Connect with us

Conservatism

Ben Shapiro on a divided America

Published

on

Ben Shapiro on a divided America

The extreme polarization that has taken over political discourse in our nation is clear and palatable. Notions of bipartisanship in DC or common courtesy at events have been tossed aside, replaced by vitriol so putrid, only the bravest gluttons venture forth into “enemy” territory while most stay isolated in their ideological echo chambers reaffirming their biases and remaining blind to any hint of fault in their chosen leaders.

This is a new phenomenon, at least for the modern era. It wasn’t too long ago when there were certain areas of disagreement, but even in those disagreements we could find common ground. Those days seem to be behind us.

In his new book, “”The Right Side of History: How Reason and Moral Purpose Made the West Great,” DailyWire editor-in-chief Ben Shapiro explores much of what has caused this divide. In a nation where radical progressivism has replaced common sense Democratic notions, it’s understandable how this divide has been so easily maintained with the current and previous Presidents. Shapiro points to the statistics surrounding this divide in his book:

“We’re more divided than at any time in the recent past. In July 2017, Pew Research found that 68 percent of Democrats said it was “stressful and frustrating” to talk to political opponents; 52 percent of Republicans agreed.”

You can get a copy of the book on Amazon, where it just hit #1 on the bestseller list.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Advertisement

0

Conservatism

The Suicide Squad wins the Twitter war but loses anywhere else

Published

on

The Suicide Squad wins the Twitter war but loses anywhere else

We can argue about whether Trump’s tweets were strategic or narcissistic. The result is the same: Trump provoked four Congresswomen into revealing their hatred for America. In doing so they took to Twitter to declare that President Trump is a racist. The Suicide Squad and their legions trended anti-Trump hashtags on Twitter for days. On the surface it appears that it was a bad weekend for Trump.

On the Twittersphere, Trump’s week is off to a bad start. The Suicide Squad has won the Twitter front, yet lost everywhere else. When CNN asked Republican women about the issue, they vehemently defended Trump’s statements. Earlier this week, they held a longwinded press conference that amounted to nothing more than a long campaign commercial for Trump 2020.

Echo Chambers

The media continuously overestimates American involvement on Twitter because the media is on Twitter and Twitter is where the news happens because the media is on Twitter. If that sounds circular, it’s because that’s how the media works. Polls show that Americans do not care about the Mueller Report, yet Twitter would have you think otherwise. The media wants you to believe that Twitter is an organic social platform, and popular stories, hashtags, conversation are the result of the merit of the stories. But Jack Dorsey is not neutral, saying so himself. Twitter Moments is the hand selected stories by Twitter for its users and the “For You” section of trends is certainly manipulated. So how significant is Twitter, really? Not that much. Let’s consider the words of MarketWatch’s Brett Arends:

According to the company’s own public filings, only about 20% of the U.S. population even uses Twitter. And less than half of those go on it regularly.

And as everyone knows, only a tiny percentage of those dominate the “conversation.”

To listen to Twitter two years ago, after the far-right demonstration in Charlottesville, you’d think everyone wanted Confederate statues knocked down. Actually, there wasn’t even strong support for that among African-Americans. A few months ago, you’d have assumed absolutely everyone wanted Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam to resign over the “black face” affair: Actually, even most black Virginians didn’t. Today you’d think everyone calls illegal immigrants “undocumented workers,” and wants them to have free, universal health care. Really?

So while most Americans are uninformed as to what Trump actually said, not having a Twitter account, the media will spin a poll by USA Today/ Ipsos to show that majority of Americans think that Trump’s tweets were racist. Here are their findings in their own words:

Trump’s controversial tweets open a wider discussion about racism versus patriotism. Two-thirds (65%) agree that telling minority Americans to “go back to where they came from” is racist. However, there is a 40-percentage point difference between Democrats and Republicans on this (85% of Democrats agree vs. 45% of Republicans). Similarly, the vast majority of Republicans (70%) believe that people who call others “racist” usually do so in bad faith, whereas just 31% of Democrats believe the same

Americans come together on the idea that it is patriotic to point out where America falls short and try to do better. Almost three-quarters agree (72%), with majority support even across party lines (80% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans).

Generically, telling someone to “go back” to their own country is likely racist, but applying these results to Trump’s tweets is devoid of context rendering the poll meaningless. Ilhan Omar is fundamentally anti-American and Trump questioning why she bothers staying is completely not racist within context. A poll asking generic questions with an assumed premise as to what Trump’s tweet was is misleading, and quite frankly, the results are underwhelming for the Socialist narrative even with overwhelming bias in the poll. The New York Post in carrying this false assumption about the poll said noted these findings:

But 70 percent of respondents say “people who usually call others ‘racist’ usually do so in bad faith,” while 31 percent of Democrats say so.

Going back to the CNN video we see women asked with the context known or presented whether they think that what Trump said was racist and they pushed back on the assumption of racism. The most powerful part of that video was the CNN lady defining racism assuming Trump’s words even remotely came close to surpassing the definition she read. She got wrecked.

Final Thoughts

The Trump campaign and, in the far bigger picture, the Conservative movement will undoubtedly win this issue in the real world. The challenge is communicating the context. Conservatives should continue fighting their ideas on Twitter, but our main focus should be on other platforms, including and especially the real world. As long as the Socialists think they are winning in their own echo chambers, they will continue losing in the real world.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

False narratives: TIME claims the GOP wants a ‘white republic’

Published

on

False narratives TIME claims the GOP wants a white republic

This will be the first time I’ve written an article in response to another without reading it in its entirety. I’m not a fan of reacting to anything without knowing all that was said; this is why I don’t engage as much as I should on social media. Too often the responses are based on a snippet description and the title of a link. What ever happened to reading a story that someone posts before telling them how wrong they are?

In this very rare (like I said, I think it’s the first one for me) situation in which I didn’t read the whole article, it wasn’t because it was too long. I’ve been known to read 5,000-word articles to know how to properly respond to a Tweet about it, so this relatively short article in TIME was not too daunting. But around halfway through, I realized I could probably finish the article in my mind. The story was a tired one; voter suppression, gerrymandering, racism, bigotry, Trump bad, GOP bad, GOP racist, Trump bigot… you’ve probably read similar stories from the opposition. But those stories are usually found on leftist news outlets like Vox or Buzzfeed. This is TIME. This is supposed to be the mainstream.

And the mainstream wants you to believe there’s no room for minorities in the party of old white men.

As Thomas Sowell once noted, “A higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It was Republicans whose ‘Philadelphia Plan’ in the 1970s sought to break the construction unions’ racial barriers that kept blacks out of skilled trades.”

I am a minority. I am a legal immigrant. I am very familiar with the history of racism in both political parties, though the left likes to pretend slavery, the KKK, and opposition to the Civil Rights Movement aren’t part of the Democratic Party’s DNA. I am also acutely familiar with which party’s policies work against minorities as well as the downtrodden. One needs only look at the disastrous results of decades of Democrats controlling broken cities like San Francisco, Seattle, and Detroit to realize the Democrats protect the elite and let the poor suffer in their own quiet little corners of the city.

On the flip side, we see minority unemployment rates hit record lows for minorities under Republican policies. This isn’t just luck of the draw. It isn’t an oppressed people rising up to prove their Republican masters wrong. This is a matter of good policies empowering minorities and all Americans to do more. But the philanthropic aspect of capitalism and fiscal conservatism are also in play, which is the biggest weakness of progressive Democrats. Charities can and should bear the burden of helping those whose families and communities cannot. Government should be the last line of defense helping people from falling through the cracks. But under progressives, government is the dominant driving force to help people in need. This is why so many in need aren’t getting the help they require.

If all this is true, then one might wonder how the Democratic Party has been able to maintain a false narrative for so long. Why is the GOP predominantly Caucasian? To understand this, we have to go back to the two primary sources of information for Americans: media and education. Both mainstream media and collegiate-level education are industries absolutely dominated by progressives. This is not a rumor or something based on anecdote. It’s demonstrable that this is true. As a result, younger Americans are educated with a bias in favor of Democrats and older Americans have this bias reinforced by mainstream media. It’s indoctrination followed by constant doses of propaganda that make minorities believe the GOP is bad for them and the Democrats are good for them.

History shows the Democrats work against minorities. Current statistics show Democratic policies keep minorities down by design. Logic shows the narrative is clearly driven by progressives up and down the educational and informational streams. This is why one of the most important fights we have with the rising American Conservative Movement is countering these false narratives so more minorities will realize they’ve been conservatives all along.

The GOP doesn’t want a “white republic.” We want to cut through the aggressive lies of the left to help minorities see the truth that conservative governance is what benefits them the most. Articles like TIME’s suppress this truth.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conservatism

18th century firearm technology, 21st century lies

Published

on

By

18th century firearm technology 21st century lies

Repeating and semiautomatic firearms existed long before the recent phenomena of school shootings

One of the Liberty Grabber Left’s favorite lies is to claim that repeating or semiautomatic firearms are the cause of mass murder tragedies because they only recently came into existence. Hence the line ‘21st Century laws for 21st Century weapons’ line of Bovine excreta parroted by the Marx for our lives Astroturf effort.

This is a continuation of our ‘Conversation’ on guns in honor of Gun Pride Month and AR-15 Appreciation Week. In the usual circumstances, this ‘conversation’ consists of accusations of collective guilt of more than 120 million innocent gun owners with a lecture that we should be glad to give up more of our Liberty. All of this is predicated on outright lies such as that previously referenced.

The problem for gun confiscation brigades is that – as is typical – this often repeated lie fails to match up with reality. We’ve already proven that there were many ‘assault weapons’ technologies that existed long before the 21st Century and Long before the writing of the US Constitution.

Firearm technologies didn’t start in the 21st Century.

Perhaps Leftists fail to realize that weapons technology has always been on the cutting edge [pardon the pun]. They also fail to realize that small arms are usually mass-produced, very durable and extremely valuable antiques. This means that many examples of these weapons in reside in museum and other collections with patent numbers and other indicia that prove their lineage.

This means that there are many examples of these Pre-Constitutional Assault weapons as well as patents and other forms of documentation that eviscerated the ‘They only had single shot muskets at the time of the Constitution’ lie from the Liberty Grabber Left. The fact that many of these technologies existed long before the time of the founding fathers destroys that mythology.

The ‘Cambrian explosion’ in assault weapons technology of the 19th Century.

The development of self-contained cartridge ammunition changed the world with the assault weapons of the 1800s. Cartridge ammunition combined the essential elements of propellant, projectile and primer [ignition] into one unit, that could be easily loaded into the breech of a gun. From that point on, it was just a matter of working a lever or bolt to load and fire a cartridge. Thus it was this point in time mid 19th Century that someone could quickly load and fire a number of rounds.

This innovation also vastly improved the revolver, repeating firearm technology that had already been around for centuries, resulting in the famed ‘six-shooter’ seen in every western. Easily loaded and carried, a couple of these guns could have made for a deadly mass shooting during the early 1800’s.

The fact is these early ‘Assault Weapons’ were around 170 years ago and over a century before the school shooting phenomena. Proving the point that these mass murder tragedies were not caused by the presence of repeating firearms.

The 19th Century development of semi-automatic technologies.

Later on in the same century, it was discovered that the excess chemical energy from the combustion of the propellant in a cartridge could be used to unlock the bolt, eject a spent casing and load a fresh round. This semi-automatic process made it far easier to use a firearm, with the working skills built into the weapon. This is why these are in common use, and wildly popular with the more than 120 million gun owners in the country. It is also the reason these very reliable and easy to use firearms are the prime target of the Liberty Grabbers.

The Borchardt C-93 was the first commercially viable semi-automatic firearm produced in 1893. For those counting up the Leftist Lies, this still wasn’t the 21st Century. Please take note that these are the types of weapons used in school shootings and were on the scene 70 years before these became a phenomena. Not to belabor the point, but this also proves that guns aren’t a factor in recent occurrence of these tragic events.

Other weapons and mechanism were developed at this time to the point that the technology was relatively mature at the turn of the Century [This would be the 20th Century – still not the 21st Century]. To the point that any miscreant of recent times could have replicated one of their crimes over 100 years ago – but did not.

The steep rise in school shooting in the 1980’s and 1990’s

Dennis Prager recently discussed this issue in a “Fireside chat” and a column: Why So Many Mass Shootings? Ask The Right Questions And You Might Find Out.

America had plenty of guns when its mass murder rate was much lower. Grant Duwe, a Ph.D. in criminology and director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, gathered data going back 100 years in his 2007 book, “Mass Murder in the United States: A History.”

In the 20th century, every decade before the 1970s had fewer than 10 mass public shootings. In the 1950s, for example, there was one mass shooting. And then a steep rise began. In the 1960s, there were six mass shootings. In the 1970s, the number rose to 13. In the 1980s, the number increased 2 1/2 times, to 32. And it rose again in the 1990s, to 42. As for this century, The New York Times reported in 2014 that, according to the FBI, “Mass shootings have risen drastically in the past half-dozen years.”

[Emphasis added]

Link to the book: Mass Murder in the United States: A History by Grant Duwe

The Takeaway

Repeating and semiautomatic firearms have been around for Centuries, mass shootings are only a recent phenomena of the past 40 years. A phenomena that has been on the decrease as of late: Schools are safer than they were in the 90s, and school shootings are not more common than they used to be.

Guns aren’t the problem, they have been around for over 500 years. If they were the problem, why didn’t these take place 300, 200, or 100 years ago? It wasn’t the sudden appearance of guns at the onset of these tragedies soon after the sixties, then what was it? In his column, Dennis Prager had some thoughts. We will explore that issue in a later column.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending