https://www.redstate.com/heartlandinstitute/2020/06/24/what-does-black-lives-matter-want/

What Does Black Lives Matter Want?
Posted at 3:00 pm on June 24, 2020 by The Heartland Institute
…
Well, there you have it. BLM’s policy proposals are certainly not solely about eradicating racism. BLM’s laundry list of demands (there are many, many more not covered in this piece) is more of a socialist wish list than a coherent set of policies to uplift struggling black people.

In fact, if BLM was actually interested in improving the plight of struggling black people, one would assume they would wholeheartedly embrace policies such as education choice, opportunity zones, and occupational licensure reform. These policies have been shown to produce positive results, while incubating self-reliance and diminishing dependence upon government.

As of now, it seems that BLM is more into pushing radical, socialist policies that the overwhelming majority of Americans oppose. How long will it be until Americans come to their senses and see BLM for what it really is and what it really stands for?

https://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2020/06/24/media-attack-parler/

Media Immediately Begins Attacking Parler as Twitter Users Make Switch for More Free Speech
Posted at 3:30 pm on June 24, 2020 by Brandon Morse

No commentary needed, I suppose?

The site would not be aimed at conservatives. But only conservatives would come, because they’re the ones who would need it.

Yes, the discourse would be negligible if the site were aimed at conservatives. The idea is to have an open forum where conservatives would know that they would get a fair shake, in addition to but not the exclusion of others. Think of a Twitter or YouTube that didn’t come down on only one side of the political spectrum. I know, easy to say and hard to do….

Much easier said than done. It’s been tried. The problem is that Twitter, etc., have reached enormous size without competition. They dominate, and anyone who wants to be heard by a lot of people must go there. Any competitor would start small, and if conservative voices are the only ones that go there (and a small number, as well) any effect on public discourse would be negligible.

I don’t think so. I think it’s different Neo. While it’s clear that not all blacks agree in a political sense, I think the fact remains that they do identify and relate as a unitary group. For example, when they see blacks being brutalized by “the man” they see centuries of cumulative abuse that have been heaped upon them. “Here we go again, how can they treat us like this”? They take it personally. Likewise, when they see other blacks acting like fools they take that personally too. “Look how that fool is making us look.”

I don’t think whites ever see white victims or perpetrators as representing them as a group. He or she may be crazy or a victim, but they don’t see themselves in those people.

Not excusing recent and ongoing criminal behaviors in the black community I would say that what it is they want is to be seen and recognized…as equals

It was a real tossup whether to post this to this thread or the thread about Jonestown – the part of the video that shows the white progressives would be astonishing if it were not so funny.

The Democrat Party is the political wing of the extremist mob currently attacking America. You might feel helpless against the violence right now, but you CAN make it stop by destroying Democrats at the polls in November. It’s the only thing you can do.

Hostile extremists usually have a “moderate” or “political” wing that can negotiate concessions on their behalf. The political wing seeks to appear reasonable and respectable, offering “compromises” with the demands of the radicals and legitimizing their “grievances.”

Those who resist these “compromise” demands are themselves labeled extremists and “reactionaries.” The political wing of the extremist force uses its influence to paint resistance to its compromise proposals as intransigence that will cause further – and JUSTIFIED – violence.

The game of extremism followed by “moderate” compromise is an endless cycle of degeneration that only stops for two reasons: 1. the extremists are crushed by military or law enforcement, or 2. the “moderate” wing loses its power and recognizes the extremists as a liability.
…
Note that the political wing of extremist movements is very well aware of their peril under democracy, and will do everything in their power to subvert it, making it impossible for the public to vote against them. You have to move fast to hand them stunning defeats while you can.
…
Not only is the moderate wing necessary to realize political gains, but it’s also vital to spreading the extremists’ ideology. Normal people recoil from the eye-rolling madness of the hardcore believers, but the moderates dilute and repackage it for their consumption.
…
The big problem is that too many people think the extremism will only be tamped down if the Democrats win. Cowed, intimidated, and shell-shocked from endless street theater, they think the moderate wing can deliver its promise of “normalization” if its political demands are met.

Do not believe this for a moment. Things will not get better if Democrats win. Quite the contrary. The extremists will push for more, more, more, and the moderate wing will have every reason to believe the public can be intimidated into making more concessions.

The iron rule of history is that validating extremism gets you more of it. The political center moves, and the extremists are eager to move it further. Unthinkable changes to society become thinkable, and the moderate wing begins laying plans to achieve them.

Weakness is provocative to aggressors and bullies. A nation unwilling to defend its history and core beliefs is ripe for further attacks and pillage. Let the moderates make a deal for half of what the extremists want, and they’ll immediately begin pushing for the other half.
…
You will never get less radicalism by moving in the radicals’ direction. You will never win peace by giving them more power to make war against you. You can never appease them – that’s a lie peddled by the moderate wing. You CAN hit them in their soft spot at the polls.

Everyone gets this instinctively, because politicians usually try to paint their opponents as “extreme,” knowing the public tends to vote against extremism. The public doesn’t want radicals moving the political center by force. That is what will happen if Dems win in 2020.