Future is certain - the end is near. Or so says the child prophet of vogue apocalyptic cult named "Extinction Rebellion". In this video we'll point out some deeper implications of promoting a child "on the autistic spectrum" as an embodiment of wisdom and political acumen. We focus on the one of The Guardian articles praising the virtues of holy fool de jour, Greta Thunberg, and in the process inadvertently exposing more than the tip of the iceberg of lunacy apparently holding sway on both media and masses in Western Europe.
Recently, young Swedish girl Greta Thunberg (15) addressed the big wigs at Davos Summit, reiterating the standard Doomsday predictions about the end of the world that is due to come down in a few years, "IF WE DON'T ACT NOW!!!". Of course, she has been presented as a courageous child speaking "truth" to power, although one must note that by some strange coincidence this was exactly what those in power speak themselves. The affair would be just a side note in the story of communist like system of sustainable development propaganda, where "innocents" (read: "simpletons) like children or tribesman in bizarre costumes "spontaneously" address comrades in the transnational comity asking them to "act now" as if this is not what bigwigs themselves propagate from the late Sixties onwards, if it wasn't for a notable novelty: Greta Thunberg is an autistic child or, at least, she is "on the autistic spectrum". In this video we'll explore the implications of putting severely mentally and psychologically disabled child to serve as a benchmark of excellence for other children and a new model "holy fool" employed to sell a rather devious political agenda.
It is more or less usual procedure to observe political correctness from the point of view of someone rejecting it - looking from the outside upon this peculiar edifice and attempting to describe and explain it. However this always seems to be not completely satisfactory. There's always a sense of some point being missed.
Well, here we'll attempt something different: show how PC acts upon us from the standpoint of one submitting to it and suffering its coercive power. From this angle, some quite worrisome insights become apparent, chief one of them being a potential of PC to act intimately - intrinsically - i.e. invisibly upon the will itself, changing not only actions and thoughts, but very faculties of man that act or think.
In this video we analyze Slavoj Žižek's proposition to reinvent the "divine violence" of "classical" revolutionary, laid out in his essay on Robespierre. We point out Slavoj's rhetorical tricks by which he obfuscates his, rather blatant, appropriation of the thesis that Revolution (a.k.a. "Event") without terror is "decaffeinated", i.e. not really revolutionary at all. Also, we lay out Žižek's proposal of "revolutionary subject" as an essentially "inhuman human" - a virtual being brought into existence by depersonalization - the proverbial "individuum" which, for some reason, pops up every now and then into our focus when we analyze ideas of postmodern totalitarians. We conclude by demonstrating how Žižek's clown like demeanour and rhetorical tricks hide quite, if only potentially, dangerous man.
The common notion of totalitarianism tends to present the broad canvas of all-power state from which we should be wary. Yet, as with all things, totalitarianism begins at home. In this video, we'll depict how even housewives can develop the totalitarian mentality with no great effort; and how every argument for normalcy, on the contrary, requires supreme efforts.
Mihai Marinescu revisits Orwell's "1984" and provides us with the exposition of still darker undertones present in this work, popular perhaps for all the wrong reasons. Orwell proposed no antidotes - but could it be that he never detected the essence of the poison itself? As Mihai demonstrates, the real horror of "1984" does not lay in the depiction of totalitarian monstrosity, as is customary understood. It is in the soul of its hero doomed to encounter his own reflection in the eye of executioner.
In this video we compare two instances of extreme identity politics - one being the ultimate piece of politically correct legislative drafted in 2015. for the "benefit" of European nations by then elite think tank, the other coming from then fringe Alt Right spokesman's talk given at approximately the same period. We propose that both instances of identity politics rely on congenial principles of identity based on negation where personal dignity of human being is founded on interactions of opposed social groups and not on the intrinsic value of human person.
In plain English: we demonstrate that the same kind of stench usually indicates to same crap, whichever nostril picked it up first, whether left or right.