Democrats Fool Each Other With Disinformation Excuses


A liberal New York magazine claims that the Democrats created the “disinformation threat” to deal with the psychological pain caused by Donald Trump’s 2016 defeat.

Sam Adler-Bell, New York Magazine’s “Intelligencer”, wrote that “Disinformation” was the liberal Establishment’s trauma response to the psychic wounds of 2016

He wrote that the “disinformation” diagnosis can also be a problem for Democrats, as it prevents them from seeing how ordinary Americans view their political views.

He wrote that one problem with the “Liberals” fixation on “disinformation” is that it allows them lie to themselves about public support for their policies.

How can a man so clearly abhorrent and clownish appear to others be accepted by them as a savior, or at the very least as an acceptable alternative to the status quo. …

[“Disinformation!”] offered an answer that avoided the question entirely, saving them from the pain of self-reflection. The country wasn’t riven with deep antinomies and resentments based on material realities that needed to be managed by new types of politics. The problem was not that large swathes of the country were being brainwashed by both domestic and foreign nefarious powers. If only the top minds, the most qualified experts could be given authority to regulate fake news, the scales of power would fall and the people would embrace the old order that they were tricked into disliking. This fantasy made a political problem into an academic one. Trump’s rise required not new politics, but new technocrats.

If “disinformation” is the problem, then more Harvard graduates, public education re-education and government are the best options. The so-called “Disinformation Board”, which was created by the Department of Homeland Security (and later canceled), is one example of this.

He wrote that liberals had tended to increase the number of people hostile to them by doubling down on elite technocracy and condescending toward those with false consciousness, uneducated rubes.

The critique of the article on disinformation was posted in the same way that many media outlets promoted their self-serving diagnosis regarding public concerns about migration.

You agree to our privacy and terms of service by subscribing. Breitbart News Network will send you email marketing messages to the email address that you have provided. You can unsubscribe at anytime.

Trump’s political issue is migration. However, establishment media outlets have refused to acknowledge the concern of the public about the economic and civic impacts of mass migration.

Instead of this long-overdue reckoning the public’s rational concerns have been diagnosed and smeared as a racist conspiracy theory, dubbed “Replacement Theory.” A New York Times reporter wrote, May 16,:

[Rep. Elise] Stefanik (R-NY] has been under investigation for her campaign ads that played on the white supremacist “great substitute” theory. This belief was propagated by the Buffalo gunman. It states that the elite class, often manipulated by Jews wants to “replace and disempower” white Americans.

A New York Times columnist explained why liberals believe that population replacement is good for the state’s health.

Native Indians were the first to be replaced. Now it’s the turn of America’s working class, Bret Stephens wrote May 17.

The fifth [replacement] is both the most contentious and the most routine and ordinary: the replacement of a native-born white working-class with a non-white, foreign-born working-class.

This is nothing new, but it’s not at all. Since its inception, the United States has “replaced its working class” with immigrants, not as an act or conspiracy but as a natural result of upward mobility, the demands and benefits of a growing economy, and a growing number of citizens.

All of this shows that America is the country that has experienced the most replacements, sometimes by force but mostly by choice. Stephens wrote that “replacement”, as the far right refers to it, is more accurately described as “renewal”.

Renaud Camus, a gay French author who coined the replacement term in 1990s, was the one to come up with it. A May 21 profile in Compact magazine reported:

Camus asked the question, “Can you have Europe the same with different people?” In the 1990s.

Camus would not have disappointed the gunmen at Christchurch, New Zealand and Buffalo, NY. Camus rejects violence categorically. Camus mocks conspiracy theories. He detests pseudo-scientific racism, which reduces culture and civilizational complexity to genetic factors. He is critical of rapid cultural changes caused by any type of immigration, including Muslim immigration. He is a committed environmentalist and opposes population growth. He also denounces attempts to increase the white birth rate.

The D.C. establishment has taken tens of million of illegal migrants and visa workers from low-income countries since at least 1990 to serve as legal and temporary workers, workers, renters, and workers for various U.S. CEOs and investors.

The economic strategy of Extraction Migration is unstoppable. It’s a brutal strategy for ordinary Americans, as it reduces their career opportunities, lowers their wages and housing costs, and has pushed at least ten millions of American men out the labor market.

Because employers can use stoop labor rather than machines, extraction migration also causes distortions in the economy and reduces Americans’ productivity. Also, migration reduces the political power of voters, weakens workers’ rights at work, and widens regional wealth gaps between the Democrats and Republicans’ major coastal states and their heartland states.

A society built on the extraction of migration alienates young people, and it radicalizes America’s democratic, compromise-promoting civic culture. This is because wealthy elites can ignore the despairing Americans at bottom of society.

According to multiple polls, wealth-shifting extractive migration policies are not popular. According to polls, there is widespread opposition to labor migration and the inflow foreign workers into jobs that are sought after by U.S. students.

Opposition is growing. It is anti-establishment and multiracial, transsex, nonracist, non-racist.