd. They use LaRouche’s name while rejecting his love of all mankind. […] Doubt it. That is an old poster, but I bet they are just reusing it. The guy who posted it acted like he just ran into them. […] Yeah but look at how demoralized they are, putting up a sign the printer ruined. I bet they didn’t even check the QR. — Whoever gets the mind space first will always be their representation of Larouchism.

Not necessarily promising a sign: I’m convinced that if Lyndon LaRouche never renounced Marxism left twitter would be infested with unironic LaRoucheites as well as Dengists and other such folk.

V. Now flooding the zone in “larouche Twitter”, which has been for the past several months dominated by Daniel Burke… It is “lindy larouche“. Random use of moniker and image as he relates old Conan O’Brien bits and makes a good argument on hypothetical election scenarios. I guess one can count Twitter responders who comment on the joke, keep a tally — do so yourself if interested.

Curiously ripping through tik tok — And at first I do not see anything except the use of the Hamilton musical, and only a small deluge of “larouche” tweets brings me to look deeper and watch the c-note rush by, complete with references to Rockefellar. Someone round those parts digs deeper (looks at her tiktok page) and notes the woman’s eclectic political influences. Altogether, it is amusing that in as much as anything larouchian went viral this last month, it is this tik tok dancer — perhaps giving credence to Daniel Burke’s hypothesis on cultural degeneration. Is she the future of Larouchism?

VI. How goes it, Caleb Maupin?

Maupin refusing to name his mentor? Why is that? I heard him say he was mentored by an “economist” in nyc (who he would not name) that taught him about the supposed possibilty of ‘infinite economic growth’..as soon as he said that I suspected it was LaRouche himself! Maupin’s rhetoric has always been too close to larouche’s.

Oh… Maupin moving tactically in the direction?

Maupin’s rejoinder comes in: “I know you are but what am I?“

VII. Mike Gravel Dies, Handful of People Know and Care Enough to comment that He ran around with Larouche a bit at the End… We find some people really really dislike him.

… Kudos to the person who placed up the Alex Jones video clip where he specifically threw out high praise, so Gravel and “Gravel Institute” could not dodge the issue behind a “just speaking to anyone” premise. All that besides, Mike Gravel did go on to — upon folding up his 2020 presidential bid — endorse Bernie Sanders, as opposed to the Larouchie uber love of Trump. I suppose it is best to suggest the high point of his late life legacy in fringe politics is his place in a mock committee on extraterrestrial life — and there are a few to choose from for his low point.

Hm…. People need to understand that the Gravel campaign was a trojan horse for the LaRouche Movement. Rebuttal: No it wasn’t.

On the Alex Jones front, I stumble into this Huh? Alex Jones smears of Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr. are remarkably similar to FBI CoinTelPro tactics & serves FBI goals… the crushing of socialist movements, for which LaRouche is one. I am curious to see if there is a new pronounced attitude from Alex Jones — and it is worth noting Jones has not been consistent on things over the years. (There is a pre 2015 Jones and a post 2015 Jones — marking as Ron Paul gets replaced by Donald Trump as Great American Hero — or perhaps better marked as a Kurt Nimmo as main accolyte at infowars era and a Paul Joseph Watson era.). A quick Google search reveals nothing.

VIII. Memories

Matthew Sweet: I once attended a LaRouche meeting in New York where we sang Mozart’s Requiem in solfeggio to a Bontempi beat and an old lady told me the British LaRouche group was an MI6 operation. …. Were they pursuing their campaign for changing the standard tuning of A=440 Hertz, which was a LaRouche thing for a while IIRC ?

This New Yorker cartoon contest entry suffers from the “putting hat on a hat” problem in comedy writing.

you kids missed out… Was he handing out Lyndon Larouche literature? You’re probably too young to remember THAT awesome airport experience. 🙂 Much more aggro than Krishnas.

I remember coming across what were presumably GW undergrad students canvassing/harassing for LaRouche outside of the Foggy Bottom Metro Station in 2004, and it boggled my mind that kids were still getting pulled into his microcult

Shortly after 9/11 I signed up to hand out LaRouche publications at college. Sent me two big boxes of pamphlets then start reading about how women have sexual guilt because their genitals too close to anus and I’m like yeah I am not gonna be passing these out after all.

Yeah but its… LaRouche? Like you can’t take that man seriously. The only guy I knew who really handed out his lit was this would mostly rant about circumcision on the corner (like okay but). The ones in Occupy were easy to spot, their rhetoric was transparently all aesthetic.

Mensa Facebook posts: Honestly, the “League of Lyndons” post when LaRouche died is one of my all-time favorites. I laugh every time I think about it.

series of dreams last night. -trapped in a vampiric dinner with smug 20 yr old Lyndon LaRouche fascists -had to cap off demonic interdimensional rift under an apartment building -glassy orbital space hotel / mall started spinning all the way out of control and crashed to earth […] I’m sure the Lyndon LaRouche fans appeared because of a single tweet i read on this hellsite yesterday

Dateline Burlingame: The weather is fine and the #larouche #loonies are out in downtown #burlingame @ Downtown Burlingame. One mean looking granny.

Better techno thriller than Clancy!

Then there is this. Every day, I’m ALREADY on here telling ppl to GFT. I got into a public fight with some LaRouchies, and my hubs had to drag me away (the guy was twice my size and 1/4 my age). I already KNOW politics ain’t for me except as a watcher. […] Oh those fucks, they used to all over Seattle. I stupidly signed up with them and they wouldn’t stop calling. Next time I saw them, I ran the other way. As far as Twitter I already lost my last account, I have to be good on this one.

Not going unnoticed. they’re aggressively recruiting on the NYC streets, you got time. a LaRouche campaigner stopped me on the street and kept asking me “were you born good or bad? GOOD or BAD?”

When Straussians see LaRouche guys on the street, tradition dictates a rumble for old times sake. […]. These same characters were laughed off W 98th & Broadway on Monday.

They’ll get you with something — I had no idea Larouche wrote stuff like this. Last time I ran into Larouche people was on street in NYC, when they accosted me and tried to convince me Dick Cheney was Satanic. […] lol, while they weren’t wrong, that stuff doesn’t help. LaRouche was a very strong proponent of classical music, RIP.

Forerunners of American Fascism. My father was a union shop steward that also subscribed to the Lyndon LaRouche newsletter. You’re not going to get me with vulgar maxism and the sheer force of cracker grievance – I grew up, inside, the ideology you’re grasping towards.

After eight years embedded in D politics, before exiting, I can say with confidence that the number of times GPUS was discussed was somewhere south of Lyndon Larouche on the frequency list. Probably most discussion during the 8 years of — hm, 1996 – 2004 focused on Nader. Below that, they really have not gotten big enough to warrant some tooth gnashing that Republicans experience with a handful of downballot Libertarians — though there was some aggrivation in Arizona a decade and a half back with Republican bankrolled Green candidates. Larouchies were much discussed at various times over the decades in Illinois, Virginia, and Texas. (Tonally different but probably a point of order in Massachusetts.)

A joke, I assume: Come read my superintelligent Marxist essay about why the left should remain a highly exclusive club no bigger than the size of a public library speaking event. Medium says it’s just a 97-minute read. It’s got over six views and counting. Hope you like footnotes […………..] Lyndon LaRouche was on his path to doing that and he realized it was more fun to engage in Operation Mop-up. And even in that respect he proved cleverer than the people around him because that’s precisely what should be done to political parties across the spectrum.

IX. History

Part of the 1986 Illinois campaignings. Side topic but apparently once Lyndon LaRouche sent his crew to exorcise Eliade’s house (instead of electioneering stuff on Election Day) because he thought Eliade was a witch […] Apparently!!! Because of uhhhhhh witchcraft. I think it’s my second favorite LaRouche spat with an awful person, after Edward Teller [etc]

Hm. Idaho is the only John Birch Society stronghold of the ’60’s that never let up. John Schmitz came in 2nd in ’72. It’s the one state where LaRouche-type independents have consistently done better than other parts of the U.S. Such inaccuracies irritate me, No– McGovern did indeed kick Schmitz’s butt in Idaho 26 to 9.3. The stat that is stuck in his head is the “Beat him in 4 counties”. On that larouche type independents, it might depend on what the hell that means.

The company Larouche sources keep.

… Okay, but which set of Larouchies?

no clue what this means. Wasn’t the political platform of Larouche basically an extended critique of the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha * program? * 2x

listing “real” progressives.

I claim neutrality on the “October Surprise”, but I see a flaw in this formation: You always buy into Conspiracy Theories that Lyndon LaRouche was peddling? Investigated by Congress. They found nothing. Trust Congress?

Tshirt for sale.

Flashing back to the turn of the century:  Lyndon “I am the Boomer Doomer” LaRouche

Sigh. This again. Andy Ngo is a dishonest actor, but passable to his Fox News audience — a milk shake thrown at him (vegan, mind you) is “quick drying cement”. The (inadvisable, sure) assault on him — a push by the antifa yahoos — was not enough for his neck brace. That being said…

The fixed premise setting of the conspiratorial mindset.Shredding the January 6th Myth As the result of studies of) the terrorist operations of the 1980s and 1990s, and the hybrid warfare doctrines of various nations, Lyndon LaRouche concluded that there were no naturally evolving terrorist phenomena, that all such terrorist incidents were directed by state actors or the British Empire in one form or another. And it is there that I understand the claim of Larouche as ” the intellectual author of the 9/11 Truth” movement, whether I agree beside the point.

I already have noted “Lengthy Mike” Anderson’s hobby horse line. But nay to this — you need to ask the question to Xi Van Fleet, not Franklin Graham — she is the one who used the term. The big news here is that Mike Anderson finally meets up with Very Online Daniel Burke and… He does not acquit himself well. Surely he can find more damneding material than something calling into question Hitler’s, Stalin’s, and some Capitalists’ motivations at the onset of WW2. I suppose the good news is that Burke’s follow through is asinine enough to suggest had he been up to it, Anderson would be able to throw more carefully argued crap from the book out there — or better to suggest that even as Anderson fails at his job here, Daniel Burke is there to do it for him. So now, Burke dismissed, he can get back to his big Twitter project of citing the politics of South Park cartoons as simply regurgitating the message of Larouche.

The problem with this postulation — once upon a time in a prior decade, I saw anti Wal-Mart piece in a Larouche publication, at the same!e time as I saw an anti Wal-Mart piece in Mother Jones. No matter where you stand on a large search of issues, you will be in agreement with the Larouch goes at some point, at least superficially and at least until paragraph 3 when they just tick off a list of Jewish surnames as Enemies of All Humanity.

(Rub eyes). So we just start ascribing every antisemitic piece of trash to Larouche now?

On the next hand, I have to contemplate the sad world in which this person lives. Never gonna be a good day when antiSemites like Roger Waters and Margorie Taylor Greene are trending this early. Only things missing are Lyndon LaRouche and one of the Haddid girls to make it a full house. I had to wonder — why is his name inflaming this twitterer so? — did he at some point in time talk of Rockefeller controlled weather apparatuses causing forest fires? So, looking up Waters with ” anti-Semitism” — (sigh) — okay, he disagrees with him on Israel and Palestine. The only problem I see there is that if he is hailing forth on it between songs, it will ruin a concert experience, but I tend to side with David Gilmore anyway.

Randomly tossing out this larouche article on how Blair “smeared” larouche through Jeremiah Duggan, nevermind how far we are now from Tony Blair. But I guess this is the world in which they live.

Cute. “Frankfurt Marxist”. I dreamt that Jack Kerouac became a LaRouchie

Some more battles from “the left” against right entryists. I should point out that Matt Tiabbi, back when he was a liberal darling against Bush and then with Rolling Stone — described his desire not to be the new Hunter Thompson but the new HL Mencken.

The bane of “Libertarian Party”: by dent of kookdom, you get lumped in with Larouche. (Swarming about this map). We seem to get a good deal of this: Almost universally the Ron Paul libertarians who annoyed me the most in college are full blown MAGA. The edge lords determined right wing populism was far edgeier.

Here’s WHY: Those people were CRANKS – WE are NOT ”cranks”. Why would I want to associate OUR thing w/CRANKS? That’s it — Cranks always call other Cranks Cranks and deny their own Crankdom. LaRouche was kinda unique. A LOT of refugees from the ’60s COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY Right ended up w/him but he defies simple categorization. I think he was a utopian socialist at base w/more than a passing sympathy for RACIALISM. That’s the best way to think of it.

… Just the 80s?

One of the worst theorists, Lyndon LaRouche— who possibly believed his own nonsense– would write articles filled with 50 assertions; one of which might be credibly sourced, with some truth; the other 49 being leaps of logic combined with wild speculation. Art of the con.

Who the heck is DrZ? I’m with you, but DrZ was reading “fringe’ media in 1965 and taking Lyndon LaRouche to lunch to get the outside PoV.

RCam sells the old British set up Hitler and Stalin line.

… Roy Cohn… Now East, strange bedfellows.

Cafe dot com offers up a basic and generic overview of Larouche history.

Bookmark for later podcast pursual. Frank Zappa figures somehow.

Hm… Xenon-129 isotope on Mars? Evidence of US Spece Force trying to terraform the planet? (perhaps in an expedition in 1985, at the request of Ronald Reagan’s Science Advisor, Lyndon LaRouche?) Or. ancient Atomic War that compelled martianoids to colonize Earth?

X. ABROAD

Investigative report in the offing.

Aussie Larouchie responds making use of old canard. Also we get this “wants a postal bank” as their innocuous fight claim.

Why does everything get the presumption of “false flag until proven otherwise”?

… winning friends, influencing people…

And of course a good source for China’s media… Y’know, Abraham Lincoln woulda declared their government Democratic. It is curious that they are citing the Aussie variant of the movement, but then again what you do is throw up a lot of names for the same thing…

… And use the phrase Anglo-American empire’s “War Party”.

One deleted tweet from the party: This article contains a false claim that we were founded by Lyndon LaRouche. Obviously @meriamrobin hasn’t spoken to Craig Isherwood or watched “Who We Are”.  Oh, sure.  Also the Nazi Party predated Hitler’s joining.  Hm.  Steve Allen did The Tonight Show before Johnny Carson. 

(Stephan Ossenkopp does his part — presenting me the question:  who?  Well, he beat out one party in an election.)

Watching the first couple minutes of their introductory video.  And… Um… Well, you can’t mistake the excitement level for  trump Rally.

Behold!  Helga Zepp Larouche provides perhaps the scariest PR job for China’s government yet, coming out Foursquare against Individualism no matter how defined.

I don’t read French, but I do grasp the gist of this material on Jacques Cheminade.

XI.  Is that right?  Dunno…

I want to look into this claim: Loudon County is where LaRouche’s farm was. At the beginning of all this there was a based black woman that everyone was rt’ing. You could tell by her lingo she was a LaRouche person. Not saying there’s anything sinister going on. Quite proud of everyone. A raucous and contentipus issue, and certainly a culturlal flashpoint the Larouchies can exploit. But as of yet I do not see the Larouchie and want to know what language was used —  was “dutch Anglo” here, “anti-Malthusian Alliance” there (dunno about “Aristotle Baconist“– or if we are back into seeing basic rightwing premises good and bad get oh so defined for bashing purposes.  The one thing we do have is Richard Black, former state legislator, speaking — but he can move in and out of Larouche space..

and lastly, Matt Taibbi will probably disagree with Nick Benton.

The interview with Justin Amash is not all that interestng, except perhaps a general sense of his attempt in defining a frame of a center between two extremes of the left and the right through contortions, and the bulk of the comments section is a long since defined bunch of rote insta-comments. But swirling about there are at least a few insights into the workings of the Libertarian Party:

I. All political parties are coalition parties. The Libertarian Party is comprised of various factions, none of whom believe in coalitions. That is the core of the problem right there. Randians are never going to get along with Rothbardians, minarchists will never get along with anarchists, crunchies will never get along with turtles.

I’ve been in LP executive meetings at the state level. Nasty shit. The lower the stakes the pettier the politics, and when the party as a whole has completely given on the idea of actually getting someone elected, there literally are no stakes so it’s the maximum of petty sniping. And I’m sure the state level was Emily Post in comparison to national.

II. One dimension is a conflict between those who want to create a “big tent” Libertarian Party that has people who support liberty broadly but who don’t necessarily support every single position, vs. those who want to create a Libertarian Party of pure principle. As I recall, there was a candidate who epitomized the purism tradition, Bergland in 1984, who refused even to get a driver’s license on principle. That’s pretty hardcore. He of course failed miserably. Just from an empirical point of view, the “big tent” campaigns of Gary Johnson were more successful than any purist campaign. Is there a Libertarian Party candidate who was elected, anywhere, by standing on a mountain of pure principle? But there have been plenty of Libertarian Party candidates elected in various offices who were elected despite some heterodox beliefs, because they were viewed as reasonable alternatives to the two-party duopoly, and one reason they were considered reasonable was because they WEREN’T hard-core ideologues.

The other dimension to the conflict is how to package and sell libertarianism. Being edgy and prioritizing the most unpopular libertarian positions is not the way to go IMO. I mean, if you want to sell the Libertarian brand, why on earth would you start your opening pitch with a statement like “maybe child labor should be legalized”? WTF? There are COUNTLESS examples of how our liberties are infringed upon that are much easier sells. Going on about legalizing child labor, or overturning the Civil Rights Act, or privatizing the roads, or securing the right to own nuclear weapons, is just going to turn people off.

Personally I think the LP would be well served by pursuing some “good government” proposals that are strictly speaking not libertarian per se, but could secure interest and support, and are unwilling to be addressed by either Team Red or Team Blue because it would undermine their duopoly. Such as, expanding the size of the House. Pushing for more open access and more transparency on how government at all levels works. They can be “gateway issues” to the Libertarian philosophy at large.

Some more:

III. Team L has two problems: no money, and few candidates that can effectively articulate a libertarian message to the electorate. It is not rocket science. Develop an effective apparatus to raise money in small dollar amounts (think Act Blue app, versus just a few wealthy donors); ‘up’ their digital game – significantly.

Then the better candidates will come. And for damned sure, if someone looking like Vermin Supreme is truly a serious contender for Team L leadership, Team L will go nowhere. Jorgensen had some mishaps in her campaign (BLM comments come to mind). What I would tell her is that practice makes perfect. She is intelligent and articulate. To me, she is the lead candidate for 2024 for Team L (assuming she wants another try).

,,…….,,,…..

In third party land, you might as well have your candidates roll two turns at bat. Vermin Supreme can wait for 2028.

The Green Party had to kick out their Alaska Party after they roguishly ran Jesse Ventura for President, but that at least is a tangible certain focus than trying to herd a batch of malcontents. The party’s definining character should argue for sectionalist in fights, the pitch increased because the stakes literally come down to who gets to be right and as everyone knows that is I.

The problem with this crooksandliars waving against Republican strategist on “critical race theory”: Is it possible that the opposition to critical race theory is… Both?  (just as it is a melange of sensical and nonsensical).

So, on this warning sire with comparison to Lee Atwater and Willie Horton, a call to action for progressive democrats to defeat this racist political tactic–  and defining the political wages of concepts into a frame that is very much agreeable but oddly exposes the problem, (some contradictions with multiple opinions, you say?) it is worth dipping into just what some complaints are, and let us now go to the National Review defining its problem, as praising the Washington Post for putting the terms of opposition ” correctly for once” –– whether or not the terms are so narrowly defined by the shouting mob at a Virginia townhouse —

Uma Menon is a 17-year-old writer and student at Princeton University who attended public schools in Florida, where the state Board of Education just banned public schools from teaching that racism is “embedded in American society and its legal systems in order to uphold the supremacy of white persons.”

The good news is that this frame is not definitionally within the frame that the Washington Monthly article has it.  The problem here is there was a retroactive rewriting of what the 1619 Project is — “US founded for express purpose of upholding slavery” but once we get past the inaccuracy of that, there is better room to teach the effects of slavery.

The bad news is, well… Just what is the GOP up to with this?  And how can anyone argue with this sensible “just want to play sports”?

So, what does the G.O.P. do? Conjure up normative threats by attacking CRT, ltransgender girls who want to play sports, and Black Lives Matter.

We make a pretty good full spectrum “grand unified theory” to crush any “Oppression Olympics” by way of intersectional and allyship politics.  Presuming that the Washington Monthly article has it right — “normative threat” of seeing a transgendered athlete running rings around her competition — it has to be understandable that someone will feel stifled if they can’t point this one out.  I suppose the good news is all the transgender ed people I know want nothing to do with sports.  I imagine opinions will vary a smidge on the “Heather Swanson Effect”, a smidgeon to the idea that most people’s sports career stops before anything gets terribly competitive anyways — the world of participation trophies handed out at end of season pizza parlors.

On the future of battles over or against the normative normative, and perceptions of shoving new norms on the populace, I can imagine a future argument that we need to value sports where traditionally females do better than males — The Sports page gotta cover more figure skating, damnedit — which has a corollary argument that football needs less coverage.  

And underscoring the woke troubles with the world of mma — Is “Joe Rogan makes anti Biden comment typical of Joe Rogan” a legiltimate news article? To be sure, if it is decided “Dog Bites Man” is never a real story, we will lose out on some real news as the contrarian “Man Bites Dog” headline gets over emphasized against actual real items, but then again if we see Joe Rogan making pro Biden commentary I find it puzzling why it too ought be headlined.

Is this pretty much the end of Andrew Yang’s foray into electoral politics?

Things that make no real sense. Senator John Barrasso’s goal of Biden being a “half term predident”, itself can only be accomplished with some Impeachment that, we assume after great Republican gains in these midterms as this is what the man is hyping, will require either a great Democratic Party turning of him or an unprecedented electoral drilling by the Republicans.

But, alrighty then. Next we move to this claim.

“Joe Biden will never veto a bill,” he said. “He will go down in history as a president who has never vetoed a bill, because he will sign whatever Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi put on his desk.”

George W Bush vetoed nothing through his first term, and only one bill until the Democratic Congressional takeover 2007. So we have the basic question of “and – so?”. But the only way he can go down in history as not vetoing anything ever after this Republican takeover is with a wholly unproductive or ideologically acceptable to the “Great Beacon of Socialism Biden” Republican Congress. Or, I suppose, a true to his word and very precise promises kept definition of “half term” that kicks him out during that short period where the new Congress begins but the anniversary of Biden’s inauguration has yet to come.

At least in theory your problem with a thing like Citizens United is ideological, not partisan. If Big Money is siding with Democrats over Republicans it doesn’t much matter — as it holds the keys of leverage for policy goal, skews policy outcomes at the expense of… er… “Little Money”.

Squabbling over the “Religious Exemption Menace”, I do have to point out — well, this is why ” The Religious Right” and onto I guess not necessarily “Right” but Religious voted for that guy Trump. All very transactional, even though the great media focus moves over to an analysis on how the qanon Trump believers steps out of Protestant belief system. But now with a Republican president who was the first president to come into office in support of gay marriage, and them the last holdouts in that regard, at least their charities — entangled as everything is to public coffers — won’t have to put orphans in with two dudes or two chicks — and at least their bakeries — entangled though they may be as everything is in publically licensed space — won’t have to place two grooms or two brides atop their wedding cakes.

An element of Swiss cheese is the offing. All major transnational corporations wave the Rainbow flag through June, and pummel it in national media. But a booming business continues with a small-town bakery that is the monopoly in that town. When I was living for a handful of months in small twn Eastern Washington a few years’ back, I mused over this dichotomy: an outrage by national liberal pundits over “crisis pregnancy centers” and a characterization of them as dishonest fronts — and constant andonyne advertisements for a couple that suggested something other than evil. Currently the big story round them parts is a city council decision to wave the Rainbow flag — the line of argument is a reasonable one (if only I thought these opponents did practice a baseline “Tolerance” here) of “Right there with the American flag?”. The local tv newscaster turned conservative talk radio host — using a frame of “choice” for “sexual lifestyle”) brings out the ” Would you want to see the coiled snake flag wave?” It does strike me that the local tv newscaster turned conservative radio host would get some agreement the more radical faction within the LGBT etc community (who are apt to alter the letter formation to focus on their identities) perceiving everyone everywhere as co-op ting and “quest washing”, but this strikes me as something from a point of privilege — how can you argue such in a conservative community whose government is waving that damned flag?

Headlines of the day see Justice Breyer — Retire — Now. Yeah, well — shoulda gotten to Ginsburg, shouldn’t you have? Actually, per that National Review article slightly scratching their head on the idea of a single 18 year term for Supreme Court justices — which is my personal ideal as opposed to all the other progressive “reforms” — the nakedly unseamlines of the calls in conflict with the accuracy of the logic really is the reason for the single 18 year term idea. (To be sure, it pales in unseamliness to confirming a justice fifteen minutes after Ginsberg’s death, and after denying the final Obama year confirmation of Garland.)