We'll start this thread off with some education. 

Leftist Teachers Going After Your Children! But don't let that scare you! (Much )

https://rumble.com/v13t33l-leftist-teach...ldren.html

The eventful life of one Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus. Wonderful Radio Version with Derek Jacobi, from the book by Robert Graves.

https://youtu.be/rnwUxIk5dhY

How Government Takes Away Your Right to do Something and Sells it Back to You as a “License”
 
Government has, for thousands of years, refined its methods of extracting wealth from people, perhaps with no greater efficiency than in 20th century America. The Federal Reserve, corporatism, and consumerism proved a winning combination for achieving what is known as The Great Fleecing.
 
While this brought about the largest transfer of wealth in history from the middle class to the 1 percent, through taxes it has also fueled the growth of an incomprehensible leviathan. The Pentagon alone “spends” (actually borrows from the Fed) $600 billion a year using our tax dollars to perpetuate endless war, and it’s never been audited.
 
http://www.activistpost.com/2016/05/how-...cense.html
 
:Insanity:
 
Searching for the golden fleece. All governments the world over have been fleecing the sheep for all of recorded history. Before that? I suspect human beings learned how to fleece the sheep from the gods. 
 
Endless war..................Doomed to repeat....................!
 
 
 
 

Mr. Trump, explain why America First requires eliminating the U.S. Department of Education
 
All of America’s Founders, from the most known to the least, believed that the republic they created could survive only if its population was well educated, especially in history; consistently attentive to politics and the media, so as to see the approach of tyranny early on; and therefore equipped to identify tyranny if they saw it nearing and to use their right to destroy any U.S. government that became oppressive, arbitrary, lawless, and/or conspired against America with her enemies.
 
http://non-intervention.com/2195/mr-trum...education/
 

:Banana_Bigone:
 
Have to say it gets a bit boring watching big red roosters flaunt their swords. Cock fights are fine but what about hen pecking? Nothing gets the juices flowing better than watching fine chicks and fat heifers go at it in the mud. All that slippery wriggling can sure make the cocks get hard.
 
  :22:
 

 
http://www.cpath.ca/wp-content/uploads/2...ESCHER.pdf
 
 
Let's take a closer look at the scientific attitude towards the transgender issue currently debated in current pop culture advertisement. First off, a little research notes...
 
In the old DSM-IV, GID focused on the “identity” issue — namely, the incongruity between someone’s birth gender and the gender with which he or she identifies. While this incongruity is still crucial to gender dysphoria, the drafters of the new DSM-5 wanted to emphasize the importance of distress about the incongruity for a diagnosis. (The DSM-5 uses the term gender rather than sex to allow for those born with both male and female genitalia to have the condition.)
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/04...85287.html
 
Rigid gender beliefs usually flourish in fundamentalist, religious communities where any information or alternative explanations that might challenge implicit and explicit assumptions are unwelcome. When entering the realms of gender and sexuality, it is not unusual to encounter another form of binary thinking: “morality tales” about whether certain kinds of thoughts, feelings, or behaviors are “good or bad” or, in some cases, whether they are “good or evil” 
 
Most importantly, in medicine, psychiatry, and other mental health professions, removing the diagnosis from the DSM led to an important shift from asking questions about “what causes homosexuality?” and “how can we treat it?” to focusing instead on the health and mental health needs of LGBT patient populations 
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4695779/
 
The current dilemma now concerns public bathrooms. Should transgenders be allowed to relieve themselves as themselves in public fashion? Current debate indicates a high thresh hold of irritation among subjects on the emotional arguments brought forward. 
 
All well and good for great debate. Some questions remain. Since great learned doctors are non-elected 'authorities' in these matters. Should they be allowed to make up the 'rules' for the general 'un-learned' population. Representation without knowledge. 
 
Economic value must be considered in this political debate. The medical and pharmaceutical industries hold a big stake in the lobbies agenda. 
 
 
 
 
 

There never was, nor will there ever be,

anyone like her:

 

 

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0SO8wpchC9XO_kACTdXNyoA;_ylc=X1MDMjc2NjY3OQRfcgMyBGZyA3lmcC10LTQ4MC1zBGdwcmlkA2dCNmxhY2FsUmN5ZjZScFpaSWRMMkEEbl9yc2x0AzAEbl9zdWdnAzkEb3JpZ2luA3NlYXJjaC55YWhvby5jb20EcG9zAzkEcHFzdHIDamFuaXMlMjBqb3BsaW4lMjBzb25ncwRwcXN0cmwDMTgEcXN0cmwDMzUEcXVlcnkDamFuaXMlMjBqb3BsaW4lMjBzb25ncyUyMGNyeSUyMGJhYnkEdF9zdG1wAzE0NjI3MzE4OTg-?p=janis+joplin+songs+cry+baby&fr2=sa-gp-search&fr=yfp-t-480-s&fp=1

 

The U.S. nuclear power industry's 93 reactors generate more than half of the country's carbon-free electricity, according to the Department of Energy (DOE). But 12 reactors have closed since 2013 in the face of competition from renewable energy and plants that burn plentiful natural gas.

In addition, safety costs have soared after the 2011 tsunami at Japan's Fukushima plant and after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The industry produces toxic waste, currently stored on site at plants across 28 states.

The program could help a range of utilities, including PSEG (PEG.N) and Constellation Energy Corp (CEG.O), which currently do not have plan to shut plants.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-a...022-04-20/

California willing to keep nuclear plant running to keep lights on

It followed a Los Angeles Times interview with the governor published on Friday in which he said the state "would be remiss" not to apply for funding under a new $6 billion federal program aimed at helping nuclear power plants stay open.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/califor...022-04-29/

Over the course of the 20th century, capitalism preserved its momentum by molding the ordinary person into a consumer with an unquenchable thirst for more stuff.

The notion of human beings as consumers first took shape before World War I, but became commonplace in America in the 1920s. Consumption is now frequently seen as our principal role in the world.

People, of course, have always “consumed” the necessities of life — food, shelter, clothing — and have always had to work to get them or have others work for them, but there was little economic motive for increased consumption among the mass of people before the 20th century.

Quite the reverse: Frugality and thrift were more appropriate to situations where survival rations were not guaranteed. Attempts to promote new fashions, harness the “propulsive power of envy,” and boost sales multiplied in Britain in the late 18th century. Here began the “slow unleashing of the acquisitive instincts,” write historians Neil McKendrick, John Brewer, and J.H. Plumb in their influential book on the commercialization of 18th-century England, when the pursuit of opulence and display first extended beyond the very rich.

This article is adapted from Kerryn Higgs’ book “Collision Course: Endless Growth on a Finite Planet.”

But, while poorer people might have acquired a very few useful household items — a skillet, perhaps, or an iron pot — the sumptuous clothing, furniture, and pottery of the era were still confined to a very small population. In late 19th-century Britain a variety of foods became accessible to the average person, who would previously have lived on bread and potatoes — consumption beyond mere subsistence. This improvement in food variety did not extend durable items to the mass of people, however. The proliferating shops and department stores of that period served only a restricted population of urban middle-class people in Europe, but the display of tempting products in shops in daily public view was greatly extended — and display was a key element in the fostering of fashion and envy.

Although the period after World War II is often identified as the beginning of the immense eruption of consumption across the industrialized world, the historian William Leach locates its roots in the United States around the turn of the century.

In the United States, existing shops were rapidly extended through the 1890s, mail-order shopping surged, and the new century saw massive multistory department stores covering millions of acres of selling space. Retailing was already passing decisively from small shopkeepers to corporate giants who had access to investment bankers and drew on assembly-line production of commodities, powered by fossil fuels; the traditional objective of making products for their self-evident usefulness was displaced by the goal of profit and the need for a machinery of enticement.

“The cardinal features of this culture were acquisition and consumption as the means of achieving happiness; the cult of the new; the democratization of desire; and money value as the predominant measure of all value in society,” Leach writes in his 1993 book “Land of Desire: Merchants, Power, and the Rise of a New American Culture.” Significantly, it was individual desire that was democratized, rather than wealth or political and economic power.

The 1920s: “The New Economic Gospel of Consumption”

https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/a-bri...r-culture/

#truthsocial #twitter #trump #covfefe #elonmusk