The Greatest monster of them all

[midcan5]

MacTheKnife, just another election time troll? Why have Americans (?) become so dumb?

World Net Daily (WND) - Media Bias/Fact Check

Media Bias/Fact Check Makes WND's Fakest Fact Checkers List - Media Bias/Fact Check

"What is patriotism? Let us begin with what patriotism is not. It is not patriotic to dodge the draft and to mock war heroes and their families. It is not patriotic to discriminate against active-duty members of the armed forces in one's companies, or to campaign to keep disabled veterans away from one's property. It is not patriotic to compare one's search for sexual partners in New York with the military service in Vietnam that one has dodged. It is not patriotic to avoid paying taxes, especially when American working families do pay. It is not patriotic to ask those working, taxpaying American families to finance one's own presidential campaign, and then to spend their contributions in one's own companies. It is not patriotic to admire foreign dictators. It is not patriotic to cultivate a relationship with Muammar Gaddafi; or to say that Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin are superior leaders. It is not patriotic to call upon Russia to intervene in an American presidential election. It is not patriotic to cite Russian propaganda at rallies." Timothy Snyder

On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century by Timothy Snyder

"The trick never ages; the illusion never wears off. Vote to stop abortion; receive a rollback in capital gains taxes. Vote to make our country strong again; receive deindustrialization. Vote to screw those politically correct college professors; receive electricity deregulation. Vote to get government off our backs; receive conglomeration and monopoly everywhere from media to meatpacking. Vote to stand tall against terrorists; receive Social Security privatization. Vote to strike a blow against elitism; receive a social order in which wealth is more concentrated than ever before in our lifetimes, in which workers have been stripped of power and CEOs are rewarded in a manner beyond imagining." Thomas Frank, What's the Matter With Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America

 

[MacTheKnife]

10 evil dictators and their kill count.

Top Ten Most Evil Dictators of All Time (in order of kill count) – Popten

 

[MacTheKnife]

The New York Times regularly reports made up or fake news about Donald Trump and his administration.

Also abc news deserves to be mentioned and they have a lot of fake news sources.

Public opinion on ABC reporting fake news about Donald Trump in the U.S. 2017 | Statistic

ABC apologizes for fake news report......https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...-four-weeks/&usg=AOvVaw1-VbAR2_bNKbJ7KXAOa_QL


Statista - The Statistics Portal

List of stories the fake news media have been forced to correct.

Not fake news, just plain wrong: Top media corrections of 2017

The age old problem of fake news...............The Age-Old Problem of “Fake News” | History | Smithsonian

In the margins of his copy of Condorcet’s treatise Outlines of an Historical View of the Progress of the Human Mind, President John Adams scribbled a cutting note.

Writing in the section where the French philosopher predicted that a free press would advance knowledge and create a more informed public, Adams scoffed. “There has been more new error propagated by the press in the last ten years than in an hundred years before 1798,” he wrote at the time.

The charge feels shockingly modern.


Read more: The Age-Old Problem of “Fake News” | History | Smithsonian

 

[MacTheKnife]

It is only natural to feel some pleasure when another person’s suffering leads to one’s benefit, especially in competitive situations where the benefit can be felt so directly. But some people, perhaps because they are more selfish than others, may feel such schadenfreude more effusively—and untroubled by pangs of guilt. In some cases the tendency to feel schadenfreude may achieve a dispositional character and become a prominent feature of a person's personality. I think a case can be made that Mao Tse-tung was such a person.

The Dispositional Schadenfreude of Mao Tse-tung

From an early age, Mao was fascinated by terror and killing, but what interested him most was how terror and killing could be used to gain power. One of his favorite methods for striking fear and paranoia in citizens was to get people to accuse others of being counter-revolutionaries. Mao wasn’t interested in whether any one person was actually a counter revolutionary, unless that person was out to undermine his interests. He simply wanted people to be terrified of being accused of one.

Picture of a liberal making obeisance to mao.

 

[MacTheKnife]

Why liberals love dictators 101..................Why Liberals Love Dictators 101

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I speak of course of Mao Tse Tung. The portrait of Mao is one of tyranny, degeneracy, mass murder and promiscuity despite the fact that some in the obama administration adored him.

So why did some in the Obama administration publicly praise him?

Astute historians understand very well the all encompassing evil of Mao and his running dogs...but why have so many failed to understand what obama and his gang stood for and stands for still?

Irregardless of the failure of many today led of course by the media to comprehend what Mao was really about -- those interested and who know the truth about Mao...need to propagate it and how the democratic party in general has set Mao up as some mythic heroic figure and someone the lefties love to look up to. That tells much about them and how dangerous they are and have always been to America.

Mao Tse-tung who for decades held absolute poer over the lives of one-quarter of the world's pop., was responsible for well over 70 million deaths in peacetime, more than any other twentieth-century leader.

Yet, the lefties are still obsessed with Hitler and hollywood cannot make enough movies about Nazism and the evil of Hitler.

Mao makes Hitler look like a choir boy.

Why Obama’s lieutenants love Mao - WND

Genghis Kahn was far more destructive than Mao. And as for Hitler, movies, and Nazism... Jews make the movies, and entertainment. They've been promoting the WW2 pity party since the war ended. That's the fault of the audience. If they knew history it would become readily apparent, that even if the worst of all things said about hitler, and the Nazis were true... It would still be small time, compared to other historical figures.

Agree.
Yet, Genghiz Khan was a small government, Nomad, NO?

I think Khan, and Mao murdered for the same reason, it's called Psychos & their servants.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

10 evil dictators and their kill count.

Top Ten Most Evil Dictators of All Time (in order of kill count) – Popten

I guess key word is "Dictator" here.

Because the British Empire killed a ton, on every continent, and they were a crude- Capitalist Democracy during much of it.

 

[MacTheKnife]

On John Adams (one of greatest Presidents) and why fake news is nothing new.

I dedicate this to the 'elitists' be they democrats or republicans and unfortunately both camps are well represented in that group. The groups that knows not what they do, nor the danger they pose for America...................

John Adams & Why Fake News is Nothing New
by John Hill
published on April 10, 2018

John Adams was the second president of the United States of America, and was also one of our country's founding fathers. Being in both the First and Second Continental Congresses and having important contributions to both, he was one of the key members in the shaping of our new country.

How should we respond to “fake news”? Sadly this question is as important and timely as ever: the Presidentcontinues to use the term daily; Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal has expanded to include 87 million people; and Sinclair Broadcast Group, the largest broadcaster in the country, just forced 200 station anchors toread the same script warning viewers about “fake news.”

But here’s the thing: people well educated in U.S. history should already be familiar with fake news and how to assess it. In fact, having a grasp of history is central to understanding the current crisis. When we understand how fake news is integral to the American political tradition—how everything from conspiracy theories to outright lying to deceitful inference has been used at both the fringes and in the mainstream across U.S. history—we can put current events in their proper context and help generate a reasoned, level-headed response.

With that in mind, we present an example of fake news in U.S. history by John Hill, Professor Emeritus of Politics and History at Curry College and author of Democracy, Equality, and Justice: John Adams, Adam Smith, and Political Economy.

—

“Fake news”—or, as it used to be called, spin or propaganda—is all the rage. But failing to expose it for what it is can have serious consequences for democracy. Take, for example, a campaign scare tactic used in the 1800 Presidential election, one of the dirtiest elections in U.S. history and one that reshaped our political system, with consequences reaching all the way to today.

Adams and aristocracy or as it is known today....'Elitism'.


Our second President, John Adams, served only one term. Federalist Party leader Alexander Hamilton quite possibly deprived Adams of a second term—Hamilton didn’t trust Adams, who claimed to be a Federalist but thought the President should be above party. But Hamilton probably had less impact on the result than the Jeffersonian tarring of Adams with the brush of aristocracy. Some even claimed that he wanted to establish himself as monarch, so that his son John Quincy Adams could inherit the throne.

This was fake news. John Adams, the “Atlas of American Independence” according to delegates to the Continental Congress, was consistently a supporter of democracy from the beginning of his political consciousness. But Adams did two things that gave Americans reason to question whether his long sojourn in Europe as a U.S. diplomat had changed the stalwart democrat into a believer in aristocracy—and gave supporters of Jefferson the ammunition they needed to spread false rumors. First was his publication A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America (1787), second were his actions as Vice President, especially with regard to the “titles” controversy.

The One, the Few, the Many

A defence of the constitutions of government of the United States of America

In Defence of the Constitutions Adams argued that the new American democracy would be subject to the same strife among the One (Monarchy), the Few (Aristocracy), and the Many (Democracy) that had affected democratic republics since the ancient Greeks. Among other reasons for writing Defence, he was trying to warn Americans that, without a strong President to counter the Few, the new democracy would succumb to aristocratic rule. He came to this conclusion through extensive reading in the histories of multiple democratic republics, often small city-states.

His argument fell on deaf ears for several reasons. One, it conflicted with a core American belief: United States exceptionalism. His use of the ancient division of governments into the One, the Few, and the Many was easily distorted into anti-democratic advocacy. He used the term “aristocracy” because his book was written for both Europeans and Americans; Europeans understood it, but Americans misconstrued the general term for elites as advocating imposing the old world system of inherited titles.

Adams’s reading of history was that democracies often succumbed to the aristocratic quest for power. Democracies with a strong executive (the One) aligning with the Many were often able to resist aristocratic schemes. (But he also knew that throughout history the monarch often colluded with the aristocrats against the Many.) He thought that the only chance for the nascent United States republic to survive was to have a strong executive. Based on this belief, he made a major political blunder as Vice President.

What’s in a title?

President Washington and the Senate struggled to find the best formal term for addressing the President. Adams used his position in the Senate to advocate titles such as ”His Most Benign Highness” and “His Majesty, the President.” At first, Washington and the Senate agreed but the political tide turned, and Adams did not, resulting in the gag rule for Vice Presidents presiding over the Senate. He feared that without such titles most Americans would devote their lives to private concerns, would not have enough incentive to serve as government leaders. How would the wily aristocrats be counter-balanced if government service were not made attractive?

Based on these two issues, Adams’s supposed advocacy of aristocracy was used mercilessly against him in the election of 1800. Jeffersonian leaders, themselves American aristocrats,(elitists) cynically distorted Adams’s ideas. A few years later, they told John Quincy Adams that they knew his father was not, in actuality, against democracy. Jefferson himself didn’t spread this canard; presidential candidates at that time did not campaign, leaving the dirty work to others. But it should be noted that Adams wrote Jefferson asking him to specify where in his writings he had advocated aristocracy. Jefferson never responded to this request.

Both the Jeffersonians and the Federalists feared that the other party would destroy American democracy. Jeffersonians mistakenly thought they preserved it with their victory in 1800. But neither the Jeffersonians nor the Hamiltonians understood the danger that the prescient John Adams saw: American democracy succumbing to rule by the few, also known as the 1%. Thus they did not inoculate our young democracy against the aristocrats, nor did later leaders understand the danger. Today, for many reasons, we have a deeply entrenched group of political and economic elites with outsized influence. Many people still do not understand what Adams so deeply feared.