Vivek Ramaswamy Holds Up the Mirror to The Washington Post on the Topic of Racism

The conversation:

Washington Post Reporter: Do you condemn white supremacy and white nationalism?

Vivek Ramaswamy: I mean, what this? Who are you with? With the Washington Washington Post? Alright, so Potato Potato, okay.

Of course, I condemn any form of vicious racial discrimination in this country. But I think that the presumption of your question is fundamentally based on a falsehood, that that really is the main form of racial discrimination we see in this country today. Institutionalized racial discrimination that we see doesn't come from somehow discriminate against people on the basis of some tentative white supremacy. It's based on affirmative action. It's based on actually discriminating against people on the color of their skin in a way that's actually institutionalized today. Was there a point in our history, a point in our prior national history where there have been vicious forms of anti-black or anti-brown discrimination throughout this country after the Civil War and otherwise? Yes. But you're looking in the rearview mirror and using that to pose a question today that is so far removed from what the reality is in America today, this myth of white supremacy. The closest you can find is Jesse Smollet, where you were all were actually speaking of trust in the media jumping up and down over some false narrative. The best way you're able to find your best instance of white supremacy was a guy who was actually paying his other fellow people to be actually staging something that didn't happen.

And so stop picking on this farce of some figment that exists at some infinitesimally small fringe of the American public today to open our eyes to the actual real threats that we face. And I think that it's frankly questions and framings like that have caused the American public to lose all trust in the mainstream media, I'm sorry to say, for good reason.

Washington Post: Can you say that you condemn white supremacy?

Vivek Ramaswamy: I'm not going to recite some catechism for you. I'm against vicious racial discrimination in this country. So I'm not pledging allegiance to your new religion of modern wokeism, which actually fits fits the test. I'm not going to bend a knee to your religion. I'm sorry. I'm not asking you to bend the knee to mine. And I'm not going to bend the knee to yours. But do I condemn vicious racial discrimination? Yes, I do. Am I going to play your silly game of gotcha? No, I'm not.

Continue ReadingVivek Ramaswamy Holds Up the Mirror to The Washington Post on the Topic of Racism

While Excess Post-Pandemic Deaths Soar, Corporate News Organizations Pretend Not to Notice

Russell Brand recently quoted distressing statistics from insurance companies.  As you can see from the following video, there are large numbers of excess deaths in the United States, even though the pandemic is over.  These numbers have been announced by bean counters employed by insurance companies, not politicians and not the public health "experts" who got almost everything wrong during the pandemic.

Brand explains the problem:

All of a sudden, we now know, as a result of the release of insurance premium figures, that excess deaths in America are beyond even the peak of the pandemic even though the pandemic is over. We are aware now that in the first nine months of 2023--I can't believe that this is true but it is--there's as many young Americans who have died as died in all the American wars from Vietnam to present day. The only reason that we know this information is because insurance companies have reported on it...

Why would the legacy media not investigate [unexplained sudden deaths of young healthy-seeming people] with the same vigor that they've applied to a variety of other subjects that appear to enhance their ability to control dissenting voices and shut down counter narratives? Why is there a demand for censorship to be enshrined in law from the EU, to Ireland, to the United Kingdom to the United States of America to Canada? ... I'm not suggesting for a moment that all of those athletes died or all of those athletes were suffering as a result of particular medications, but the data is available now. Excess deaths are rising, the life expectancy in the United States of America is falling and it isn't because of COVID. Comparable figures are available in the United Kingdom. And once again, the same is true: sudden deaths, unexpected deaths, excess deaths are rising and it isn't because of COVID.

Curiously, there is a total lack of appetite to investigate this even though it seems like there's ample evidence to warrant an investigation. Health Agencies are not investigating it. Legacy media organizations are not investigating it. Elsewhere, we've reported on the kind of relationships that exist between big pharma and cable news media who received the vast majority of their funding not only from big pharma, but specifically from Pfizer, just one organization.

Have you ever seen Albert Bourla contend with a single difficult question except for when he was chased by Rebel News from the snowy streets of Davos? Of course you haven't. You've just seen him in puff piece after puff piece. Independent media is vital because it allows these questions to be asked. We're not for the valuable voices in this space, you wouldn't have a COVID inquiry in the UK. You wouldn't have any dissent at all. You wouldn't have no uptake for the latest COVID booster shots because none of this information will be available.

The real power is with you, your independent thoughts, your ability to choose. That's what they are trying to shut down and control. They do not want an awakened dissenting population investigating the high levels of corruption in their own state, in their own media and in particular in globalist corporatist agencies and financial entities, because if people become aware to that we would oppose it. They want to control and regulate a population that is mistrustful of its media its judiciary as law enforcement agencies and in particular, the establishment interests that appear to be able to coordinate all of them.

You've just seen with your own eyes sufficient evidence to warrant a serious investigation into the impact of the pandemic era distinct and separate from the impact of COVID itself, whether that's as a result of the rise of heart disease, or people taking their own lives or mental health or the collapse of small businesses or the impact on children's education, and certainly, and perhaps most importantly, the possible impact of certain medical interventions that were highly propagandized, the message of which was amplified. Questions weren't asked the sand was shut down. The gym experts were shamed and smeared and shut down and dissenting voices were attacked. This is time for a global reckoning. Let's make sure that 2024 isn't like 2023 a year where ordinary people's views were oppressed. So the establishment power could be continually magnified.

[More . . . ]

Continue ReadingWhile Excess Post-Pandemic Deaths Soar, Corporate News Organizations Pretend Not to Notice

The Modern Destruction of Romance?

Have we convinced our young adults to give up on romance? Freya India thinks so and "It’s tragic, all of this. Tragic because it’s putting us on a trajectory to miss out on what’s actually meaningful." Her evidence? See the following excerpt for some and read her entire article for a lot more:

Gen Z are dating less. Having less sex. Settling for situationships that are empty and meaningless. And I think a major part of this is that human connection comes with a high level of risk. Among young men, for example, I’d say this risk-aversion is most obvious in fear of rejection. A recent survey found that almost 45% of men aged 18 to 25 have never approached a woman in person. Another Pew Survey found that half of single men between 18 and 30 are voluntarily single, which some suggest is in part because of fear.

But I think young women are also risk-averse about relationships. We are naturally more risk-averse, for a start, and an even higher number of women are voluntarily single. But our risk-aversion plays out differently. Most obvious to me is the way we talk about relationships, the advice young women give each other, the therapy-speak and feminist clichés that I think often cloak a deep fear of hurt and vulnerability. . . . Social media is full of young women warning each other and listing out red flags and reasons why you should dump him or dodge commitment. He compliments you a lot? Love-bombing. Says I miss you too soon? Run. Approaches you in person? Predator. It’s all so cynical. It’s all about how not to catch feelings; ways not to get attached; how “you’re not gonna get hurt if you have another man waiting”! We blunt romance and passion with this constant calculation of risk, this paranoid scanning for threats, and by holding back to avoid being hurt. We encourage each other to be emotionally absent, unfazed, uncaring. We even call it empowerment! It’s not. It’s neuroticism. I think we are a generation absolutely terrified of getting hurt and doing all we can to avoid it.

Jonathan Haidt is also impressed with India's analysis:

Continue ReadingThe Modern Destruction of Romance?