The left and the right, you could say it's a team-based thing, they may do it equally, but because the left have academia, they have Hollywood, they have the mainstream media, they have so much power, and they control through the HR departments, these big corporations, social media companies.
So even if both groups are doing it equally, it's sort of like Mike Tyson and a girl guide.
They're both punching as hard as they can, but you're not that worried about the girl guide.
You're worried about Mike Tyson in his prime, right?
So even if it's equal, the left has more an obligation to be more circumspect because they have so much more power.
So with great power comes great responsibility and should come with the power to exercise restraint and maturity and wisdom when dealing with ideas you don't like.
The purpose of the aggressive rhetoric on the part of the mainstream media is to get you beaten up.
It's to get you physically attacked, is to get you driven out of restaurants, is to get you fired, it's to mobilize the low IQ, aggressive idiot mob into attacking you because you've had these negative labels put on you and so they want to encourage violence against people.
They want to dehumanize you.
You know, the left's always like, well, you don't want to dehumanize the other, you Nazi, right?
So they want to attach these negative labels to you in the same way that, you know, there are people out there in the combat situation, they put a laser that's invisible so that the Scud missile or something can hit the target.
They paint a laser.
Well, the language, the labels are to paint a laser on you so that the low IQ mob will attack you and everybody knows that that's the purpose of it and that's what they're trying to do because they see it enacted all the time.
So it is a form of media terrorism because they're trying to use, they're trying to instigate violence against people they disagree with for the sake of political purposes.
That's terrorism in a nutshell.
The left as a whole has set up a system wherein people profit from coercion.
So you have a welfare redistribution system, you have a military industrial redistribution system, you have an old age pension redistribution system, you have a healthcare redistribution system, all enforced at the point of a gun by the armed might of the state.
Now whether that's direct violence in terms of if you don't pay your taxes, we're going to kick in your door and drag you off to jail, or whether it's indirect violence in that we're going to dilute the value of your currency, we're going to sell your future generations into foreign bankster debt, whether it's explicit or implicit violence, we have a whole system where close to half the population of Western countries is directly dependent upon the coercive redistributionist or inflationary power of the state.
So when you start to threaten that power, it goes from implicit to explicit.
So the idea that the problem with state violence is riots in the streets after America's been involved in a 17-year war in Afghanistan, after America sells arms overseas, has over 700 military bases overseas, has $180 trillion of unfunded liabilities, is indoctrinating children in government schools and government subsidized universities.
The idea that riots in the street are the only problem with violence in that whole system, the whole damn system is coercive.
Now, when you threaten that system, it goes from implicit to explicit, right?
So like if some guy's bullying you and you give him your lunch money, it's like, hey, the bullying stops for now, you're just buying bullying down the road.
But if you decide to say, hey man, you're not getting my lunch money, I'm going to stand up to you, then the fists come out.
So when people are starting to stand up to this redistribution and saying to people, no, I'm tired of paying for all your bad life decisions.
You've got to get a job, you got to grow up, you got to stop sucking off the taxpayer, well then the violence moves to the streets, but it's not new anymore than that last little flake of snow that lands on the top of the iceberg is the iceberg.
This is just the violence becoming more visible.
And it was the inevitable next step.
It always happens when you have an implicit violence system threatened with freedom, it becomes explicit, and that's why it's all happening at the same time.
Yes.
Yes, but it's not easy.
The way to solve this is you push back against the lies, you push back against the falsehoods, you find out the truth about the people the media are lying about, myself and many others, and that's what this movie Hoaxed is all about.
Find the truth about what people are, who's being lied about, spread the truth.
Now it's almost like a negative.
Like, you know, back in the day, they used to have negative films, and if you were really good at photography, you could look at negative and you'd really see the actual film picture or the photo.
So now we live in this weird bizarro world where whoever the media is attacking probably is telling the truth.
And whoever the media is praising is probably lying the most.
So use that power that the media has taken for themselves, go to where the media is attacking and find out the truth about those people, spread the arguments, spread the ideas.
The only chance for a soft landing or a peaceful transition is for more and more people to get jobs and fewer and fewer people to be dependent on the state.
So if you're dependent on the state, you can't vote objectively about taxes.
You can't vote objectively about the welfare state if you're receiving the welfare state.
So if more people are paying taxes, they'll be interested in taxes going down.
If more people are taking tax money, they don't care about taxes.
In fact, they want taxes to go up because that's more money for them.
Transition people from state dependence to the free market and you get a free market constituency that can help shrink the power of the state further.
If we can't get people off that state dependence, of course there'll be civil war.
I mean it's going to happen all over the Western world.
