EUA

[cabeça de martelo]

Atenção, o Nazismo tinha toda uma carga filosófica/religiosa/racista que vinha dos grupos ocultistas que começaram a aparecer na Áustria e na Alemanha no século 19. Hitler pertenceu de resto a um desses grupos.

O Nacional-Socialismo tinha toda uma série de características únicas, como qualquer ditadura baseada na figura de um único homem.

[wagnerm25]

Atenção, o Nazismo tinha toda uma carga filosófica/religiosa/racista que vinha dos grupos ocultistas que começaram a aparecer na Áustria e na Alemanha no século 19. Hitler pertenceu de resto a um desses grupos.

Essa coisa de ocultismo era mais coisa do Himmler do que do Hitler, mas de qq forma é verdade.

[P44]

Atenção, o Nazismo tinha toda uma carga filosófica/religiosa/racista que vinha dos grupos ocultistas que começaram a aparecer na Áustria e na Alemanha no século 19. Hitler pertenceu de resto a um desses grupos.

Essa coisa de ocultismo era mais coisa do Himmler do que do Hitler, mas de qq forma é verdade.

Todo o movimento Nacional-Socialista foi beber muito ao oculto que era moda na altura

[cabeça de martelo]

O Steve Bannon deu uma entrevista ao "The American Prospect", onde contradisse o Trump em relação à Coreia. Como ele era uma personagem muito pouco consensual dentro da própria administração e o ego do trump deve ter sido ferido, ele foi despedido pelo chefe.

http://prospect.org/article/steve-bannon-unrepentant

Agora o governo Norte-Americano tem como homens fortes o Mike Pence, o General Mattis (USMC), o General John F. Kelly (USMC), o General H. R. McMaster (Exército) e o Rex Tillerson (ExxonMobil). Qualquer um destes homens pode ser o próximo alvo e verdade seja dita, o Mattis tem uma autonomia total e controla as Forças Armadas de uma forma como nenhum Ministro da Defesa alguma vez o fez. Para além disso ele tem desdito repetidamente o Trump, será ele o próximo?

[Sterrius]

Os EUA realmente reviveu uma lei de 1974 pra começar a pensar em investigar a china por roubo de propriedade intelectual.

E a verdade é que a China tem se aproveitado de empresas americanas mas por escolha delas mesmas. Elas que escolhem ficar no mercado chines por 5-10 anos até uma empresa chinesa as trocar.
Todas pensaram que iam dar um golpe na china e estão é tomando o golpe em troca.

[Bourne]

A discussão sobre direitos de propriedade intelectual perdeu importância nos dias atuais. Por que todo mundo rouba coisas de todo mundo, utilizando engenharia reversa de produtos, processos e tecnologias conhecidas, como também através da dos trabalhadores. Ou seja, é praticamente impossível que esses conhecimentos deixem de circular e que seja possível provar que ocorreu o roubo de fato. É o caso das empresas americanas, coreanas, japonesas e outras. Cada um rouba coisas das concorrentes nacionais e no estrangeiro, cooperam e competem entre si.

Os casos de empresas americanas que desenvolveram uma tecnologia, foi roubada e aprimorada por uma chinesa ou coreana. Depois outra empresa americana rouba de novo esse tecnologia. Isso ocorre em Smartphone e eletrônica de consumo em geral. Hoje abre um Samsung S8, Iphone S7 ou Honor Huawei estão cheio de componentes diversos com patentes de diversos proprietários. Inclusive boa parte das peças do Iphone é feita pela Samsung, como também soluções usadas pela Samsung tem origem na Apple. os chineses também pagam pelo uso e recebem por tecnologias desenvolvidas por eles.

Assim a legislação e acordos atuais são mais preocupados em fazer acordos para pagar pelo uso da patente do que evitar seu uso. Inclusive é até bem visto na parte econômica que esse intercâmbio ocorre porque força a competição e mais investimento em P&D. Portanto, nenhuma empresa pode ficar parada já que logo alguém pega a tecnologia e pode se tornar melhor.

[P44]

[P44]

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
Leftist Vandals Confuse Joan of Arc for Confederate Statue



It seems no historical figure is safe from leftist vandals and their ignorance of history. Now a statue of French icon Joan of Arc has been defaced in the French Quarter of New Orleans. The statue has become an apparent victim of the backlash aimed at Confederate monuments.

The Times-Picayune reports:

The phrase “Tear it Down” was hastily sprayed in black paint across the base of the golden Joan of Arc statue on Decatur Street in the French Quarter sometime earlier this week. It has since been removed, with only the vaguest traces of the paint remaining.

The “Tear it Down” tag would seem to relate to the debate surrounding the city’s ongoing removal of four Confederate monuments. But the statue of Joan of Arc, a 15th-century military leader, martyr and Catholic saint, hasn’t been mentioned in the controversy to this point.

Amy Kirk Duvoisin, the founder of the annual Joan of Arc parade that ceremonially pauses at the statue on the first day of Carnival season, says she’s confused by the vandalism.

“Surely, people realize she’s not related to American history,” she said referring to the French icon.

If there’s a bright side to the incident, Duvoisin said, it’s that it’s “an opportunity to teach about” the teenage warrior who was burned at the stake in 1431.



Surely, if Antifa and others want to rally against the Confederacy, they might want to crack open a book and learn something about it.

An Abraham Lincoln statue was vandalized in Chicago. While it may have been the work of factions rallying to defend the Confederacy, it cannot be ruled out that this too was ignorant leftists.

At present, it seems any statue may be at risk as uneducated mobs lash out against anything they perceive to be linked to the Confederacy.

http://feeltheliberty.com/leftist-vanda ... te-statue/

[P44]

Everything is going great! in 1 amazing Trump administration picture



Let's break down the looks -- and messages sent via those looks -- for each white man of the 13 white men and 1 woman in the photo. Side note: I have to believe the attendees were told not to smile due to the seriousness of the topic discussed. Otherwise, the sheer spontaneous seriousness is truly beyond belief. (Huge thanks to CNN's Jim Acosta for helping ID everyone.)
Here's the message we're taking away from each person pictured (from left to right):

* John Kelly: The newly installed White House chief of staff looks vaguely menacing -- like the photographer had just said something he didn't like. Also, he's doing that thing that photographers hate when trying to do a big group picture: He's not scooching in enough. Get closer to Sessions, general! Or, given Trump's feeling about the attorney general, maybe, um, don't.

* Jeff Sessions: The attorney general looks like he just came from the gym where his did a MAJOR chest workout. He is fully pumped up -- and, oddly, given Trump's views about him, less unhappy-looking than the others. Maybe he's just happy to be included.

* Elaine Duke: Duke is the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, filling the job since Kelly's elevation to White House chief of staff. Her face seems to say: "Wait, am I seriously the only woman here? SERIOUSLY?"

* Tom Bossert: Bossert, Trump's homeland security adviser, appears to be stifling a laugh. Probably about how much taller he is than everyone else in the photo. Or maybe that's just Bossert's "serious" face.

* Paul Selva: Selva is an Air Force general and the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (Joe Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, was in the midst of a trip to South Korea, China and Japan.) His uniform says "all business," but his face says "is this over with yet?"

* Rex Tillerson: No Rexit! No Rexit! The secretary of state is clearly a veteran of these "be super serious" photos. He's not frowning. He's not smiling. His face represents perfect equanimity. I'm impressed.

* Donald Trump: The President's "this-is-tough-and-serious-stuff-and-I-am-tough-and-serious" face is a classic of the genre. Also, am I the only one wondering why he is sitting while everyone else is standing?

* Mike Pence: Steely. Determined. Also, "I flew back from Panama early for this?"

* James Mattis: The secretary of defense wins the award for Most Serious-Looking. I mean, that look shows that my dude is NOT kidding around.

* H.R. McMaster: The national security adviser looks more unhappy than serious. Also, he thought they were all turning sideways for the photo, but then Mattis just stood straight on. Come on, Mattis!

* Steve Mnuchin: The treasury secretary is my favorite part of the photo. I'm not sure if it's the knowing semi-smirk or the amazingly stiff arms. Either way, I love everything about him.

* Mike Pompeo: "When did we start doing two rows here? And why I am in the back one? It looks like they just Photoshopped my head in there! I'm the director of the CIA, damn it! "

* Mick Mulvaney: On the one hand, Mulvaney, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, is way out on the fringes of the picture. On the other hand, he beat Pompeo out for a spot in the front row.

* Dan Coats: Coats is the director of national intelligence. And he was elected to the Senate from Indiana two separate times. Which means he is a big enough boss to be the only one in the picture not to wear a suit. Suit separates forever!

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/20/polit ... index.html?

[Penguin]

Socialism, fascist-style: hostility to capitalism plus extreme racism
The far right share with Bernie Sanders supporters a desire to change the system – but the society they wish to build would only benefit white people


A far-right demonstrator in Charlottesville. For the new wave of national socialists, ‘socialism means kicking out immigrants, sequestering black people, and establishing an authoritarian state.’

Sunday 20 August 2017 11.00 BST Last modified on Sunday 20 August 2017 12.31 BST
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... -far-right

The groups that marched through Charlottesville last weekend with clubs, shields and cans of mace were clearly drawn from the most extreme and violent end of America’s far right. But key elements of the ideology of at least some of them echo themes that have animated populist groups across the political spectrum, including on the left.

In their chants and placards, the marchers were explicitly fascist, racist and antisemitic. One of their number is accused of murdering a leftwing activist with his car and injuring many more. They came prepared to do violence to leftists, whom they consider to be existential enemies. They weren’t shy about any of this, and the event was the crest of an extremist wave that has been swelling since well before Donald Trump’s inauguration.

But at the same time, some of the groups that marched evince a hostility to neoliberal capitalism, which is equal to that of the most ardent supporters of Bernie Sanders, the leftwing populist who mounted a vigorous challenge to Hillary Clinton during last year’s Democratic primaries – although for the far right it comes inextricably linked to a virulent racism. Many also support the enhancement of the welfare state.

For example, those marching under the red and blue banners of the National Socialist Movement (NSM) have signed up to a manifesto that supports a living wage, sweeping improvements in healthcare, an end to sales taxes on “things of life’s necessity” and “land reform” for “affordable housing”.

An establishing principle in the document written by their leader, Jeff Schoep, is that the state “shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens”. It calls for “the nationalisation of all businesses which have been formed into corporations”.

The manifesto of Matthew Heimbach’s Traditionalist Worker Party calls for “opportunities for workers to have jobs with justice”. And in a manifesto issued on the day of the Charlottesville march, the noted far-right figurehead Richard Spencer wrote that “the interests of businessmen and global merchants should never take precedence over the wellbeing of workers, families, and the natural world”.

Spencer has previously spoken out – including at the American Renaissance conference, a gathering of far-right activists in Nashville in July – in favour of “single payer” universal healthcare.

At the conference, Spencer gave Trump just three out of 10 when invited to rate him – because he was “too focused on the Republican agenda” of tax cuts and dismantling Obamacare.

These critiques of capitalism and mainstream conservatism are key to the socialist element of national socialism. Observers of the far right argue that understanding this is essential to demystifying the far right’s appeal, especially to the alienated millennial men currently swelling its ranks.

Matthew Lyons is a researcher into far-right movements, and the author of one book on rightwing populism in the US, and another, recently published, on the alt-right. He argues that a lot of the “socialist” content in the ideology of movements such as the NSM is vague, and is at one level “a prime example of how the far right takes elements of leftist politics and appropriates them for their own purposes”.

But he adds that “there is a broad hostility to an idea of the capitalist ruling class”, within a “notion of capitalism centred on stereotypes of Jews”.

He talks of “a long tradition in Nazism and other parts of the far right of drawing a distinction between finance capital and industrial capital”, with the former, identified with Jews, being seen as “parasitic”.

This identification is apparent on the web pages of NSM, and – until the site was purged from the internet – on the website of Vanguard America, the group with which the alleged murderer James Fields marched in Charlottesville.

“Jewish finance” is consistently nominated as the principal enemy of these groups. Lyons explains that this distinction is an antisemitic variant on the ideology of “producerism”, which is common across the populist right and privileges the makers of tangible things over those engaged in more abstract pursuits. “They define industrial capitalists as ‘good’ capitalists, or even as workers,” he says, adding that this was how the noted antisemite Henry Ford described his role at the head of a giant auto manufacturer.

So there is a notion of class conflict, and even a revolutionary perspective, says Lyons. But the society they plan to build on the wreckage of the one they overturn will be constructed for the benefit of whites.

Their socialism, explains Lyons “is not universalist. It rejects any notion of an international working class.” In their utopia, the state would only be used to tend to the needs of white people. And many groups also reject the idea of equality even among whites.

Alexander Reid Ross is the author of Against the Fascist Creep, a sweeping history of fascism from the early 20th century to the present. He argues that while contemporary fascists try to “make nationalism palatable for the working class”, ultimately what they envision “has nothing to do with socialism; it’s absolutely inegalitarian”.

He also points to the historical example of fascist states during the inter-war period, where workers lived on less food, received lower wages for working longer hours, and enjoyed no collective bargaining rights, and then were fed into the meat grinder of the second world war.

Similarly, for the new wave of national socialists, Ross says, “socialism means kicking out immigrants, sequestering black people, and establishing an authoritarian state within which they can live out their fantasies”.

Implicitly and explicitly, they offer a critique of the free market capitalism that has been recent conservative orthodoxy throughout the developed west.

Shane Burley, researcher and author of a forthcoming book, Fascism Today: What it Is and How to End It, says: “What they want is a situation where the economy is not left up to the free market – where it is instead under the control of an elite.”

He points out that the trend of mobilising socialist ideas and rhetoric “really dates back to the ‘Strasserite’ section of the Nazis”, and helped pull support from areas that would normally go to the far left. “It would be a socialism that retains hierarchy, where classes are determined by God or ‘science’.”

A preoccupation with the source of inequality was on display at July’s American Renaissance conference, where speakers flourished IQ data, and even images of different-sized brains, in their accounts of the reason for social divides. There, and at other alt-right events this year, it has been evident that these views are very attractive to a particular slice of young, millennial men.

In Charlottesville, hundreds marched sporting white polo shirts and distinctive, undercut “fashy haircuts”. At the Nashville conference, they made up half the crowd. In the breaks between speakers, many sought out Spencer to take candid selfies.

Ross said that in the unresolved aftermath of the 2008 economic crisis, those seeking out fascist groups resemble those of the interwar period: “veterans who are pissed off about the way that society treats them”; and “an educated strata who don’t feel they can find a place in the current economy”.

Observers argue that Trump’s campaign rhetoric runs parallel to the racialised economic populism of the far right, and opened up a space in which they can proselytise.

Lyons says that as president, Trump “has mostly pursued a familiar conservative agenda”, but as a candidate, his platform of protectionism and xenophobic economic nationalism marked out the place where “civic and racial nationalism coincide”.

In the wake of the Charlottesville protests, and as Trump’s presidency continues to melt down, it remains to be seen whether socialism, fascist-style, will retain its allure for so many resentful, violent young men.

[Penguin]

A extrema direita e a extrema esquerda têm muito em comum.

[wagnerm25]

A extrema direita e a extrema esquerda têm muito em comum.

Seria ótimo largá-los em um ringue com gel para uma luta até a morte. De ambos.

[Juniorbombeiro]

A extrema direita e a extrema esquerda têm muito em comum.

Vandalizar estátuas não é a mesma coisa que atirar em pessoas ou atropelá-las.

[Penguin]

A extrema direita e a extrema esquerda têm muito em comum.

Vandalizar estátuas não é a mesma coisa que atirar em pessoas ou atropelá-las.

Concordo.
Me referia ao artigo acima do The Guardian.
Ambos flertam com a xenofobia, com o autoritarismo, demostram ódio ao diferente, rejeitam o liberalismo, liberdade de expressão, a globalização, as liberdades individuais, a democracia etc.

[wagnerm25]

A extrema direita e a extrema esquerda têm muito em comum.

Vandalizar estátuas não é a mesma coisa que atirar em pessoas ou atropelá-las.

Só para ficar em dois exemplos:

Aqui no BR não faz muito explodiram a cabeça de um cinegrafista.

Aqui no RS, um sem terra passou a foice no pescoço de um PM no centro da cidade durante um protesto.