Connect with us

Culture and Religion

English Conservative MEP: Hitler was a socialist

Published

on

Daniel Hannan proves that Economic Liberty is vastly superior to collectivist slavery.

Howbeit, this video is from a few years ago, however, it does address some key points that are incessantly regurgitated by the National Socialist Media. Such as the reactions to Republican Representatives Mo Brooks of Alabama and Louie Gohmert of Texas having the audacity to refer to a National Socialist Worker’s Party as a National Socialist Worker’s party while quoting the political manifesto one of the world’s most infamous socialists of all time: Adolf Hitler

The speaker is of course English MP (Member of Parliament) Daniel Hannan who goes on to present the larger point that society based on economic Liberty is vastly superior to one based on coercion and collectivism.

Destroying the ‘Rivalry’ talking point.

Soon after beginning to present the facts of the matter, someone arises to challenger him on his assertion with the ‘Rivalry’ talking point – whereby conflict between various groups of collectivists is presented as evidence that one isn’t a collectivist. This is one of the most common forms of trying to deny that a National Socialist Worker’s party of was a National Socialist Worker’s party.

The flaw in that kind of argument is that it assumes that rivals for power have to be of different ideologies, which doesn’t have to be the case. Consider the rivalries between the various candidates running for the presidency in 2020. Does the fact that they are competing with each other magically turn one or both to being non-socialist?

Reference the rivalry between the Old USSR and communist China or communist China with communist Vietnam or communist Vietnam with communist Cambodia. Do these rivalries magically convert on or both into being non-socialist? Alternatively there is the rivalry between different factions of Islam, do these rivalries magically convert one or both into being non-Muslim?

In the case of the particular National Socialist Worker’s party in question, at one point they co-operated with another group of socialists – the USSR. Did they magically change ideologies during this time period?

Authoritarian collectivists are hostile to the true Liberal Right.

As reported in Independent Journal Review several years ago, Mr Hannan prefaced his remarks on the organised evil that is socialism by pointing out an obvious historic fact: That Adolf Hitler was a socialist.

As Hannan points out, while socialists and fascists, two different kinds of authoritarian collectivists, fought one another for power, both groups were hostile to the classically liberal true “right” – which stands for individual freedom.

Later on in the video [5:30], a questioner asks: “How is it freedom to not have your daily bread, to not go to a reasonable school, to not have any opportunities to develop yourself as a young person…?”

Mr. Hannan replied, “Let’s leave aside whether or not one means positive freedom or negative freedom. If you want those opportunities, if you want decent schools, if you want a rise in living standards, would you go to North Korea or South Korea?” Much of the audience applauded in approval.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 



 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Advertisement

0

Culture and Religion

Chanting ‘send her back’ is playing into Ilhan Omar’s hands

Published

on

Chanting send her back is playing into Ilhan Omars hands

Many Democrats believe Republicans are generally racist. Even those who don’t like to insert racism as a stereotype would probably acknowledge they believe a higher percentage of Republicans are racist than Democrats. Independents likely think the same thing. Heck, even some Republicans may believe it.

The reality is racism has nothing to do with political party and everything to do with personal ideology. But that reality is muted by the thunderous chants of “send her back” as heard tonight at President Trump’s rally in Greenville, NC. This makes the party seem racist, and there are plenty of people who might otherwise associate with or vote for Republicans but won’t because of the racist perception.

There’s a big difference between “send her back” and the President’s Tweet that included the words, “Why don’t they go back and help fix..” The President improperly expressed his frustration towards “The Squad.” The chant at his rally is racist.

Ilhan Omar is a United States citizen. She may have challenges, as evidence seems to indicate, and may very well be in real trouble if more is revealed about her second marriage if it turns out she committed fraud. But until that is proven in a court of law, she is a United States citizen. We do not send back United States citizens without legal cause. As of now, there is none. This is why the chant is far more damaging to the President’s reelection hopes than anything he Tweeted himself.

Challenge Ilhan Omar over her terrible policy proposals. Chide her for her anti-American and anti-Semitic positions. Call her out for her lies. But do NOT turn this into a race issue. That’s exactly what she wants. Her victim card is big and she’s not afraid to use it.

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

Conspiracy Theory

Evidence that Ilhan Omar married her brother

Published

on

Evidence that Ilhan Omar married her brother

The story from Ilhan Omar’s camp is that any insinuation that she married her brother to help him become an American citizen should be relegated to fake news and right-wing bloggers. But as we detailed last month, even the newspaper that endorsed her is starting to ask questions.

Mainstream media will start picking up on the story more, though it’s unlikely any of them will reveal the information they find unless it’s conclusive. When dealing with conservatives, mainstream media tends to run with any accusation regardless of credibility as long as a scandal is involved. When the subject is a progressive, media outlets only reveal the truth when they’re absolutely sure there’s no way around it and the cat is already being let out of the bag. Otherwise, they sit on it.

But as the President calls attention to it, the media will have to at least check on it. Most will still dismiss it as a right-wing conspiracy theory, but those willing to do their jobs properly will find the evidence is at least worthy of further investigation. Even in bits and pieces, it’s very damaging. A new video by Alpha News MN details an opening round of evidence that should be worth a watch. There is more to come next week.

It seems it isn’t a matter of “if” but “when” Ilhan Omar’s history catches up to her in the public eye. In that scenario, how will the “Squad” member react? She’s thought about it. Others likely have as well. Will she ever tell the 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