Investigate the Natural Gas fields off the coast of Gaza and to the north.. then look at the leases granted by Israel AFTER the attack on Oct 7th… “Follow the money…” (R. Limbaugh)..

Add this to the pile of evidence that odummy is biden’s puppet master.

Echo, echo, echo . . . Chamber.

You guys need to get out and read some non-mainstream content.

Yeah.

Basically, many people came out of the universities crazy, and hating both peace and civilization. The ‘cultural relativism’ notion of the anthropologists supports the notion of alien societies having ‘ways of knowing’, but it also implies that mainstream American culture (which American academic culture diverges from) can have valid ‘ways of knowing’ when it comes to evaluating or reformulating the ideas of the academic world. A number of the results of critical theory are arguably equivalent to hating peace, and hating civilization.

There’s a conflict within academic theory between the critical theory approach, and the applied mathematics approach. A mathematician might conclude that critical theory is disproven by contradiction. The critical theorists have absolutely concluded that they need to classify mathematics as one of the evil magics that were worked by ancient super conspiracies, that they alone can work the counter magics to. If valid, the mathematical tool of logic would allow ordinary people to study claims by critical theory scholars, and evaluate implications.

Certain ‘scholarly’ notions of power and of oppression have implications. (‘Dawn of Everything’ apparently contains a set of claims about the ‘evil’ magics allegedly worked by the ancient super conspiracies.) It is actually questionable whether power, and oppression exist as absolute things; I tend to see elements where state of mind is a useful tool. The magics of the ancient super conspiracy are invoked as the explanation for why ordinary people can have no choice but to be ‘oppressed’ by those with ‘power’, and yet the critical theory scholars have enough magical power in words and symbols to overthrow that ‘power’ and ‘oppression’. They have a strict top down view, deny any possibility of bottom up agreements, and insist that we over generations inherit a definite division of power that rests upon ancient magics.

One error is the assumption of peace default, instead of war default. If war is default, then peace can ultimately be summation of bottom up individual agreements of reciprocating lack of harm for lack of harm. Then peace can either be bottom up, or it can be top down, using a central army to deter various factions from seeking resolution by violence. Their view is that wars are always caused by something other than agreement breakdown, or one or more sides failing to deliver lack of harm, and that the use of that central army is always unfair.

One of their central and long standing claims is that criminal behavior is caused by ‘societal oppression’, and that criminals are never simply bad people who are unwilling to live by delivering on their side of mutual individual to individual bottom up peace agreement. ‘stealing bread to feed a starving family’, etc. They fundamentally deny that some people just like hurting others enough that those specific people live for causing suffering, and at the same time insist that everyone who is not them is complicit in ‘oppression’. This model is not self contradicting if people are basically good, but wholly controlled by outside magics. It does however deny variation of behavior that can be verified by direction observation. This element of communist theory has always enabled particularly evil vicious people in going around to hurt others, and is probably motivated for the sake of enabling and justifying evil.

Law, peace, disputes between parties, are perhaps the same, and related to the human behavior of personal choices about wrongs done, and about what means of recourse are best.

This is some of the thinking and observation that leads to the conclusion that certain academics think that peace is an evil magic, and think that civilization is an evil magic.

Imperialism, colonialism, etc. are related feelings, and likewise playing a lot of tricks. ‘Indigenous’ are naturally at peace, and somehow have a property right to a chunk of land, despite no one else ever having any right to land property. Reality is that land property is downstream of law, and law is dispute resolution downstream of peace, and some of these appeals are simply silly if you can never actually demonstrate a people or a society living at peace with neighbors. Furthermore, ‘indigenous’ prioritizes claims dating to the distant past over the here and now of ‘actually, can anyone here involved live in peace?’ The nature of generational ancestry mostly means that the more generations back you go, the weaker your argument is for ‘imperialism’ on the grounds that population A and population B are entirely distinct, and have completely different levels of claim to the same chunk of land.

The academics have thought this stuff strongly for decades, and the emotional conviction shows up in their other claims. They are crazy.

Them showing the crazy about Israel and ‘porkloin’? A bit sad, but not a surprise.

As for the leadership of Hamas, Iran, and the ‘American’ Democrat party, they are men of lawlessness. (Probably small m and small l, like Hitler, who was a man of lawlessness. The coming of The Man of Lawlessness will probably be like a thief in the night.) They are evil men, who hate peace, and love lawlessness. Their advice on love, justice, and on pragmatic planning for the future is malicious. It is proper to ignore their advice, and evade their direction.

Some elements of American bureaucracy are simply blind, and by rote going through the motions that they understand to have been previously productive.

Evil men will attempt to work evil. Good men will seek to work good. Where they are in conflict, we shall be able to observe the outcomes of those conflicts.