I wonder how long YouTube will keep this available!?
Marx
All posts tagged Marx
The following is an email from https://www.advanceaustralia.org.au/?
‘Anthony Albanese keeps telling us the Voice is a “modest” proposal.
“It’s just an advisory body,” he says, over and over.
Well, he must be praying Australians don’t get to hear this.
It’s from Marcia Langton, co-chair of the government’s “Indigenous Voice Co-Design Senior Advisory Group” – this is the mob who actually invented the Voice.
She was on ABC radio this week, trying to explain how it would work when “advising” parliament and executive government.
Keep in mind Langton wrote the mind-numbing, 272-page “co-design” report that Albanese says has all the detail you need on the Voice.
“Why would we restrict the Voice to representations that can’t be challenged in court?” she said.
Langton was asked if she thought it was a problem that if a democratic government made a decision without listening to the Voice, it “could be challenged in the High Court and potentially stopped from being implemented until the Voice had been heard”.
Her response?
“That’s a possibility. And why wouldn’t we want that to be the case,” she said.
If the Voice is “completely gutted”, she said, “then the government can ignore all of the Voice’s decisions with impunity”.
The activists pushing the Voice insist that it won’t confer any special rights.
But can you take the government to the High Court of Australia if it doesn’t listen to what you want?
No bloody way!
But here we have the activist who designed the Voice to Parliament saying that if your democratically elected government makes a decision without “listening to the Voice”, they will wind up in court.
Maybe that’s why Albo said last year that it would be a “very brave government” that ignored the Voice?
Nope, there’s nothing “modest” about this massive overhaul of your Constitution.
The truth is that the dangerous and divisive Voice will exert a political – and legal – power unlike anything before seen in our nation.
They want you to think the Voice is just a feel-good “request”, a “modest” change to our nation’s founding document.
But that’s a lie.
This is way bigger than they are letting on.’
‘At least one Canadian senator is drawing chilling historical parallels and similarities between censorship legislation being introduced by the Liberals and what is seen in totalitarian regimes.
It’s coming in the form of Bill C-11, a piece of legislation brought forward by the federal Liberal government that would mean sweeping regulation of internet content and censorship by the Canadian Radio-Television Corporation (CRTC).
As the first of its kind in Canada, Bill C-11 An Act to Amend the Broadcasting Act, has been widely criticized as an Orwellian attempt to control the content Canadians can produce and access online. Yet it passed in the House of Commons and has now made its way to the third reading at the Canadian senate – where the only hope of squashing it is by appealing to unelected and primarily liberal-appointed senators.
This seemed hopeless, until Liberal-appointed Senator David Richards drew a chilling comparison:
“In Germany, it was called the Ministry of National Enlightenment,” he said during the third reading.
This reference draws parallels to the Reich Ministry for Propaganda and Public Enlightenment which controlled film, radio, theatre, and the press during Hitler’s reign in Nazi Germany.
Hitler utilized mass media to propagate his radical ideologies and political goals while his faithful followers burned books to ensure the purity of the state.
“Stalin again will be looking over our shoulder when we write,” furthered Canadian Senator Richards, drawing additional similarities between this bill and dictatorships.
Stalin took control of the notorious Russian publication Pravda (meaning truth), and used it as a powerful tool that eventually became the official mouthpiece of the Soviet Union and Stalin’s own dogmas.
The official ideologies of these regimes had this glaring commonality – censorship and control of all printed and produced communication with the public.
Senator Richards continued with his unsettling parallels, stating that he thinks the bill is “censorship being bundled up and sold to the public as ‘national inclusion,’” before further criticizing the legislation for “creating compliance instead of greatness,” even referring to the dystopian writings of George Orwell directly.
“Orwell said that we must resist the prison of self-censorship. This bill goes a long way to construct such a prison.”
The totalitarian society described in 1984 uses a superstate party-approved version of English referred to as “NEWSPEAK” to quell complex thought and manipulate its citizens into robotic interactions. One infamous word is the term thoughtcrime which defines any belief that questions the ruling party as a crime.
It’s exactly what appears to be currently happening to any remaining intellectual free thinker in Western society over the last decade or so – arguably prior – but has especially intensified under the COVID-19 regime.
There are medical professionals being silenced and threatened into self-censorship by their regulators like the countless doctors suspended by the College of Physicians and Surgeons for simply upholding their oath of ‘First, Do No Harm,’ and providing their patients with true informed consent in the wake of the novel pharmaceutical emergency use of drugs.
Or consider free-speech advocate, psychologist, author, speaker, and academic Jordan Peterson, who is facing an onslaught of censorship mobs, and has most recently received an order from his regulator, the College of Psychologists of Ontario, in a disturbing attempt to re-educate him.
It’s a slippery slope and we’re already on it.
Will Canadian senators squash Bill C-11 as we continue on this downward spiral into an oppressive censorship abyss?
Urge them to stop this legislation at StopTheCensorship.ca.’https://www.rebelnews.com/canadian_senator_draws_chilling_parallels_between_bill_c_11_and_totalitarian_regimes?
There is so much going on in higher (or should it be called lower) education I hope the following helps you to navigate what is happening on university and college campuses from THE COLLEGE FIX https://www.thecollegefix.com/.
POLITICSUChicago selects failed candidates Beto O’Rourke, Tim Ryan to teach politics
JONATHAN DRAEGER – UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON •FEBRUARY 3, 2023
DEI HIGHER EDUCATIONFauxcahontas: White female scholars keep pretending to be Native American
MARGARET PEPPIATT – FRANCISCAN UNIVERSITY OF STEUBENVILLE FEBRUARY 3, 2023
FREE SPEECHMIT faculty ‘increasingly afraid to express their views,’ survey finds
ESTHER WICKHAM – THE KINGS COLLEGE FEBRUARY 3, 2023
ANALYSIS FEMINISM10 countercultural female scholars to watch in 2023
MAGGIE KELLY – ASSISTANT EDITOR FEBRUARY 2, 2023
CLIMATE CHANGE HIGHER ED BUBBLE HIGHER EDUCATIONStanford University considers barring oil and gas research funding
JACK APPLEWHITE – UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA FEBRUARY 2, 2023
RELIGION TECHNOLOGYMeet the popular campus chaplain whose podcast reaches tens of millions monthly
AIDAN MAYS – FRANCISCAN UNIVERSITY OF STEUBENVILLE FEBRUARY 2, 2023
FREE SPEECH POLITICAL CORRECTNESSPenn law dean hit with grievance over drawn out Amy Wax investigation
BENJAMIN OGILVIE – UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL FEBRUARY 1, 2023
CURRICULUMYes, ‘Zombie Studies’ is a thing
FINN MCCOLE – TRINITY COLLEGE FEBRUARY 1, 2023
FEMINISM HIGHER EDUCATIONOffice for Civil Rights probes complaints Stanford discriminates against men
MARTIN FRIEDENTHAL – UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS FEBRUARY 1, 2023
‘According to published reports, George Soros is teaching college courses these days to thousands of students.
To be clear, he is not actually on campuses in front of the class. Rather, exhaustive investigations by journalists reveal how his reach, influence, and above all, money, is resetting curriculum to reflect his political ideology wherever and whenever he can.
Investigative author Matt Palumbo wrote in the New York Post last month:
“In 2020 alone, Soros’ Open Society Foundations budgeted more than $63 million, or just over 5% of its budget, toward influencing higher education here and abroad….
“More than 19 colleges had individually received at least $1 million from Soros, including Harvard University, Columbia University, Indiana University, and Georgetown University, among others.”
One institution in particular, Palumbo reveals, has significantly benefited from Soros’ campaign of campus influence, Bard College.
“Bard College had received nearly $80 million total from Soros when he announced in 2020 that he’d be awarding it an additional $100 million over the next decade.”
For what purpose?
It would appear that Soros is seeking to leverage his enormous wealth to create a new political cadre from an emerging generation that will pursue his goals today, and long after he is gone. It is what these goals are that is being questioned (for instance here , here and here).
Soros was a student of Karl Popper (author of The Open Society and Its Enemies) in London. Later, to promote freedom and defeat totalitarianism, Soros donated millions to such causes as Lech Walesa’s Solidarity Movement, which led Poland out of the grip of the Soviet Empire, and to financing democracy movements in Yugoslavia working to oust Slobodan Milosevic.
More recently, however, questions arise, such as, in 2106: “Is Soros Funding An Agitprop Protest Movement to Destabilize Poland’s New Democratically Elected Government?”‘https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19373/goerge-soros
‘Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ 6,000-word essay, recently published in left-wing publication The Monthly, shows conservatives were correct in predicting the Albanese Labor government would be a meddling, bigger-spending, anti-capitalist nightmare.
However, while there is an understandable temptation to label Chalmers’ love letter to big government as “socialism”, that’s not quite right.
It embodies something that could prove far worse.
Chalmers’ promise to “redesign markets for investment in social purposes, based on common metrics of performance” sounds innocuous.
As does his purported optimism that “2023 will be the year we build a better capitalism” that is “uniquely Australian”.
However, this supposedly better capitalism, or “values-based capitalism”, as he puts it, is not uniquely Australian.
It’s been virulently propagated internationally for decades by the likes of Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum (WEF), under the banner of “stakeholder capitalism”, and is a core component of the WEF’s Great Reset initiative.
The Great Reset is a proposed alliance between big government and big business to “reset” the global economy post-pandemic, by pushing companies to adopt “Environmental, Social, and Governance” (ESG) policies as a condition of operation.
ESG policies are characterised by identity politics and radical climate action, and are determined in part by faceless, unelected corporate elites.
It’s not socialism; it’s neo-feudalism.
ESG policies are the “values” of Chalmers’ “values-based capitalism”.
We know this because his essay bears a striking resemblance to the type of stakeholder capitalism outlined in Klaus Schwab’s 2022 co-written book, The Great Narrative, a sort of sequel to his 2020 book The Great Reset.
This, for anyone who holds right-of-centre values, should be cause for alarm.
Chalmers describes a core component of values-based capitalism as enabling investors “to work out the climate-risk rating of a firm just as a lender can work out a credit-risk rating”.
“In 2023, we will create a new sustainable finance architecture, including a new taxonomy to label the climate impact of different investments. That will help investors align their choices with climate targets, help businesses who want to support the transition get finance more easily…This strategy begins with climate finance,” he continues.
Similarly, in The Great Narrative, Schwab says stakeholder capitalism “welcomes the idea of legislative action to define with precision the benchmarks for ESG reporting and performance”.
My essay in @THEMONTHLY out tomorrow in hard copy or read it here: https://t.co/IxeNPWsazE#auspol #ausecon pic.twitter.com/gktOUGH6Nf— Jim Chalmers MP (@JEChalmers) January 29, 2023
“In the same way that companies have an obligation to report their financial results…in the not-too-distant future they will have a similar obligation to report on ESG metrics… governments will make the last call for setting the legal obligations, targets and incentives around ESG standards.”
Ultimately, the purpose of both values-based and stakeholder capitalism is to justify politicians working with corporations to create big government policies, and insidiously exert the kind of control over markets and individuals that, in isolation, is unpalatable to your average voter.
This is the antithesis of democracy.
Jim Chalmers can claim all he wants that his values-based capitalism is the right thing for Australians, but he seems to forget that values are often subjective.
While he may believe that markets geared towards controlling citizen’s behaviour is a moral good, others (like me) believe this is – at best – overly stubborn.
Chalmers would do well to remind himself of this before he positions himself as the last word on Australia’s so-called “national goals”.’https://www.skynews.com.au/insights-and-analysis/jim-chalmers-valuesbased-capitalism-takes-a-page-straight-out-of-the-great-resets-neofeudalistic-playbook/news-story/d8b32e97ea2a060d4d5d9deeddba44f8
whatyareckon 