Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

𝘔𝘺 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘪𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘴. 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘥 𝘢 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘺 𝘰𝘸𝘯, 𝘐 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦, 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥. 𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯'𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘪𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘪𝘵. 𝘐'𝘷𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘺 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘪𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦. 𝘐'𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘨𝘶𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳.... show more

Prog Rock Songs

66,262 subscribers

19,948 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

🚨📸| 𝐁𝐫𝐲𝐚𝐧 𝐌𝐛𝐞𝐮𝐦𝐨 𝐕𝐢𝐚 𝐈𝐆 "6 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘧𝘦𝘭𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 6 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘴.⁣ ⁣ 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘰𝘧𝘧 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘦𝘦𝘴 𝘗𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘦𝘵. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘐 𝘨𝘰, 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶.⁣ ⁣ 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘢𝘳𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘛𝘩𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘴 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘢 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘧𝘧 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘺 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸, 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘦, 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘦, 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘺𝘰𝘶, 𝘍𝘢𝘯𝘴, 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘯𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘈𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭 𝘩𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘢𝘺, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.⁣ ⁣ 𝘐𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘫𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘺 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘴𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘦, 𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭. 𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘮𝘺 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘵. 🤍⁣ ⁣ 𝘞𝘦’𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘦𝘦𝘵 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴."⁣ ⁣ 𝖢𝗁𝖾𝖾𝗋𝗌⁣ ⁣ 𝖡𝗋𝗒𝖺𝗇.

🚨📸| 𝐁𝐫𝐲𝐚𝐧 𝐌𝐛𝐞𝐮𝐦𝐨 𝐕𝐢𝐚 𝐈𝐆 "6 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘧𝘦𝘭𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 6 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘴.⁣ ⁣ 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘰𝘧𝘧 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘦𝘦𝘴 𝘗𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘦𝘵. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘐 𝘨𝘰, 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶.⁣ ⁣ 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘢𝘳𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘛𝘩𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘴 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘢 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘧𝘧 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘺 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘸, 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘦, 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘦, 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘺𝘰𝘶, 𝘍𝘢𝘯𝘴, 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘯𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘨𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘈𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭 𝘩𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘢𝘺, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.⁣ ⁣ 𝘐𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘫𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘺 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘴𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘦, 𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭. 𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘮𝘺 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘵. 🤍⁣ ⁣ 𝘞𝘦’𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘦𝘦𝘵 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘪𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴."⁣ ⁣ 𝖢𝗁𝖾𝖾𝗋𝗌⁣ ⁣ 𝖡𝗋𝗒𝖺𝗇.

Fan 珍宝

92,098 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

"𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘑𝘗 𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘯𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘑𝘢𝘮𝘮𝘶 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘒𝘢𝘴𝘩𝘮𝘪𝘳. 𝘞𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘑𝘗 𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 𝘞𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘥𝘰 𝘪𝘵 𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘴𝘵, 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘑&𝘒. 𝘓𝘦𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘋𝘗 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘪𝘯 2015. 𝘖𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥. 𝘞𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘯'𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘗𝘚𝘜𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘶𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘎𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘑&𝘒 𝘙𝘦𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘈𝘤𝘵. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘨𝘨𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦. 𝘖𝘯𝘦 𝘉𝘑𝘗 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘶𝘴 𝘢𝘴 "𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦" 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦'𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 "𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦" 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘜𝘛. 𝘚𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘳𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘞𝘢𝘬𝘢𝘧 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘞𝘢𝘬𝘧 𝘈𝘤𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘔𝘰𝘚 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘦𝘧 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴. 𝘐 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘭 𝘵𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘑&𝘒", 𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘦𝘧 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘖𝘮𝘢𝘳 𝘈𝘣𝘥𝘶𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘩 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘌𝘱𝘪𝘴𝘰𝘥𝘦-39 𝘰𝘧 "𝘒𝘢𝘴𝘩𝘮𝘪𝘳 𝘗𝘰𝘥𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘞𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘈𝘩𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘈𝘭𝘪 𝘍𝘢𝘺𝘺𝘢𝘻". 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘛𝘈𝘓𝘒𝘐𝘚𝘛𝘈𝘕 𝘰𝘯 𝘚𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘺.

"𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘑𝘗 𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘯𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘑𝘢𝘮𝘮𝘶 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘒𝘢𝘴𝘩𝘮𝘪𝘳. 𝘞𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘑𝘗 𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 𝘞𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘥𝘰 𝘪𝘵 𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘴𝘵, 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘑&𝘒. 𝘓𝘦𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘋𝘗 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘪𝘯 2015. 𝘖𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥. 𝘞𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘯'𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘗𝘚𝘜𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘶𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘎𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘑&𝘒 𝘙𝘦𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘈𝘤𝘵. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘨𝘨𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦. 𝘖𝘯𝘦 𝘉𝘑𝘗 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘶𝘴 𝘢𝘴 "𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦" 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦'𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 "𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦" 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘜𝘛. 𝘚𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘳𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘞𝘢𝘬𝘢𝘧 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘞𝘢𝘬𝘧 𝘈𝘤𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘔𝘰𝘚 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘦𝘧 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴. 𝘐 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘭 𝘵𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘑&𝘒", 𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘦𝘧 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘖𝘮𝘢𝘳 𝘈𝘣𝘥𝘶𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘩 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘌𝘱𝘪𝘴𝘰𝘥𝘦-39 𝘰𝘧 "𝘒𝘢𝘴𝘩𝘮𝘪𝘳 𝘗𝘰𝘥𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘞𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘈𝘩𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘈𝘭𝘪 𝘍𝘢𝘺𝘺𝘢𝘻". 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘛𝘈𝘓𝘒𝘐𝘚𝘛𝘈𝘕 𝘰𝘯 𝘚𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘥𝘢𝘺.

Ahmed Ali Fayyaz

13,493 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

𝐁𝐋𝐔𝐄-𝐇𝐀𝐈𝐑𝐄𝐃 𝐍𝐘𝐂 𝐆𝐔𝐘 𝐆𝐎𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐎 𝐍𝐎 𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆𝐒 𝐑𝐀𝐋𝐋𝐘, 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐋𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐑𝐄 𝐌𝐎𝐕𝐄𝐌𝐄𝐍𝐓, 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐃𝐄𝐂𝐋𝐀𝐑𝐄𝐒: “𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐍𝐒𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐈𝐒 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐏𝐋𝐄𝐓𝐄” This guy lives in Chelsea — one of the most liberal neighborhoods in Manhattan. He has blue hair. Everyone in his building kept asking him if he went to the No Kings rally. He politely said no. Then he turned on his camera and said what he really thinks. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘺𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘺. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵. He went further: 𝘐 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘪𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘯. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘱𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦. 𝘐 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳 — 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦. On the rally itself: 𝘐𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘐 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘺 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦. Everyone in his neighborhood treated it like a social event — the cool thing to do in Chelsea. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘐 𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘐’𝘮 𝘢 𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘬. Then the line that says everything about where this country is heading: 𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘮𝘰𝘣𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵-𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘤𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘥. 𝘐 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦, 𝘐 𝘥𝘰. And then: 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘦. He acknowledged what he supports Trump on: 𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘧 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺, 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐’𝘮 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘦. 𝘐 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘔𝘪𝘥𝘥𝘭𝘦 𝘌𝘢𝘴𝘵. His closing message to his blue-haired peers: 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵. And to conservatives watching: 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦. 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘭𝘶𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘳. 𝘎𝘦𝘵 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵. 𝘚𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘰𝘵𝘺𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦. Then Batya Ungar-Sargon weighed in with the analytical kill shot: 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦. 𝘖𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘭𝘺. 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘺 𝘴𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘋𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘥 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘸𝘰𝘯. She pointed out the obvious: 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘸𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘱𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦. 𝘏𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘯 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘏𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘯𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥. 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺. And then the best observation of all: 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 — 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘢 “𝘯𝘰 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴” 𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺 𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 — 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯’𝘴 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘢𝘤𝘩. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘪𝘵, 𝘎𝘰𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘥, 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘴𝘢𝘺. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵. 𝐀 𝐛𝐥𝐮𝐞-𝐡𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐠𝐮𝐲 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐂𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐬𝐞𝐚 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐂𝐍𝐍 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐫𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝.

𝐁𝐋𝐔𝐄-𝐇𝐀𝐈𝐑𝐄𝐃 𝐍𝐘𝐂 𝐆𝐔𝐘 𝐆𝐎𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐎 𝐍𝐎 𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆𝐒 𝐑𝐀𝐋𝐋𝐘, 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐋𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐑𝐄 𝐌𝐎𝐕𝐄𝐌𝐄𝐍𝐓, 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐃𝐄𝐂𝐋𝐀𝐑𝐄𝐒: “𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐍𝐒𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐈𝐒 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐏𝐋𝐄𝐓𝐄” This guy lives in Chelsea — one of the most liberal neighborhoods in Manhattan. He has blue hair. Everyone in his building kept asking him if he went to the No Kings rally. He politely said no. Then he turned on his camera and said what he really thinks. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘺𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘺. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵. He went further: 𝘐 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘪𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘯. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘱𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦. 𝘐 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳 — 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦. On the rally itself: 𝘐𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘐 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘺 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦. Everyone in his neighborhood treated it like a social event — the cool thing to do in Chelsea. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘐 𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘐’𝘮 𝘢 𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘬. Then the line that says everything about where this country is heading: 𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘮𝘰𝘣𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵-𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘤𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘥. 𝘐 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦, 𝘐 𝘥𝘰. And then: 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘦. He acknowledged what he supports Trump on: 𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘧 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺, 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐’𝘮 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘦. 𝘐 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘔𝘪𝘥𝘥𝘭𝘦 𝘌𝘢𝘴𝘵. His closing message to his blue-haired peers: 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵. And to conservatives watching: 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦. 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘭𝘶𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘳. 𝘎𝘦𝘵 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵. 𝘚𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘰𝘵𝘺𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦. Then Batya Ungar-Sargon weighed in with the analytical kill shot: 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦. 𝘖𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘭𝘺. 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘺 𝘴𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘋𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘥 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘸𝘰𝘯. She pointed out the obvious: 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘸𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘱𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦. 𝘏𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘯 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘏𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘯𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥. 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺. And then the best observation of all: 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 — 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘢 “𝘯𝘰 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴” 𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘺 𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 — 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯’𝘴 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘢𝘤𝘩. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘪𝘵, 𝘎𝘰𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘥, 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘴𝘢𝘺. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵. 𝐀 𝐛𝐥𝐮𝐞-𝐡𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐠𝐮𝐲 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐂𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐬𝐞𝐚 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐂𝐍𝐍 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐫𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝.

M.A. Rothman

187,656 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Setiap awal pasti akan menemukan akhirnya. Begitu juga perjalanan ini yang telah sampai di penghujung Chapter. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘺 𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 Catherina Vallencia — 𝘢 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘫𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘺 𝘐’𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧, 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳, 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘥 𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘴. ✨ 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘣𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥. 𝘐 𝘩𝘰𝘱𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘺—𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘮𝘦, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘫𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘺. 🫶 Sampai Jumpa 👋 cc: Cavallery #Memory🕯️

Setiap awal pasti akan menemukan akhirnya. Begitu juga perjalanan ini yang telah sampai di penghujung Chapter. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘺 𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 Catherina Vallencia — 𝘢 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘫𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘺 𝘐’𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧, 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳, 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘥 𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘴. ✨ 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘬𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘣𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥. 𝘐 𝘩𝘰𝘱𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘺—𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘮𝘦, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘫𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘺. 🫶 Sampai Jumpa 👋 cc: Cavallery #Memory🕯️

Point of You

18,824 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

𝐀 𝐁𝐋𝐀𝐂𝐊 𝐌𝐀𝐍 𝐃𝐄𝐒𝐂𝐄𝐍𝐃𝐄𝐃 𝐅𝐑𝐎𝐌 𝐒𝐋𝐀𝐕𝐄𝐒 𝐉𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐓𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐅𝐈𝐄𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐇𝐄 𝐈𝐒 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐎𝐏𝐏𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐒𝐄𝐃, 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐀 𝐕𝐈𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐌, 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐑𝐀𝐂𝐈𝐒𝐌 𝐈𝐍 𝐀𝐌𝐄𝐑𝐈𝐂𝐀 𝐖𝐎𝐔𝐋𝐃 𝐁𝐄 𝐃𝐄𝐀𝐃 𝐓𝐎𝐃𝐀𝐘 𝐈𝐅 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐈𝐍𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐓𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐒 𝐊𝐄𝐄𝐏𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐈𝐓 𝐎𝐍 𝐋𝐈𝐅𝐄 𝐒𝐔𝐏𝐏𝐎𝐑𝐓. A black American testifying at a school-board meeting against critical race theory just delivered 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐫𝐞 𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐲 heard at any public meeting in 2026. He earned a standing ovation. “𝘔𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘣𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬. 𝘈𝘭𝘭 𝘦𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵-𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘴. 𝘖𝘯 𝘮𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳’𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦, 𝘮𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘈𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘢𝘮𝘢. 𝘖𝘯 𝘮𝘺 𝘧𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳’𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦, 𝘪𝘯 𝘛𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘴. 𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘥. 𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮. 𝘐 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘭 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺, 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘤𝘬 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘴, 𝘧𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺, 𝘨𝘰 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘭, 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴. 𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘥𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵, 𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘴𝘵.” “𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳, 𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘴. 𝘐’𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘮𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴: 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘭𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘱𝘰𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯-𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘭. 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢. 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘯 190-𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳-𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘧𝘭𝘰𝘢𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳.” “𝘙𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘪𝘯 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥, 𝘣𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘦, 𝘣𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘪𝘧 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵 𝘰𝘯 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘭𝘺, 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘭𝘺, 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘢 𝘣𝘢𝘣𝘺 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘨𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘢𝘣𝘺 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰.” 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐡𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐂𝐑𝐓 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐞. You don’t fight 1860 racism by teaching 2026 children they are colored-in by their ancestors’ sins. 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤, 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧-𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. 𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐝𝐢𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐢𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐥𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞. 𝘝𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 @𝘒𝘊𝘗𝘢𝘺𝘛𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘐𝘵

𝐀 𝐁𝐋𝐀𝐂𝐊 𝐌𝐀𝐍 𝐃𝐄𝐒𝐂𝐄𝐍𝐃𝐄𝐃 𝐅𝐑𝐎𝐌 𝐒𝐋𝐀𝐕𝐄𝐒 𝐉𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐓𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐅𝐈𝐄𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐇𝐄 𝐈𝐒 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐎𝐏𝐏𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐒𝐄𝐃, 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐀 𝐕𝐈𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐌, 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐑𝐀𝐂𝐈𝐒𝐌 𝐈𝐍 𝐀𝐌𝐄𝐑𝐈𝐂𝐀 𝐖𝐎𝐔𝐋𝐃 𝐁𝐄 𝐃𝐄𝐀𝐃 𝐓𝐎𝐃𝐀𝐘 𝐈𝐅 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐈𝐍𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐓𝐔𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐒 𝐊𝐄𝐄𝐏𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐈𝐓 𝐎𝐍 𝐋𝐈𝐅𝐄 𝐒𝐔𝐏𝐏𝐎𝐑𝐓. A black American testifying at a school-board meeting against critical race theory just delivered 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐫𝐞 𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐲 heard at any public meeting in 2026. He earned a standing ovation. “𝘔𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘣𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬. 𝘈𝘭𝘭 𝘦𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵-𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘴. 𝘖𝘯 𝘮𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳’𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦, 𝘮𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘈𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘢𝘮𝘢. 𝘖𝘯 𝘮𝘺 𝘧𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳’𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦, 𝘪𝘯 𝘛𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘴. 𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘥. 𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮. 𝘐 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘭 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺, 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘤𝘬 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘴, 𝘧𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺, 𝘨𝘰 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘭, 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴. 𝘐 𝘢𝘮 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘥𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵, 𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘴𝘵.” “𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳, 𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘴. 𝘐’𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘮𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴: 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘭𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘱𝘰𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯-𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘭. 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢. 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘯 190-𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳-𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘧𝘭𝘰𝘢𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳.” “𝘙𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘪𝘯 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥, 𝘣𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘦, 𝘣𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘪𝘧 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵 𝘰𝘯 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘭𝘺, 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘢𝘥𝘭𝘺, 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘢 𝘣𝘢𝘣𝘺 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘨𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘢𝘣𝘺 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰.” 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐡𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐂𝐑𝐓 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐞. You don’t fight 1860 racism by teaching 2026 children they are colored-in by their ancestors’ sins. 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤, 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧-𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. 𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐝𝐢𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐢𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐥𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞. 𝘝𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 @𝘒𝘊𝘗𝘢𝘺𝘛𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘐𝘵

M.A. Rothman

109,680 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

𝐌𝐊 (𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲) 𝐆𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞(𝐬) 𝐒𝐮𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝? Nkosi Dlamini: MK was disbanded in 1993, without informing its leaders, specifically Chris Hani. He was not informed. That never sat well with us. We stuck around, hopeful, but it turned out we were being disbanded, abandoned. You look at the branches of the ANC, we are not recognized. We are not deployed. 𝘍𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰, 𝘸𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘕𝘊 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘢 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯. [𝘈𝘯𝘥] 𝘯𝘰 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬, 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘞𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘢𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯… 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬, 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘯’𝘵 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 — 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭, 𝘪𝘵 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘱. 𝘉𝘺 𝘴𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘕𝘊 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯… 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘔𝘒 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘸 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵, 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 (𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩) 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘸 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘕𝘊, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘥𝘰/𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦; 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘴𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘦𝘥 (𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰) 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘬𝘦𝘺. 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬. 𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘕𝘊 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 1912, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥; 𝘣𝘶𝘵… 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 (𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦) 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘬𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴; 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢 𝘉𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥. 𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘺, 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴/𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 — 𝘓𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯, 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩 𝘈𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦… 𝘔𝘒 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘑𝘢𝘤𝘰𝘣 𝘡𝘶𝘮𝘢. 𝘈 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴/𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘢𝘴 𝘉𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘴. 𝘙𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩 𝘈𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢 — 𝘶𝘴, 𝘉𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘮 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘴/𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘢𝘴 𝘉𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦… [𝘉𝘶𝘵] 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘝𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴/𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘺𝘪-𝘵𝘰𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘰𝘢𝘥𝘴, 𝘱𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨… 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴/𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥. 𝘜𝘴, 𝘸𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴. 🖇️

𝐌𝐊 (𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲) 𝐆𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞(𝐬) 𝐒𝐮𝐦𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝? Nkosi Dlamini: MK was disbanded in 1993, without informing its leaders, specifically Chris Hani. He was not informed. That never sat well with us. We stuck around, hopeful, but it turned out we were being disbanded, abandoned. You look at the branches of the ANC, we are not recognized. We are not deployed. 𝘍𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰, 𝘸𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘕𝘊 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘢 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯. [𝘈𝘯𝘥] 𝘯𝘰 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬, 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘞𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘤𝘢𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯… 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬, 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘯’𝘵 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 — 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭, 𝘪𝘵 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘱. 𝘉𝘺 𝘴𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘕𝘊 𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘬 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯… 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘔𝘒 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘸 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵, 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 (𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩) 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘭𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘸 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘕𝘊, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘥𝘰/𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦; 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘴𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘦𝘥 (𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰) 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘧𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘬𝘦𝘺. 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬. 𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘕𝘊 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 1912, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥; 𝘣𝘶𝘵… 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥 (𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦) 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘬𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴; 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢 𝘉𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥. 𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘺, 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴/𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 — 𝘓𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯, 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩 𝘈𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦… 𝘔𝘒 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘑𝘢𝘤𝘰𝘣 𝘡𝘶𝘮𝘢. 𝘈 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴/𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘢𝘴 𝘉𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘴. 𝘙𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩 𝘈𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢 — 𝘶𝘴, 𝘉𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘮 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘴/𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘢𝘴 𝘉𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦… [𝘉𝘶𝘵] 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘝𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴/𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘺𝘪-𝘵𝘰𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘰𝘢𝘥𝘴, 𝘱𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨… 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴/𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥. 𝘜𝘴, 𝘸𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴. 🖇️

Mr. Tshweu

89,644 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

𝐆𝐑𝐄𝐆 𝐆𝐔𝐓𝐅𝐄𝐋𝐃 𝐑𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐀𝐋𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐎𝐍𝐄-𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐃 𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐏𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐒𝐇𝐔𝐓𝐒 𝐃𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐌𝐏 𝐂𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐂: “𝐒𝐎?” Greg Gutfeld just handed Trump supporters the only word they’ll ever need. “𝘏𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘚𝘰. 𝘏𝘦 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍-𝘣𝘰𝘮𝘣 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵. 𝘚𝘰. 𝘏𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘜𝘕. 𝘚𝘰. 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘱𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵” Gutfeld laid out the fundamental disconnect: “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦. 𝘐𝘵 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘴. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘺 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥. 𝘓𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘐𝘳𝘢𝘯. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦” Then the analogy that nailed it: “𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘵𝘸𝘰-𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯 𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘣𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘮𝘱𝘺, 𝘯𝘰𝘪𝘴𝘺. 𝘔𝘢𝘺𝘣𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈.𝘊. 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘵. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘵” Gutfeld also posed the question Democrats will never answer: “𝘞𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘳𝘦𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥? 𝘞𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘐𝘳𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘩? 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘋𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘴𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵?” His diagnosis of Trump’s method was the most precise anyone has offered: “𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱’𝘴 𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘰𝘴. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘪𝘹 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘵, 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘬, 𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘰𝘴” The critics see the chaos and panic. The results-oriented see the 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 — and the pattern keeps working. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐬. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐅-𝐛𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐬. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐲𝐥𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝: 𝐒𝐨?

𝐆𝐑𝐄𝐆 𝐆𝐔𝐓𝐅𝐄𝐋𝐃 𝐑𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐀𝐋𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐎𝐍𝐄-𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐃 𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐏𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐒𝐇𝐔𝐓𝐒 𝐃𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐌𝐏 𝐂𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐂: “𝐒𝐎?” Greg Gutfeld just handed Trump supporters the only word they’ll ever need. “𝘏𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘚𝘰. 𝘏𝘦 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍-𝘣𝘰𝘮𝘣 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵. 𝘚𝘰. 𝘏𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘜𝘕. 𝘚𝘰. 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘦𝘱𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵” Gutfeld laid out the fundamental disconnect: “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘪𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦. 𝘐𝘵 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘴. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘺 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥. 𝘓𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘐𝘳𝘢𝘯. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘺𝘭𝘦” Then the analogy that nailed it: “𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘵𝘸𝘰-𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯 𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘣𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘮𝘱𝘺, 𝘯𝘰𝘪𝘴𝘺. 𝘔𝘢𝘺𝘣𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈.𝘊. 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘵. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘵” Gutfeld also posed the question Democrats will never answer: “𝘞𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘳𝘦𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥? 𝘞𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘐𝘳𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘩? 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘋𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘴𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵?” His diagnosis of Trump’s method was the most precise anyone has offered: “𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱’𝘴 𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘰𝘴. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘪𝘹 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘵, 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘬, 𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘰𝘴” The critics see the chaos and panic. The results-oriented see the 𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 — and the pattern keeps working. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐬. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐅-𝐛𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐬. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐲𝐥𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝: 𝐒𝐨?

M.A. Rothman

23,602 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

𝐊𝐄𝐌𝐈 𝐁𝐀𝐃𝐄𝐍𝐎𝐂𝐇 𝐉𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐃𝐄𝐋𝐈𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐄𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐄 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐖𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐍 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐄𝐑𝐕𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐃𝐄𝐑 𝐇𝐀𝐒 𝐁𝐄𝐄𝐍 𝐃𝐎𝐃𝐆𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐀 𝐃𝐄𝐂𝐀𝐃𝐄. An LBC caller asked Badenoch how a Muslim could trust the Conservative Party after Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy criticized mass Ramadan public prayer in Trafalgar Square as “an act of domination.” Badenoch did not duck. Her opening: 𝘔𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮. 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 50% 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮. 𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮 𝘱𝘳𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘍𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘭. 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮. Then the line: 𝘐𝘯 𝘮𝘺 𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮. Then the closer: 𝘐𝘧 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘻𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘧𝘢𝘣𝘳𝘪𝘤, 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵. British law over religious law. British culture over religious deference. The right to criticize ANY religion — Christianity, Islam, all of them — is a non-negotiable feature of a free society, not a privilege the majority granted to the minority. This is the Western mainstream conservative position. Badenoch — daughter of Nigerian immigrants, raised Christian, lived among Muslims her whole childhood — said it on national radio without hedging, without apologizing, and without softening it for the audience. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐖𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐚𝐲. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐟𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐝𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝘝𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 @𝘓𝘉𝘊.

𝐊𝐄𝐌𝐈 𝐁𝐀𝐃𝐄𝐍𝐎𝐂𝐇 𝐉𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐃𝐄𝐋𝐈𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐄𝐃 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐄 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐖𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐍 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐄𝐑𝐕𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐃𝐄𝐑 𝐇𝐀𝐒 𝐁𝐄𝐄𝐍 𝐃𝐎𝐃𝐆𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐀 𝐃𝐄𝐂𝐀𝐃𝐄. An LBC caller asked Badenoch how a Muslim could trust the Conservative Party after Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy criticized mass Ramadan public prayer in Trafalgar Square as “an act of domination.” Badenoch did not duck. Her opening: 𝘔𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮. 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 50% 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮. 𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮 𝘱𝘳𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘍𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘭. 𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮. Then the line: 𝘐𝘯 𝘮𝘺 𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮. Then the closer: 𝘐𝘧 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘻𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘧𝘢𝘣𝘳𝘪𝘤, 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵. British law over religious law. British culture over religious deference. The right to criticize ANY religion — Christianity, Islam, all of them — is a non-negotiable feature of a free society, not a privilege the majority granted to the minority. This is the Western mainstream conservative position. Badenoch — daughter of Nigerian immigrants, raised Christian, lived among Muslims her whole childhood — said it on national radio without hedging, without apologizing, and without softening it for the audience. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐖𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐚𝐲. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐟𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐝𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝘝𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 @𝘓𝘉𝘊.

M.A. Rothman

710,294 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐁𝐄𝐒𝐓 𝐁𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐊𝐃𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐎𝐅 𝐂𝐀𝐏𝐈𝐓𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐒𝐌 𝐕𝐒. 𝐒𝐎𝐂𝐈𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐒𝐌 𝐕𝐒. 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐌𝐔𝐍𝐈𝐒𝐌 𝐘𝐎𝐔’𝐋𝐋 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑 𝐇𝐄𝐀𝐑 This creator explained the difference using YouTube—and it’s brilliant. 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦: “𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘢 𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘛𝘶𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘭. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘶𝘱 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘧𝘪𝘭𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘵, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘦𝘧𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘦.” 𝐒𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦: “𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘭, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘱𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘴, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺. 𝘞𝘦’𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘭𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘴 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱.” 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐦: “𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘭𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘦𝘵.” Then the key insight: “𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘴. 𝘐𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘴.” He nailed how they sell it: “𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭—𝘪𝘵’𝘴 ’𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦.’ 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯—𝘪𝘵’𝘴 ’𝘱𝘢𝘺 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘳 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘦.’ 𝘐𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘵, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘰𝘳.” A 2024 poll found 𝟒𝟒% 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐞𝐧 𝐙 viewed socialism favorably—until they were told what it actually means (Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation). 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐩𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐬. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐚 𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐞.

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐁𝐄𝐒𝐓 𝐁𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐊𝐃𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐎𝐅 𝐂𝐀𝐏𝐈𝐓𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐒𝐌 𝐕𝐒. 𝐒𝐎𝐂𝐈𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐒𝐌 𝐕𝐒. 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐌𝐔𝐍𝐈𝐒𝐌 𝐘𝐎𝐔’𝐋𝐋 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑 𝐇𝐄𝐀𝐑 This creator explained the difference using YouTube—and it’s brilliant. 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦: “𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘢 𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘛𝘶𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘭. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘶𝘱 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘧𝘪𝘭𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘵, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘦𝘧𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘦.” 𝐒𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦: “𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘭, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘱𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘴, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺. 𝘞𝘦’𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘭𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘢𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘴 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱.” 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐦: “𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘭𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘴 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘦𝘵.” Then the key insight: “𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘥 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘴𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘴. 𝘐𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘴.” He nailed how they sell it: “𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭—𝘪𝘵’𝘴 ’𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦.’ 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯—𝘪𝘵’𝘴 ’𝘱𝘢𝘺 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘳 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘦.’ 𝘐𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘵, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘰𝘳.” A 2024 poll found 𝟒𝟒% 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐞𝐧 𝐙 viewed socialism favorably—until they were told what it actually means (Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation). 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐩𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐬. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐚 𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐞.

M.A. Rothman

75,328 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

54 years ago this month, 𝗬𝗲𝘀 released their fourth studio album, 𝗙𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗹𝗲, one of the best albums in progressive rock history. This masterpiece is the first 𝗬𝗲𝘀 album to feature 𝗥𝗶𝗰𝗸 𝗪𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻. - What is your favorite track from the album? * 𝘜𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺, 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘭𝘦. 𝘠𝘦𝘴’𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘸𝘦𝘣𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘣𝘶𝘮 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟤𝟨, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘥’𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘟 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵’𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘸𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵 𝘤𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘣𝘶𝘮’𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟣𝟣 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟤𝟨. 𝘞𝘪𝘬𝘪𝘱𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘢 𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘖𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟤𝟥 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘣𝘶𝘮 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘭 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟣𝟤, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟣𝟤. 𝘏𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳, 𝘪𝘯 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘧. 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘜𝘒-𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘤 𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘋𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘣𝘶𝘮’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘗𝘦𝘳𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘥’𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘺. YESofficial

54 years ago this month, 𝗬𝗲𝘀 released their fourth studio album, 𝗙𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗹𝗲, one of the best albums in progressive rock history. This masterpiece is the first 𝗬𝗲𝘀 album to feature 𝗥𝗶𝗰𝗸 𝗪𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻. - What is your favorite track from the album? * 𝘜𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺, 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘭𝘦. 𝘠𝘦𝘴’𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘸𝘦𝘣𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘣𝘶𝘮 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟤𝟨, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘥’𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘟 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵’𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘸𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵 𝘤𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘣𝘶𝘮’𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟣𝟣 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟤𝟨. 𝘞𝘪𝘬𝘪𝘱𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘢 𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘢 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘖𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟤𝟥 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘣𝘶𝘮 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘭 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟣𝟤, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝟣𝟤. 𝘏𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳, 𝘪𝘯 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘧. 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘜𝘒-𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘤 𝘮𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘕𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘋𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘣𝘶𝘮’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘗𝘦𝘳𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘥’𝘴 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘺. YESofficial

Prog Rock Songs

25,038 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

𝐂𝐑𝐀𝐈𝐆 𝐅𝐄𝐑𝐆𝐔𝐒𝐎𝐍 𝐒𝐇𝐔𝐓 𝐃𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐕𝐈𝐄𝐖’𝐒 𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐌𝐏 𝐁𝐀𝐈𝐓: “𝐈’𝐌 𝐒𝐈𝐂𝐊 𝐎𝐅 𝐏𝐄𝐎𝐏𝐋𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐈 𝐀𝐆𝐑𝐄𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇” The hosts of The View tried the move they always try: drag the funny guest into bashing Donald Trump. They asked Craig Ferguson whether his new tour, “𝘗𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘍𝘪𝘳𝘦”, was loaded with Trump material. He 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧'𝐭 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐢𝐭 for a second: “𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘵. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭.” Then he explained why, and it was sharper than anything the panel managed all show: “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬... 𝘐’𝘮 𝘴𝘪𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩.” And the line that should embarrass every cable-news scold: “𝘐’𝘭𝘭 𝘨𝘰 𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘦, 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢 𝘣𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘫𝘰𝘬𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵, 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘧𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬. 𝘐’𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘺𝘰𝘶.” Here's the context that makes it sting. Ferguson hosted CBS's Late Late Show for a decade. CBS just 𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐭 𝐞𝐫𝐚 and handed its 11:35 slot to a syndication package — no host, no desk, no charm. Meanwhile the genuinely funny guy is selling out theaters doing the one thing late night forgot how to do: 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐥𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚 𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞. 𝐋𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐧𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 𝐈𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐟 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.

𝐂𝐑𝐀𝐈𝐆 𝐅𝐄𝐑𝐆𝐔𝐒𝐎𝐍 𝐒𝐇𝐔𝐓 𝐃𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐕𝐈𝐄𝐖’𝐒 𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐌𝐏 𝐁𝐀𝐈𝐓: “𝐈’𝐌 𝐒𝐈𝐂𝐊 𝐎𝐅 𝐏𝐄𝐎𝐏𝐋𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐈 𝐀𝐆𝐑𝐄𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇” The hosts of The View tried the move they always try: drag the funny guest into bashing Donald Trump. They asked Craig Ferguson whether his new tour, “𝘗𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘍𝘪𝘳𝘦”, was loaded with Trump material. He 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧'𝐭 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐢𝐭 for a second: “𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘵. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭.” Then he explained why, and it was sharper than anything the panel managed all show: “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘐 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬... 𝘐’𝘮 𝘴𝘪𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐 𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩.” And the line that should embarrass every cable-news scold: “𝘐’𝘭𝘭 𝘨𝘰 𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘦, 𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢 𝘣𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘫𝘰𝘬𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵, 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘧𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬. 𝘐’𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘺𝘰𝘶.” Here's the context that makes it sting. Ferguson hosted CBS's Late Late Show for a decade. CBS just 𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐭 𝐞𝐫𝐚 and handed its 11:35 slot to a syndication package — no host, no desk, no charm. Meanwhile the genuinely funny guy is selling out theaters doing the one thing late night forgot how to do: 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐥𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚 𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞. 𝐋𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐧𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 𝐈𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐟 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.

M.A. Rothman

418,321 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

𝐀𝐔𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐏𝐌 𝐀𝐋𝐁𝐀𝐍𝐄𝐒𝐄 𝐀𝐓𝐓𝐀𝐂𝐊𝐒 𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐊 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐑𝐄𝐅𝐔𝐒𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐓𝐎 𝐂𝐄𝐍𝐒𝐎𝐑 𝐍𝐄𝐖𝐒 𝐀𝐁𝐎𝐔𝐓 𝐕𝐈𝐎𝐋𝐄𝐍𝐓 𝐀𝐓𝐓𝐀𝐂𝐊𝐒 𝐁𝐘 𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐋𝐈𝐌𝐒 Anthony Albanese was asked about Elon Musk mocking him for “𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘦𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘵𝘩.” His response was a masterclass in authoritarian doublespeak. “𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰’𝘴 𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘯 𝘦𝘨𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦.” He accused Musk of “𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘸 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨.” He insisted Musk has “𝘢 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺” and that other social media companies “𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘵.” Then came the tell: “𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘌𝘭𝘰𝘯 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘰 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘰𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘯 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵.” Let’s be clear about what’s actually happening. Australia experienced violent attacks by Muslims, and the government’s priority isn’t addressing the violence — it’s 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞. Albanese doesn’t want Australians seeing what happened on their own streets. And when one platform refuses to comply with state-directed censorship, the Prime Minister calls its owner “𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘺.” Notice the framing: Albanese calls it “sowing division.” In his worldview, the 𝐟𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞 of the attack is the problem — not the attack itself. Showing people what happened is “distressing.” Hiding it is “common sense.” Every authoritarian in history has used this exact logic — the truth is destabilizing, therefore the truth must be managed. He even said it himself: “𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘸. 𝘐𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨.” Translation: comply voluntarily, or we’ll make you. 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐚 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐣𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦 “𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧” 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 “𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞” — 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭.

𝐀𝐔𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐏𝐌 𝐀𝐋𝐁𝐀𝐍𝐄𝐒𝐄 𝐀𝐓𝐓𝐀𝐂𝐊𝐒 𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐊 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐑𝐄𝐅𝐔𝐒𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐓𝐎 𝐂𝐄𝐍𝐒𝐎𝐑 𝐍𝐄𝐖𝐒 𝐀𝐁𝐎𝐔𝐓 𝐕𝐈𝐎𝐋𝐄𝐍𝐓 𝐀𝐓𝐓𝐀𝐂𝐊𝐒 𝐁𝐘 𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐋𝐈𝐌𝐒 Anthony Albanese was asked about Elon Musk mocking him for “𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘦𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘵𝘩.” His response was a masterclass in authoritarian doublespeak. “𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘣𝘭𝘰𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰’𝘴 𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘯 𝘦𝘨𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦.” He accused Musk of “𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘸 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘰𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨.” He insisted Musk has “𝘢 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺” and that other social media companies “𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘵.” Then came the tell: “𝘐 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘌𝘭𝘰𝘯 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘰 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘰𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘯 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵.” Let’s be clear about what’s actually happening. Australia experienced violent attacks by Muslims, and the government’s priority isn’t addressing the violence — it’s 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐢𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞. Albanese doesn’t want Australians seeing what happened on their own streets. And when one platform refuses to comply with state-directed censorship, the Prime Minister calls its owner “𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘺.” Notice the framing: Albanese calls it “sowing division.” In his worldview, the 𝐟𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐠𝐞 of the attack is the problem — not the attack itself. Showing people what happened is “distressing.” Hiding it is “common sense.” Every authoritarian in history has used this exact logic — the truth is destabilizing, therefore the truth must be managed. He even said it himself: “𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘸. 𝘐𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨.” Translation: comply voluntarily, or we’ll make you. 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐚 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐣𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐦 “𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧” 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 “𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞” — 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭.

M.A. Rothman

37,789 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

𝗜𝗡 𝗔 𝗦𝗘𝗔 𝗢𝗙 𝗢𝗦𝗖𝗔𝗥𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗜𝗦𝗘 — 𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗦 𝗢𝗡𝗘 𝗛𝗜𝗧 𝗗𝗜𝗙𝗙𝗘𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗟𝗬 I'll be honest. The Oscars are not exactly must-see television for me anymore. But someone sent me this — and I watched it twice. Irish actress Jessie Buckley just won Best Actress. And instead of a political lecture, instead of a pin, instead of a land acknowledgment or a cause of the week — she talked about her husband. Her eight-month-old daughter dreaming of milk at home. Her Irish family whose flights were paid for by Ireland itself to be in that room. 𝘍𝘳𝘦𝘥, 𝘐 𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶. 𝘠𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘥. 𝘠𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘮𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝟤𝟢,𝟢𝟢𝟢 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘺𝘰𝘶. The room probably didn't know what to do with that. Then she dedicated the award to motherhood itself — on Mother's Day in the UK — with words that belong on a wall somewhere: 𝘛𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳'𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦. 𝘐 𝘥𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘰𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳'𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘵. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗰𝗵. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝗮 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘆. Hollywood spent years telling women that ambition means leaving behind the things Jessie Buckley just stood on the biggest stage in her industry and celebrated without apology. A husband she adores. A baby at home. A family flown in from Ireland. I don't know what film she won for. But I know I'll watch it now. Well done, Jessie. 𝗚𝗼 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗯𝗵 𝗺í𝗹𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝘁.

𝗜𝗡 𝗔 𝗦𝗘𝗔 𝗢𝗙 𝗢𝗦𝗖𝗔𝗥𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗜𝗦𝗘 — 𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗦 𝗢𝗡𝗘 𝗛𝗜𝗧 𝗗𝗜𝗙𝗙𝗘𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗟𝗬 I'll be honest. The Oscars are not exactly must-see television for me anymore. But someone sent me this — and I watched it twice. Irish actress Jessie Buckley just won Best Actress. And instead of a political lecture, instead of a pin, instead of a land acknowledgment or a cause of the week — she talked about her husband. Her eight-month-old daughter dreaming of milk at home. Her Irish family whose flights were paid for by Ireland itself to be in that room. 𝘍𝘳𝘦𝘥, 𝘐 𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶. 𝘠𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘥𝘢𝘥. 𝘠𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘮𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝟤𝟢,𝟢𝟢𝟢 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘺𝘰𝘶. The room probably didn't know what to do with that. Then she dedicated the award to motherhood itself — on Mother's Day in the UK — with words that belong on a wall somewhere: 𝘛𝘰 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳'𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦. 𝘐 𝘥𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘰𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳'𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘵. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗰𝗵. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝗮 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘆. Hollywood spent years telling women that ambition means leaving behind the things Jessie Buckley just stood on the biggest stage in her industry and celebrated without apology. A husband she adores. A baby at home. A family flown in from Ireland. I don't know what film she won for. But I know I'll watch it now. Well done, Jessie. 𝗚𝗼 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗯𝗵 𝗺í𝗹𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝘁.

M.A. Rothman

281,498 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

𝐃𝐎𝐔𝐆𝐋𝐀𝐒 𝐌𝐔𝐑𝐑𝐀𝐘: 𝟕𝟒% 𝐎𝐅 𝐍𝐄𝐖 𝐁𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐒𝐇 𝐉𝐎𝐁𝐒 𝐖𝐄𝐍𝐓 𝐓𝐎 𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐄𝐈𝐆𝐍-𝐁𝐎𝐑𝐍 𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐊𝐄𝐑𝐒 — 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐀𝐍𝐘𝐎𝐍𝐄 𝐖𝐇𝐎 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐏𝐋𝐀𝐈𝐍𝐒 𝐈𝐒 𝐀 𝐍𝐄𝐎-𝐍𝐀𝐙𝐈 Douglas Murray just delivered one of his most devastating indictments of the UK political class — and the parallels to America are impossible to miss. The core number: since 2008, 𝟕𝟒% 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐣𝐨𝐛𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧. For 𝟐𝟎 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬, British voters have asked for reduced immigration every single election and been promised action. Instead, immigration went up. Murray’s question cuts to the bone: “𝘐𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮, 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦?” The answer, apparently, is nothing. “𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵, 𝘯𝘦𝘰-𝘯𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘴.” Murray pointed to a single man with a swastika tattoo being used to discredit entire movements: “𝘐𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘨𝘶𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘳𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵? 𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵.” Then he exposed the double standard that no British politician will touch. When an imam is caught preaching violence in a mosque, “𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘪𝘯 𝘧𝘢𝘷𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘦𝘭𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦.” But when working-class Brits protest mass stabbings and terrorism? The entire crowd gets labeled neo-Nazis. Murray’s framework for what’s happening is devastating in its simplicity: “𝘐𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘴. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘦.” The primary problem is 𝐦𝐚𝐬𝐬 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭. The secondary problem is public anger. Starmer’s government is obsessed with policing the anger while doing nothing about the cause. The same playbook runs in America. Call border enforcement racist. Label parents at school board meetings domestic terrorists. Smear anyone who questions the status quo as an extremist — then wonder why trust in institutions evaporates. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐠𝐨 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲. 𝐈𝐭 𝐠𝐨𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐞.

𝐃𝐎𝐔𝐆𝐋𝐀𝐒 𝐌𝐔𝐑𝐑𝐀𝐘: 𝟕𝟒% 𝐎𝐅 𝐍𝐄𝐖 𝐁𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐒𝐇 𝐉𝐎𝐁𝐒 𝐖𝐄𝐍𝐓 𝐓𝐎 𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐄𝐈𝐆𝐍-𝐁𝐎𝐑𝐍 𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐊𝐄𝐑𝐒 — 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐀𝐍𝐘𝐎𝐍𝐄 𝐖𝐇𝐎 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐏𝐋𝐀𝐈𝐍𝐒 𝐈𝐒 𝐀 𝐍𝐄𝐎-𝐍𝐀𝐙𝐈 Douglas Murray just delivered one of his most devastating indictments of the UK political class — and the parallels to America are impossible to miss. The core number: since 2008, 𝟕𝟒% 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐣𝐨𝐛𝐬 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐁𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧. For 𝟐𝟎 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬, British voters have asked for reduced immigration every single election and been promised action. Instead, immigration went up. Murray’s question cuts to the bone: “𝘐𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮, 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦?” The answer, apparently, is nothing. “𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘳 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵, 𝘯𝘦𝘰-𝘯𝘢𝘻𝘪𝘴.” Murray pointed to a single man with a swastika tattoo being used to discredit entire movements: “𝘐𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘨𝘶𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘳𝘺 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘪𝘯 𝘚𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵? 𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘵.” Then he exposed the double standard that no British politician will touch. When an imam is caught preaching violence in a mosque, “𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘲𝘶𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘪𝘯 𝘧𝘢𝘷𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘦𝘭𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦.” But when working-class Brits protest mass stabbings and terrorism? The entire crowd gets labeled neo-Nazis. Murray’s framework for what’s happening is devastating in its simplicity: “𝘐𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘴. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘦.” The primary problem is 𝐦𝐚𝐬𝐬 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭. The secondary problem is public anger. Starmer’s government is obsessed with policing the anger while doing nothing about the cause. The same playbook runs in America. Call border enforcement racist. Label parents at school board meetings domestic terrorists. Smear anyone who questions the status quo as an extremist — then wonder why trust in institutions evaporates. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐠𝐨 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲. 𝐈𝐭 𝐠𝐨𝐭 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐞.

M.A. Rothman

48,897 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

𝐖𝐎𝐌𝐀𝐍 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐋𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 “𝐆𝐑𝐀𝐁 ’𝐄𝐌” 𝐎𝐔𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐆𝐄 𝐈𝐍 𝟔𝟎 𝐒𝐄𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐃𝐒 𝐅𝐋𝐀𝐓 A woman on the Whatever Podcast just did what ten years of conservative pundits couldn’t — she buried the Trump “grab ’em” talking point with one question: “𝘏𝘰𝘸’𝘴 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨?” The liberal girl across from her brought up the 2016 tape as proof Trump is unfit. Rachel Wilson didn’t flinch. She corrected the record first: “𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥. 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘸𝘢𝘴, 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢 𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘩, 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘴, 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩-𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘯, 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘭𝘦𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘣 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.” Then she asked the only question that matters — “𝘏𝘰𝘸’𝘴 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨?” The other woman’s response? “𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨.” Not “it’s false.” Not “here’s why he’s incorrect.” Just — it’s a bad 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬𝐞𝐭. Wilson pressed: “𝘛𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦.” Then she went deeper than any talking head ever has on this subject. “𝘏𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘐𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘳 𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘨𝘶𝘺𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵. 𝘞𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺, 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦, 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘩, 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩-𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘮𝘦𝘯, 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘴.” The liberal’s last stand: “𝘐 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘺𝘰𝘶, 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯, 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘬𝘢𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘧𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.” Translation — she couldn’t argue the facts, so she went to 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬. Wilson’s answer shut it down completely: “𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘵𝘩.” This is why the “grab ’em” tape lost its power. Not because people stopped caring about how things sound. Because a generation of women grew up, looked at the actual statement, and realized — it’s observationally accurate. The Women’s March was built on pretending Trump described assault. He described 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. And when a woman says that out loud on camera, the entire moral framework collapses. 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩. 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭. 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡.

𝐖𝐎𝐌𝐀𝐍 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐋𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 “𝐆𝐑𝐀𝐁 ’𝐄𝐌” 𝐎𝐔𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐆𝐄 𝐈𝐍 𝟔𝟎 𝐒𝐄𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐃𝐒 𝐅𝐋𝐀𝐓 A woman on the Whatever Podcast just did what ten years of conservative pundits couldn’t — she buried the Trump “grab ’em” talking point with one question: “𝘏𝘰𝘸’𝘴 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨?” The liberal girl across from her brought up the 2016 tape as proof Trump is unfit. Rachel Wilson didn’t flinch. She corrected the record first: “𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥. 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘸𝘢𝘴, 𝘪𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢 𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘩, 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘴, 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩-𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘯, 𝘢 𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘭𝘦𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘣 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.” Then she asked the only question that matters — “𝘏𝘰𝘸’𝘴 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨?” The other woman’s response? “𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘴𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨.” Not “it’s false.” Not “here’s why he’s incorrect.” Just — it’s a bad 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬𝐞𝐭. Wilson pressed: “𝘛𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦.” Then she went deeper than any talking head ever has on this subject. “𝘏𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘐𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘳 𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘨𝘶𝘺𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘐 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘩𝘦’𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵. 𝘞𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺, 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦, 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘩, 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩-𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘮𝘦𝘯, 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘴.” The liberal’s last stand: “𝘐 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘺𝘰𝘶, 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯, 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘬𝘢𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘧𝘧 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.” Translation — she couldn’t argue the facts, so she went to 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬. Wilson’s answer shut it down completely: “𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘵𝘩.” This is why the “grab ’em” tape lost its power. Not because people stopped caring about how things sound. Because a generation of women grew up, looked at the actual statement, and realized — it’s observationally accurate. The Women’s March was built on pretending Trump described assault. He described 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. And when a woman says that out loud on camera, the entire moral framework collapses. 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩. 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭. 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡.

M.A. Rothman

425,513 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

𝐆𝐀𝐃 𝐒𝐀𝐀𝐃 𝐀𝐓 𝐂𝐀𝐍𝐀𝐃𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐂𝐏𝐀𝐂: 𝐏𝐌 𝐂𝐀𝐑𝐍𝐄𝐘’𝐒 𝐖𝐈𝐅𝐄 𝐒𝐀𝐘𝐒 𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐃𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐒 𝐒𝐏𝐄𝐄𝐂𝐇 𝐈𝐒 𝐁𝐄𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐓𝐀𝐔𝐆𝐇𝐓 𝐈𝐍 𝐔𝐍𝐈𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐒𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐄𝐒 Gad Saad — the Lebanese-Canadian evolutionary psychologist known as “The Gadfather” — shared this bizarre clip from Canada’s political stage. PM Carney’s wife is publicly boasting: “𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘮𝘺 𝘩𝘶𝘴𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘥’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘋𝘢𝘷𝘰𝘴 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘦𝘤𝘩. 𝘖𝘧 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴. 𝘖𝘧 𝘊𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘥𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘦 𝘢 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳.” A 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫. That’s a direct quote. Saad’s broader thesis — from his 2025 book "𝐒𝐮𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐲: 𝐃𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐁𝐞 𝐊𝐢𝐧𝐝" — is that Western nations are destroying themselves through performative empathy and ideological conformity. His quote: “𝘚𝘶𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘤𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.” Saad’s background matters: born in Beirut in 1964 to a Lebanese-Syrian Jewish family, he 𝐟𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐋𝐞𝐛𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝟏𝟏 when the civil war erupted. He holds degrees from 𝐌𝐜𝐆𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐥𝐥 and is a professor at Concordia University. He watched one civilization destroy itself from the inside — and he’s watching it happen again. 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐲’𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚 “𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫.” 𝐆𝐚𝐝 𝐒𝐚𝐚𝐝 𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐩𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 𝐇𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐧 𝐮𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐭.

𝐆𝐀𝐃 𝐒𝐀𝐀𝐃 𝐀𝐓 𝐂𝐀𝐍𝐀𝐃𝐈𝐀𝐍 𝐂𝐏𝐀𝐂: 𝐏𝐌 𝐂𝐀𝐑𝐍𝐄𝐘’𝐒 𝐖𝐈𝐅𝐄 𝐒𝐀𝐘𝐒 𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐃𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐒 𝐒𝐏𝐄𝐄𝐂𝐇 𝐈𝐒 𝐁𝐄𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐓𝐀𝐔𝐆𝐇𝐓 𝐈𝐍 𝐔𝐍𝐈𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐒𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐄𝐒 Gad Saad — the Lebanese-Canadian evolutionary psychologist known as “The Gadfather” — shared this bizarre clip from Canada’s political stage. PM Carney’s wife is publicly boasting: “𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘮𝘺 𝘩𝘶𝘴𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘥’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘋𝘢𝘷𝘰𝘴 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘦𝘤𝘩. 𝘖𝘧 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴. 𝘖𝘧 𝘊𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘥𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘦 𝘢 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘭𝘥 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳.” A 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫. That’s a direct quote. Saad’s broader thesis — from his 2025 book "𝐒𝐮𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐲: 𝐃𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐁𝐞 𝐊𝐢𝐧𝐝" — is that Western nations are destroying themselves through performative empathy and ideological conformity. His quote: “𝘚𝘶𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘤 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘤𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.” Saad’s background matters: born in Beirut in 1964 to a Lebanese-Syrian Jewish family, he 𝐟𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐋𝐞𝐛𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝟏𝟏 when the civil war erupted. He holds degrees from 𝐌𝐜𝐆𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐥𝐥 and is a professor at Concordia University. He watched one civilization destroy itself from the inside — and he’s watching it happen again. 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐲’𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚 “𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫.” 𝐆𝐚𝐝 𝐒𝐚𝐚𝐝 𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐩𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 𝐇𝐞’𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐧 𝐮𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐭.

M.A. Rothman

74,283 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

𝐄𝐗-𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐋𝐈𝐌 𝐖𝐎𝐌𝐀𝐍 𝐅𝐑𝐎𝐌 𝐂𝐀𝐍𝐀𝐃𝐀 𝐃𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐎𝐘𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐑𝐄 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐂𝐄𝐏𝐓 𝐎𝐅 “𝐈𝐒𝐋𝐀𝐌𝐎𝐏𝐇𝐎𝐁𝐈𝐀” 𝐈𝐍 𝐓𝐖𝐎 𝐌𝐈𝐍𝐔𝐓𝐄𝐒 Yasmine Mohammed — a Canadian author, ex-Muslim, and survivor of a forced marriage to an al-Qaeda member — delivered one of the most precise takedowns of left-wing speech policing you’ll ever hear. She started with the origin of the word itself: “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘦, 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘤, 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘢 — 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴”. Not by Muslims generally. By “𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘴. 𝘎𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘳𝘢𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘈𝘧𝘨𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯, 𝘐-𝘚-𝘐-𝘚, 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮 𝘉𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘥, 𝘢𝘭-𝘘𝘢𝘦𝘥𝘢, 𝘛𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘢𝘯, 𝘏-𝘻-𝘣, 𝘏-𝘮-𝘴, 𝘏𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴”. She listed them one by one. “𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮”. Their purpose was never to protect Muslims from bigotry — “𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘪𝘯 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴” — but to 𝐬𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐭𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟. She called it what it is: “𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘶𝘱 𝘣𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘱𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘺 𝘭𝘢𝘸𝘴. 𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘪𝘯 𝘗𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘈𝘧𝘨𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘚𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪 𝘈𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘢... 𝘴𝘰 𝘭𝘦𝘵’𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳”. And the West fell for it. “𝘓𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘢 𝘣𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘰𝘵𝘴, 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘶𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘢, 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘢, 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘣𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘱 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮 𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘭𝘢𝘸𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯, 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴, 𝘨𝘢𝘺 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦”. This is a woman who 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐥𝐚𝐰, was forced into marriage with a jihadist, and escaped to the West to speak freely. When she criticizes the legal and political frameworks of Islam, she’s not being “phobic” — she’s being 𝐚 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐯𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡. And the progressive left wants to silence her using a word invented by the very regimes she fled. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 “𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐨𝐛𝐢𝐚” 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐠𝐚𝐲 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐯𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐛𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐲.

𝐄𝐗-𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐋𝐈𝐌 𝐖𝐎𝐌𝐀𝐍 𝐅𝐑𝐎𝐌 𝐂𝐀𝐍𝐀𝐃𝐀 𝐃𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐎𝐘𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐑𝐄 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐂𝐄𝐏𝐓 𝐎𝐅 “𝐈𝐒𝐋𝐀𝐌𝐎𝐏𝐇𝐎𝐁𝐈𝐀” 𝐈𝐍 𝐓𝐖𝐎 𝐌𝐈𝐍𝐔𝐓𝐄𝐒 Yasmine Mohammed — a Canadian author, ex-Muslim, and survivor of a forced marriage to an al-Qaeda member — delivered one of the most precise takedowns of left-wing speech policing you’ll ever hear. She started with the origin of the word itself: “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘦, 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘤, 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘢 — 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴”. Not by Muslims generally. By “𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘴. 𝘎𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘳𝘢𝘯, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘈𝘧𝘨𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯, 𝘐-𝘚-𝘐-𝘚, 𝘔𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘪𝘮 𝘉𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘥, 𝘢𝘭-𝘘𝘢𝘦𝘥𝘢, 𝘛𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘣𝘢𝘯, 𝘏-𝘻-𝘣, 𝘏-𝘮-𝘴, 𝘏𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴”. She listed them one by one. “𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘢 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮”. Their purpose was never to protect Muslims from bigotry — “𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘪𝘯 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴” — but to 𝐬𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐦 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐭𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟. She called it what it is: “𝘣𝘰𝘵𝘵𝘰𝘮-𝘶𝘱 𝘣𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘱𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘺 𝘭𝘢𝘸𝘴. 𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘪𝘯 𝘗𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘈𝘧𝘨𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘚𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪 𝘈𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘢... 𝘴𝘰 𝘭𝘦𝘵’𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳”. And the West fell for it. “𝘓𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘢 𝘣𝘶𝘯𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘴𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘰𝘵𝘴, 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘶𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘢, 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘢, 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘣𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘱 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮 𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘮𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘭𝘢𝘸𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯, 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴, 𝘨𝘢𝘺 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦”. This is a woman who 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐝 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐥𝐚𝐰, was forced into marriage with a jihadist, and escaped to the West to speak freely. When she criticizes the legal and political frameworks of Islam, she’s not being “phobic” — she’s being 𝐚 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐯𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡. And the progressive left wants to silence her using a word invented by the very regimes she fled. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 “𝐈𝐬𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐨𝐛𝐢𝐚” 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐠𝐚𝐲 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐯𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐛𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐲.

M.A. Rothman

28,463 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

𝐕𝐈𝐂𝐓𝐎𝐑 𝐃𝐀𝐕𝐈𝐒 𝐇𝐀𝐍𝐒𝐎𝐍 𝐓𝐎 𝐄𝐔𝐑𝐎𝐏𝐄: “𝐎𝐇, 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐖𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐄𝐃 𝐔𝐒 𝐓𝐎 𝐆𝐎 𝐈𝐍𝐓𝐎 𝐔𝐊𝐑𝐀𝐈𝐍𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐃𝐄𝐅𝐄𝐍𝐃 𝐘𝐎𝐔? 𝐁𝐔𝐓 𝐔𝐊𝐑𝐀𝐈𝐍𝐄’𝐒 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐀 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐎 𝐏𝐎𝐖𝐄𝐑. 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐈𝐒 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐏𝐑𝐎𝐁𝐋𝐄𝐌. 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐈𝐒 𝐎𝐍 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐃𝐎𝐎𝐑𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐏. 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐎 𝐃𝐎𝐄𝐒𝐍’𝐓 𝐌𝐄𝐀𝐍 𝐌𝐔𝐂𝐇 𝐀𝐍𝐘𝐌𝐎𝐑𝐄 — 𝐁𝐔𝐓 𝐖𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐇𝐀𝐕𝐄 𝐀 𝐒𝐏𝐄𝐂𝐈𝐀𝐋 𝐑𝐄𝐋𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐇𝐈𝐏 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇 𝐘𝐎𝐔.” In about 90 seconds, Victor Davis Hanson — classicist, military historian, Hoover Institution senior fellow — walked through the end of the 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭-𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟗 𝐀𝐭𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 and the beginning of what replaces it. He did it by ventriloquizing the exact conversation American leaders are no longer willing to have with European capitals. “𝘖𝘩, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘜𝘬𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶? 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘜𝘬𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘈𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘭𝘦 5. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘱.” “𝘖𝘩, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘚𝘦𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘢? 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘦𝘳𝘣𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘱 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯? 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮 𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.” “𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘈𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢, 𝘵𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘥? 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮. 𝘖𝘩, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘬𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘥𝘢𝘺? 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮 𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳.” Hanson is not being flip. He is describing a real shift in the American strategic posture. For 75 years, the deal was simple: 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐄𝐮𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬. Europe spent its peace dividend on 32-hour work weeks, free college, and a carbon regime that deindustrialized its own economy. Meanwhile 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝟏𝟏 𝐨𝐟 𝟑𝟐 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐎 𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬 currently hit the agreed 𝟐% 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐃𝐏 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 floor (NATO Secretary General’s Annual Report, 2025). Germany spends 𝟏.𝟓𝟕%. Spain spends 𝟏.𝟐𝟖%. Italy spends 𝟏.𝟒𝟗%. And then European diplomats show up in Washington and ask where the American aircraft carriers are. Hanson’s prescription is not isolationism. It is the exact opposite: “𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯-𝘰𝘧-𝘵𝘩𝘦-𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱𝘴. 𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘻𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘴, 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘴, 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵, 𝘸𝘦’𝘥 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘻𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘢 𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵? 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦.” In other words: 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐝, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐳𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐬, 𝐏𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐠𝐚𝐥 — 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 get the American security umbrella. Germany, France, and Spain get to fund their own defense or talk to Moscow directly. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐭𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐝𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐞𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐟𝐚𝐯𝐨𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐮𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐤𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐚 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐝. 𝐏𝐚𝐲 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐨𝐫 𝐩𝐢𝐜𝐤 𝐮𝐩 𝐚 𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐥𝐞.

𝐕𝐈𝐂𝐓𝐎𝐑 𝐃𝐀𝐕𝐈𝐒 𝐇𝐀𝐍𝐒𝐎𝐍 𝐓𝐎 𝐄𝐔𝐑𝐎𝐏𝐄: “𝐎𝐇, 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐖𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐄𝐃 𝐔𝐒 𝐓𝐎 𝐆𝐎 𝐈𝐍𝐓𝐎 𝐔𝐊𝐑𝐀𝐈𝐍𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐃𝐄𝐅𝐄𝐍𝐃 𝐘𝐎𝐔? 𝐁𝐔𝐓 𝐔𝐊𝐑𝐀𝐈𝐍𝐄’𝐒 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐀 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐎 𝐏𝐎𝐖𝐄𝐑. 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐈𝐒 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐏𝐑𝐎𝐁𝐋𝐄𝐌. 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐈𝐒 𝐎𝐍 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐃𝐎𝐎𝐑𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐏. 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐎 𝐃𝐎𝐄𝐒𝐍’𝐓 𝐌𝐄𝐀𝐍 𝐌𝐔𝐂𝐇 𝐀𝐍𝐘𝐌𝐎𝐑𝐄 — 𝐁𝐔𝐓 𝐖𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐇𝐀𝐕𝐄 𝐀 𝐒𝐏𝐄𝐂𝐈𝐀𝐋 𝐑𝐄𝐋𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐇𝐈𝐏 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇 𝐘𝐎𝐔.” In about 90 seconds, Victor Davis Hanson — classicist, military historian, Hoover Institution senior fellow — walked through the end of the 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭-𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟗 𝐀𝐭𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 and the beginning of what replaces it. He did it by ventriloquizing the exact conversation American leaders are no longer willing to have with European capitals. “𝘖𝘩, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘜𝘬𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶? 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘜𝘬𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘈𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘭𝘦 5. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘱.” “𝘖𝘩, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘚𝘦𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘢? 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘦𝘳𝘣𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘱 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯? 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮 𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.” “𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘈𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢, 𝘵𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘐𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘥? 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮. 𝘖𝘩, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘮𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘬𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘥𝘢𝘺? 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘦𝘮 𝘦𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳.” Hanson is not being flip. He is describing a real shift in the American strategic posture. For 75 years, the deal was simple: 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐄𝐮𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬. Europe spent its peace dividend on 32-hour work weeks, free college, and a carbon regime that deindustrialized its own economy. Meanwhile 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝟏𝟏 𝐨𝐟 𝟑𝟐 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐎 𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬 currently hit the agreed 𝟐% 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐃𝐏 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 floor (NATO Secretary General’s Annual Report, 2025). Germany spends 𝟏.𝟓𝟕%. Spain spends 𝟏.𝟐𝟖%. Italy spends 𝟏.𝟒𝟗%. And then European diplomats show up in Washington and ask where the American aircraft carriers are. Hanson’s prescription is not isolationism. It is the exact opposite: “𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯-𝘰𝘧-𝘵𝘩𝘦-𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱𝘴. 𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘻𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘴, 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘦𝘴, 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮, 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵, 𝘸𝘦’𝘥 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘻𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘴. 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘢 𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵? 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘺𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦.” In other words: 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐝, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐳𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐬, 𝐏𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐠𝐚𝐥 — 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 get the American security umbrella. Germany, France, and Spain get to fund their own defense or talk to Moscow directly. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐭𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐝𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐞𝐰𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐟𝐚𝐯𝐨𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐮𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐤𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐚 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐝. 𝐏𝐚𝐲 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐨𝐫 𝐩𝐢𝐜𝐤 𝐮𝐩 𝐚 𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐥𝐞.

M.A. Rothman

84,850 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

𝐁𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐌𝐀𝐇𝐄𝐑: “𝐖𝐄 𝐀𝐒𝐊 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐒𝐄 𝐏𝐄𝐎𝐏𝐋𝐄 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐖𝐄𝐄𝐊. 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐘 𝐒𝐀𝐘 𝐍𝐎.” This montage from Real Time is something every Democrat should have to watch. Maher lays it out plainly: the biggest names in the Democratic Party — Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Kamala Harris — 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐞 to come on his show. “𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘬 𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦, 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘯’𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘏𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘳 𝘉𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘊𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘯? 𝘞𝘩𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘒𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘢 𝘰𝘯 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘨𝘯? 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘸𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘢𝘴𝘬? 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘬. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘯𝘰.” Then the kicker: “𝘐𝘵 𝘵𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘦𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘖𝘣𝘢𝘮𝘢 𝘰𝘯. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘐 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘨𝘶𝘺 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.” And who does show up? “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘴? 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘶𝘱.” That’s the tell. Republicans walk into adversarial interviews. Democrats won’t even walk into 𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐥𝐲 ones — because Maher asks follow-up questions, and follow-up questions are what the Democratic messaging apparatus cannot survive. Then the clip shifts to Maher defending Trump on foreign policy — to his own liberal audience. “𝘏𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘥 𝘐𝘳𝘢𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘗𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺. 𝘏𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖. 𝘏𝘦 𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘶𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘯 𝘙𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘢.” When someone accused him of “coming around,” Maher shot back: “𝘐’𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦.” Then there’s the White House ballroom segment, where Maher defended the renovation: “𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘱𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘪𝘵. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘍𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘧 𝘸𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘏𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘢 𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘮. 𝘞𝘦’𝘳𝘦 𝘢 𝘣𝘪𝘨 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺. 𝘞𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘢 𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘐’𝘷𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.” The liberal outrage machine is so reflexive that it attacks a private donation to improve the People’s House — and Maher called it out. This is a man who voted Democrat his entire life, told his audience he doesn’t hate the Iran bombing, showed clips of Iranians doing the Trump dance on his show (Yahoo Entertainment), and has called the Iranian government a 𝐟𝐚𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲. He’s not switching parties. He’s just refusing to lie — and that alone is enough to make him radioactive to the Democratic establishment. His own show gets 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 now — not because Maher moved right, but because the left moved away from anyone who asks inconvenient questions. 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐯𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐬𝐢𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐭. 𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲.

𝐁𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐌𝐀𝐇𝐄𝐑: “𝐖𝐄 𝐀𝐒𝐊 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐒𝐄 𝐏𝐄𝐎𝐏𝐋𝐄 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐖𝐄𝐄𝐊. 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐘 𝐒𝐀𝐘 𝐍𝐎.” This montage from Real Time is something every Democrat should have to watch. Maher lays it out plainly: the biggest names in the Democratic Party — Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Kamala Harris — 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐬𝐞 to come on his show. “𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘬 𝘮𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦, 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘯’𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘏𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘳 𝘉𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘊𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘯? 𝘞𝘩𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘒𝘢𝘮𝘢𝘭𝘢 𝘰𝘯 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘨𝘯? 𝘠𝘰𝘶 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘸𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘢𝘴𝘬? 𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘬. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘯𝘰.” Then the kicker: “𝘐𝘵 𝘵𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘦𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘖𝘣𝘢𝘮𝘢 𝘰𝘯. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦, 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘐 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳. 𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺’𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘨𝘶𝘺 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.” And who does show up? “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘴? 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘶𝘱.” That’s the tell. Republicans walk into adversarial interviews. Democrats won’t even walk into 𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐥𝐲 ones — because Maher asks follow-up questions, and follow-up questions are what the Democratic messaging apparatus cannot survive. Then the clip shifts to Maher defending Trump on foreign policy — to his own liberal audience. “𝘏𝘦 𝘣𝘰𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘥 𝘐𝘳𝘢𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘗𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺. 𝘏𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖. 𝘏𝘦 𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘕𝘈𝘛𝘖. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘶𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘯 𝘙𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘢.” When someone accused him of “coming around,” Maher shot back: “𝘐’𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵’𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦.” Then there’s the White House ballroom segment, where Maher defended the renovation: “𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘱𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘪𝘵. 𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦. 𝘍𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘧 𝘸𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘥, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘏𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘢 𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘮. 𝘞𝘦’𝘳𝘦 𝘢 𝘣𝘪𝘨 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺. 𝘞𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘢 𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵. 𝘐’𝘷𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.” The liberal outrage machine is so reflexive that it attacks a private donation to improve the People’s House — and Maher called it out. This is a man who voted Democrat his entire life, told his audience he doesn’t hate the Iran bombing, showed clips of Iranians doing the Trump dance on his show (Yahoo Entertainment), and has called the Iranian government a 𝐟𝐚𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲. He’s not switching parties. He’s just refusing to lie — and that alone is enough to make him radioactive to the Democratic establishment. His own show gets 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 now — not because Maher moved right, but because the left moved away from anyone who asks inconvenient questions. 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐯𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐬𝐢𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐭. 𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲.

M.A. Rothman

20,644 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce