They really need to issue blue checkmarks for genuine and unpaid outrage...

That people still believe that Twitter rage is some homegrown and organic response is interesting.

But when the press still falls for it and doesn’t try to expose the political propaganda that runs there amok, you really have to wonder.

There is an article from the New York Post how Twitter attacks “protect” people.

No, it merely exposes the paid political skulduggery going on unchallenged.

Why aren’t you questioning who is attacking or what is their real incentive?

We already know how much fraudulent activity and fake accounts there are on Twitter. There is no way to stop it unless people stopped using Twitter and then there would be no benefit to wasting resources of dispatching mass propagandists.

Don’t bother with trying to take on a paid mob.

Find out who is footing the bill, and cut off that source.

Dangle a piece of meat, get the paid hordes to react on cue, and then work from behind the curtain and expose that.

We know paid fans exist at events and it a part of the manufactured celebrity machine. We know there are fake followers on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.

So why are we still not critically looking at fake outrage on Twitter?

What? You don’t think politicians build up a fake base or deflect criticism using Twitter?

Don’t buy into the fairytale. As there are absolutely no checks and balances, anyone can create any fake mass response they want.

There are no laws or regulations. You don’t know what is on the other side. Underlings, cyber goons, political operatives, bots, the politician’s mommy or daddy, anyone.

That is the way you incite emptyheads and fool the press into thinking something is genuine.

It is why I don’t stare at Twitter: other people ghost write the tweets with blue checkmarks and foot the bill for fake responses.

Let’s as a few real questions before we buy into some fake narrative…

"Tech monopolies" didn't kill journalism. It killed itself.




You have to be way of ignorant politicians who pander:

Tech monopolies are killing journalism, Ocasio-Cortez says

What evidence is there to support this garbage statement?

None. Journalism was already in decline prior to the mainstream introduction of the Internet.

But don’t let facts get in the way of political skulduggery.

Circulation was in decline as were ratings. A lot of things killed journalism, but Big Tech did not. If journalism survived radio and television, it could have survived the Internet.

What happened was (a) people were liberated by being allowed to bypass traditional journalism, and (b) journalism didn’t reinvent itself to be relevant in a modern age.

“Tech monopolies” is a myth. It is a big, scary monster conjured to try to frighten people into votes.

And it is a manipulative and tyrannical political hack used to try to woo journalists who lost their clout — it is as if some older person is writing this script — and most likely is.

Journalism should have explored the Internet and experimented with it. It chose to pretend it wasn’t important.

But it is a way for people to have an outlet, and not just with journalism.

Once upon a time, if you wanted to have a TV show, you had to have an agent, and then make it through the national broadcasting food chain where competition is fierce. Your career would not last too long, either.

Then came cable television, and with it, more shows, but still inaccessible to the majority of creative talent.

Then came Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, and then more talent had a chance to break through.

Now we have something called Stareable.

If you want to have a show and access to an audience, there is a venue for you.

You have to keep changing. You have to progress, evolve, grow, learn, and accept that lines in the sand aren’t static.

Journalism died because it took the rigs that kept it in place as gospel truth and they weren’t.

The Internet could have transformed journalism into something far more useful and exciting for humanity.

But the profession opted to treat it as an enemy.

My book chronicles the downfall of journalism — and what an alternative needs to flourish.

Because you can either make excuses like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez always does, or you can make things happen and work for you.

Alexandra Kitty does not believe in excuses. There are always obstacles, problems, and what have you.

I had a mother with cancer in 2018 I had to look after while I had cancer at the same time. Guess what?

That didn’t stop me. I got cured, and I pushed through despite everything that would have crushed the spirit and soul of other people.

I wrote everyday. I wrote on the day of my surgery, and if I had computer access from the hospital bed, I would have wrote there, too.

I got my teaching certification from Harvard. I got another book deal. I resolved a lot of things.

I didn’t blame Big Tech. That’s for people who are just looking for excuses for failure.

And failure is not an option.

When you have a defeatist mindset, you lose because you don’t really want to win. You want to wallow and then guilt and shame others into working for you. Nice try.

I am not going to be your personal servant.

Journalism is throwing fits because people realized they have no use for them, and they are right.

I believe in innovation, invention, and creating exciting new things that are future-focussed.

I respect the past, but I embrace the future.

If you are truly capable, you make obstacles work for you. There is never any excuse, only puzzles to solve and triumph.

That’s the beauty of life.

It truly is what you make it…

The Millennial Early Onset Midlife Crisis: It is just a phase. Wait until their Middle Class thinking drops the other shoe.


The federal Liberals in Canada seem hellbent on building ghettos and keeping the poor even poorer by bribing them with borrowed money.

Unfortunately, Jagmeet Singh, the NDP leader, has some very good ideas that are going to get lost in the shuffle. It would be far wiser to subsidize rent, but that would mean that the poor could live in a better area instead of being forced into monolithic stagnation, but Singh has other problems that people will look at instead of the message.

Canada has always been a Nanny State with people just assuming that the government will take care of it to their specifications without them having to do work, thinking, or sacrifice. The whining over Basic Income being axed is a case in point: the government doesn’t owe you a pay check, especially if you are a person who can work. We all have aches and pains. It would be wiser for the government to crack down on companies that do not hire people with physical issues than to just enable people into staying in place.

We all need money. Billionaires sue their own relatives over money. It is never enough.

That’s why human beings were made to work: you have to earn your keep. That is a biological reality. We are wired to work for our reward and survival. We are wired to be independent.

It is not natural for men not to work. It is not natural for women not to work. It is not natural for men not to be rewarded for their work. It is not natural for women not be rewarded for their work.

That’s why I believe children should be introduced to work. They should have a job — not a full-time job, but through the educational system from day one. Children should earn a pay check, and then have expenses they need to pay as part of their education. No exceptions.

They need to learn how economies thrive and how they collapse. No relying on debt, hoarding, or being nannied. Here are the needs, here are the wants, here are the conflicts, here are the problems, here are the unexpected expenses, and here are the goals to improve the situation.

When you have children learning from an early age that self-sufficiency is the greatest liberator of them all, they can still have their dreams, but have a better plan to make them a reality. They learn that they have to test their theories and modify them. They have negotiate with people who are not just going to go away or put up with being demonized for not playing the game.

By high school, students should have apprenticeships in every kind of job: from medicine to retail to corporate to industrial. Yes, from cleaning toilets to stocking sheets at the morgue.

I worked as a kid in my mother’s driving school: I marked papers, scheduled appointments, and whatever else a ten-year-old could do. In high school, I volunteered at the hospital, from the psychiatric ward to the gift shop to the MRI clinic. I worked, studied, and volunteered, and I was hardly the only one in my generation to perform that hat trick.

But now, you have had a generation with a peculiar kind of parental meddling that has sparked an early onset midlife crisis for Millennials. They want pensions now. They don’t want other people to be wealthy. They are trying to control and meddle in order to rig the board to justify their narrative the same way their parents meddled and controlled their children’s education.

When I first taught in college, I was surprised at how many parents did so: they would quibble with failing marks, and as their grown children were adults, privacy prevented me from discussing any of it — but it wasn’t just trying to turn a failing grade into an A. They would call to make excuses why their sons weren’t coming to class, and even go so far as do the assignments and then try to pass it off as their kids’.

This was a constant occurrence. The meddling helped no one. These were not stupid students, but they were sheltered and spoiled. It was hard to tell these parents that I had severely disabled students in my class who never did anything less than a stellar job of every assignment on their own.

I had young women in my class who worked as strippers or even escorts to pay their way because they came from extreme poverty, and yet nothing stopped them. To me, it was a horrifying reality that we had brilliant minds have to make deals with the devil to crawl out of poverty. If these students didn’t have those stresses, their grade point average would have been good enough to get a scholarship.

It was the reason I always talked to my students so I would know their circumstances, and if there was any way I could ease their burden while helping them maintain their independence and self-sufficiency, I would.

I didn’t meddle or pry. I assessed, and then guided. I was happy to do so, and it was part of my job as an educator.

What wasn’t part of my job was enabling passivity and laziness from grifters who were always quick with an excuse and sob story, but would have been better off using those resources to study and work.

But while I could reason with students, their parents were a different matter. What didn’t seem to compute is that their kid was mundane, had to work just like everyone else, and needed to fail in order to learn.

Because failure is feedback. You test the limits, and you discover your own limitations in reality. Work is nothing to be ashamed of doing.

I made my students work and work hard, but in return, I ensured that they learned what is essential and current. I did my research and focussed on what skills and knowledge were crucial in their chosen field. I did this every semester, regardless if I taught that course before.

And I did all of these as I worked as a journalist, and helped my mother with her own career.

In other words, I worked and worked hard. I always joked that I never met I job I didn’t like.

My mother worked for Lego at the time as she was also teaching jewlery-making and metalworking at various colleges. If she needed an able-bodied person to help her re-set a plan-o-gram at three o’clock in the morning, I was there. If she needed someone to drag her supplies to her class, I dragged.

Not too many children can say they managed their parent’s career. I did.

So to hear people bellyache that Basic Income is going away is mystifying to me.

You really want to rely on scam artists to save you? That’s your plan?

Then you are truly an idiot. The end.

But no one said people going through a midlife crisis were thinking with their brains.


Propaganda time!


Screen Shot 2019-01-22 at 5.13.04 PM.png

Cortez is a moron who is telling propaganda to bigger dummies.

The fear-mongering is old. The world will end?

Doomsday cult-talk. Not original.

Demonizing the wealthy? Nazis did that and that’s why so many Jews and Serbs were slaughtered by both the Nazis and the Ustashi who stole their goods.

Fascism did start as a Left-wing ideology that pandered to spoiled boys whose mommies sheltered them.

But do not buy the narrative that young America is turning socialist. This is the their midlife crisis fling.

They are too stupid to know they have had an early onset midlife crisis, something I have written about before here, here, and here.


That is a propaganda poster spewed by a historically illiterate moron pandering to even bigger dummies.

Socialism is a Euro-centric white man invention. The end.

It is patriarchal, sexist, controlling, and confining.

And that trick never works because while it panders to poor people’s version of greed, it goes against human nature.

So what is the deal with those old fogey Millennials? Why are they so defeatist — and why is this socialist fling not an actual thing?

Go back ten years when social media and Big Tech bullshitted those arrogant little twerps.

Big Tech became super-rich by means of a greed scam: hey, kids, you are all specialI And destined for greatness!

And all you have to do is plaster your ugly mug on one of our platforms and you will become rich and famous. Fuck the middleman! Screw the gate-keepers of legacy media! They are all just jealous of you!

Wiggle your ass! Make fishy faces! We really are looking at you and not the grunge in your bathroom!

And Millennials, who always lacked life experience because they are both conniving and cowardly, bought into it.

They filled up YouTube with their obnoxious warbling. They posed with their lattes on Instagram. They issued their royal decrees on Twitter. They issued their press releases on Facebook.


They lived like rock stars as they sank their lives on their smartphones because their laptops and tablets were no longer good enough. Maybe this app will do it. No, maybe this over-priced smartphone. They flocked to Etsy to see their goods as they flocked to Twitter for free promotion as they shilled on Kickstarter to get seed money.

Everyone had a vanity project.

Blogs came and went. Forums came and went.

And still, they were just mundane people who did not become rich and famous.

And the Big Tech titans grew super-rich. Super-rich! How dare they?

Not only did that generation become too old, they were made fools.

And that is in a short ten year cycle.

Now, they want someone to pay for their own nincompoopity. It is no one’s fault but their own.

If you don’t know a scam in 2019, that is because you don’t want to know.

The problem is socialism is not going to fly. It is manipulating the suckers who already fell once for a big scam, but it will not have ten years because who it is targeting is too old: those people want a champagne lifestyle and they want it now.

And it is not coming.

A midlife crisis is marked by seeking sweeping quick fixes to undo all of the opportunities lost. People marry for conniving reasons, see that they made a gross error in judgment that they endured, and then go on to have affairs, buy a sports car, have plastic surgery…

Except you are still the conniving screw-up that you always were. Those shallow cosmetic changes don’t touch the core.

And no, yoga and meditation aren’t going to enlighten you, and neither is backpacking in India.

That’s just a trip.

You can have fun, but you are not validating your flaws if you are in this corner of the world, or in some other corner.

The problem is you.

And Millennials are now wanting pensions. They are defeatist. They gave up.

All while have a premature midlife crisis.

But a real midlife crisis is still in the cards.

That’s the reality of having a Middle Class mindset: you can only make guesses about how the other half lives or how they became rich and famous.

And mostly you get your demented ideas by watching television and movies.

When socialism — despite its propagandistic methods — fails to solve all of the problems, those followers will turn on it more ferociously than they turned on social media.

Because all of these followers were huge capitalists and wannabe “entrepreneurs” until reality proved otherwise.

And they merely swung the opposite direction using the Default Delusion as the looked for The One Rule That Explains Everything.

And socialism is a disastrous recipe that still has rich and powerful people controlling the masses.

Disillusioned people looking for a Nanny They always outsmart themselves — but when their shallow thinking implodes, they want to stomp evidence of their failings to the ground.

2019 is the year of global humbling. People looking for quick fixes and quicker power grabs don’t see they are in uncharted waters created by the Internet that altered thinking.

It will be ugly.

But only for those looking for someone to save them.

For people who make their own way with their own original ideas and ideology, their time has finally arrived…and there is nothing to fear…

On the ropes: how journalism -- and feminism -- got themselves into a corner and got pummelled.


In boxing, it is safest to fight in the centre of the ring.


That happens to be the alchemic symbol for gold.


Or, in nature, the eye of the storm.

Because if your opponent gets you on the ropes, you have no room to manoeuvre, and you get pummelled.

Victory comes from the centre, not from the fringe.

Because when you move toward the ropes, you are retreating and fleeing.

And the fall of journalism is actually a very simple case of an entire profession on the ropes because it retreated to the fringe.

What makes this more fascinating is that the profession's strategy was to run toward the fringe instead of fighting in the centre.

And then they get their underpants in knots when people are shouting for them to move away from those ropes that turned into their shackles...and then noose.

 It should have remained a centrist entity. While you often feel surrounded if you stay in the centre as you seem to have enemies coming at you at all sides, the truth is you can keep your freedom and your space if you get yourself off the rigged board.

That means not playing any ideological games.

You do not want to lose your liberties or be checkmated?

Don't get tricked into walking on the board to become a pawn in the first place.

Keep in the centre -- the radical centre.

That means finding a balance to rebel against getting sucked into to dogma used to incite you to become a pawn to fight a player's games. He wins the bounty, never the pawn.

But journalism got suckered and the legacy media thought sticking with the Left was a wise way to pander to the illusion of a Middle Class majority. It looked like a safe hack: here is a class of people who like to fly under the radar, follow authority, consume products to look successful, and do not have the expertise or knowledge to actually understand the various systems used to control their behaviour as they can be easily shamed into retreating if they stray off the sanctioned script with their own ideas that will always be off because they do not have access to the information they actually need to make an informed decision and do not want to be exposed as being ignorant -- and the best part is they will all howl at you if you dare point this out to them, meaning they can be perpetually scammed as they dismiss the critical warnings they need, and then heed to the advice of the grifters playing them.

Diane Sawyer once made is very biting and comedic video short that hit upon it way back in 1986 on David Letterman.

Of course, it was a gag about how Letterman's audiences always seemed to laugh at whatever he spewed and she was "investigating" it, but audiences are those everyday Middle Class mundane people, and you can take it from there.

Play it safe by pandering to the group in the centre.

It is the middle class, after all.

And on first appearances, it seemed as if journalism was sticking in the centre.

But that is looking at the audiences -- not the people in power.

It was to the Left that mainstream journalism were taking their talking points from.

But the Left found themselves on the ropes in November 2016, get pummelled and defeated in every race that mattered.

And journalists got pummelled to death in the bargain.


The Left in North America have been in a hot mess for years, but the kicker is it is a party in perpetual denial about their own flaws and moral lapses.

Point it out, and you are accused of being some Right-wing partisan.

Except I am not a Ring-winger. Never have been. Never will.

But I am not a Left-winger, either.

Western politics reminds me of cable companies: if you want to buy a package, you have to accept all the lousy channels you do not want along with the couple that you want, meaning you are over-paying and are stuck with junk you didn't ask for in the first place in order to get the few that you do.

No, thank you. That's why I don't have cable. I don't even like Netflix. I liked DVDs because I had the exact say of what I wanted, how much of it I wanted, and when I would use it.

Politics runs the same way: it is all or none, just like cults. You have to accept garbage and more garbage than anything of actual value. 

It's how you had women who thought they were feminists defending Bill Clinton as they threw fellow woman Monica Lewinsky under a bus.

Or how you can have a feminist-free federal government in Canada, while they have slap fights over who gets to call themselves a "feminist."


The answer: none of you are feminists. If you are creating a Mean Girls pecking order, you are not feminists. Just because you are ambitious women in positions of power, it doesn't make any of you feminists.

Feminism is about taking your position of power seriously, and not girlishly argue over shallow trivialities. There are women in shelters, on the streets being pimped, getting abused at work -- and you are having a petty spat over semantics?

When you have a Prime Minister who ideologically appropriated the term and then does whatever sexist before him did when faced with a nasty accusation...and you ladies all stand by your man?

Are you serious? There is no federal feminist in government. Not one.

A feminist would be preparing the country for the fallout of a trade war. When -- not if -- tariffs hit the car industry, that's it. We are in for a rough ride, and how well will women against the ropes fare when that happens?

Feminism isn't a label -- it is actions and original thinking that rebels against a script.

Remember the Famous 5?

Nellie McClung, Henrietta Muir Edwards, Irene Parlby, Louise McKinney and Emily Murphy are Persons #7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 who everyone should know.

Because they fought so women could be considered a Person.


They fought for women to have opportunities -- not who was part of a clique of superiors.

Shame on you all for being petty little wasters of time, resources, and taxpayers's money.

Women who want a better life are in danger if they follow the lead of journalisms because those who have arrived, but yet to deliver are suddenly running toward the ropes, where they are in for a pummelling of their sheltered lives.


Journalism had feminism are having far too much in common for comfort these days. Their labels have been watered down. They lost their focus. Feminism got a huge boost from #MeToo and broke barriers, but there is a difference between arriving and delivering.

Feminism finally arrived.

The problem is it is not delivering.

That's a serious problem, because if you build up an audience with your arrival, and you fail to deliver, they will not give you a second chance, and your failure is entirely on you.

Arriving is hard because if you do not arrive, the failure is on outsiders sabotaging you at every turn to prevent you from gaining access to a wide audience. If you fail to arrive, it is not your own doing. You have no control over getting on the stage.

But failing to deliver is something else entirely.

You have a crowd. You own the stage. You have complete control over both the content and structure of what you will deliver.

And what you have to deliver must absolutely be completely different than what the audience can give to themselves and others -- they are not going to waste their time on you mimicking what they are already doing -- or what they have already seen before. 

You then are a thought thief and a rip-off artist who wants attention, but not by putting actual effort -- and if the audience can do what you can do -- they'll be resentful that they aren't on the stage on you are.

Journalism found itself on the ropes because they failed to clue in that the audience has for the last twenty-five years been able to do the same things journalists were doing on the stage. 

Journalists failed to change their act, and the crowds grew resentful, and rightfully asked why should reporters deliver the same old garbage when anyone in the audience can do that from their smartphone. The audience rebelled, and rushed the stage, turning it into a boxing ring.

The professions was on the ropes and then in November 2016, Donald Trump waltzed in and pummelled them as he won the championship bout and the keys to the White House.

His timing was perfect. Journalism's comprehension of their defeat is nil.

They still believe they are without flaw, and then came to the dysfunctional conclusion that being on the ropes was a viable strategy that was both noble and would eventually give them a victory.

This is, of course, pure lunacy.

And the more they talked themselves into their own demented logic, the less of reality they could see. Not just their present reality in the West, but the reality of the past from different places.

We see nonsense propaganda articles from the Business Insider that hypothesize that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez non-functional ideas will work.

She is advocating the same flawed trash that was used in the former Yugoslavia -- you know, non-existent country that slaughtered each other when that strategy screwed them royally. If she is historically illiterate, the press should not enable those delusions. 

Anyone who relies on a parasitic economic and political system needs a stronger host country to feed it, and the US doesn't have a stronger host willing to allow them to do it.

Journalism has now come to the conclusion that socialism will save them, and if people do not want to willingly use their trash, they should be forced to pay for it, even if they will never use it.

But, since journalists think they are perfect, they refuse to change a thing. They can be blind, deaf, numb, and unaware of their environment, too arrogant and lazy to change their ways...but somehow, they are right and everyone else is wrong. There is no need to reflect with humility, try new things, and reinvent themselves because they are on the ropes, and what a glorious thing it is to be on the ropes getting your backside whumped.

So they now need a sugar-daddy to prove they were right all along, and everyone has to change and accommodate to prove they are right and don't need to alter a thing.

Leftist feminism is now doing the exact the same thing, and expecting a victory, and they can explain away and blame others when they fail to deliver, and in Canada, feminists have failed to deliver.

We saw the fast fall of Patrick Brown, and he is suing CTV, who seem confident they will win.

Perhaps, but when you have a prime minister's excuses imply that the woman's perceptions were not aligned with reality -- and his was -- it is doubtful.

I find it interesting that Justin Trudeau is incapable of admitting flaw or wrongdoing. His behaviour obviously caused someone whose job it was to work with different strangers in a public forum to be distressed enough to report it to her bosses -- and her superiors could trust her enough to believe her. They went public with the story eighteen years ago, and not in a sensationalist way.

And yet we have a prime minister who himself has dragged on this scandal because he cannot let go or come to grips with the idea that he has a character defect and caused someone on the job enough distress to pursue it then.

And considering she is not trying to milk this for all it is worth, merely adds to her credibility.

He is now on the ropes -- and he has no one to blame for it but himself.

When you arrive, you better make sure you can deliver before you step foot on the stage.

Because that stage can transmute into a boxing ring the second you fail to deliver -- and it is a different game you play.

Journalism never got that. Feminism is rapidly following that same loser's strategy.

The problem is that society needs both information and social equality to thrive. You cannot have one half the population getting pummelled on the ropes and not have dire consequences from violence to fraud.

Western society has now entered the Age of Propaganda, which is always dangerous as propaganda doesn't just blind us to society's true problems with trivialities; it also prevents us from seeing our own internal failings and improving on ourselves in a significant way.

Ways that take hard work. Ways that are emotionally and intellectually trying and taxing. Ways that take multiples tries and failures. Ways where we have no They do to it for us. Ways that make us feel uncertain and uncomfortable. Ways that force us to go into the eye of the storm to confront our greatest fears. Ways where there are no shortcuts, scripts, tricks, or hacks where we can preserve our cultivated and choreographed image and make people jealous.

The Left has been trying to avoid paying their dues for a long time now. Hillary Clinton thought enabling indignities was the equivalent, and when she lost, she threw fits, inciting others to make them think it was all a vast Right-wing conspiracy, and not a case of someone scheming to arrive, and then becoming indignant that she was expected to deliver.

Clinton is a huge reason why both journalism and feminism have been stuck in a vortex. They latched on to her ride, but then were too scared to cut the ropes and find their own ways.

There is a void of information right now. Journalism decided it was a good thing to be on the ropes, and feminism is getting the same ideas. Feminism at least is not there yet and can get itself to the centre again instead of alienating any person whose ideas deviate from a script.

But journalism lost it all. They can't go back because they got beaten to death -- and if by some miracle, got a reprieve, they would just march back willingly back on the ropes rather than admit they were ever wrong in any way.

It's the reason we need an alternative. F.R.E.E.D. was created knowing about stages and rings as well as the radical centre. Journalism was always groping in the dark or getting blinded by the light.

One of the most important Truths we must know is that we are all fallible. We can be wrong and someone we dislike can be right. Our opinions of other people do not turn wrongs into rights or vice versa.

Once we understand those Truths, we can adjust our attitudes, and begin to find new paths that we create on our own, working on not just arriving, but on how we plan to deliver once we get there...

Champagne Socialist Devolution!: Journalism was always bad science. One does not make a revolution, children.

Journalism actually has no grasp of reality. They cannot do math. They cannot do science.

They also do not know politics, sociology, psychology, social science -- or anything else.

They speak with no context or perspective, and in an Age of Propaganda, facts are willfully ignored with people who have no clue or expertise babbling how their fantasy means something.

The US has no clue what this whole "socialism" thing actually is -- especially those who slap that label on their empty heads.

Socialism is a parasitic system of trying to bleed the rich by taking their assets. It works for about five seconds before the money runs out. Then you have to depend on bigger countries as you have people with no sense of industry running state-run things with employees who think the fun will never end because They will look after them.

When that doesn't work, you have borrow heavily, and then the country falls apart.

Ask anyone from a socialist country -- people are too crooked for socialism to work. It is a pyramid scheme with a moral patina, and a rotten greed core.

In the US right now, you are hearing about not actual "socialism", but Champagne Socialism.

Bernie Sanders is a classic Champagne Socialist, pulling in a seven figure salary as he depends on government money to fund him. Nice racket if you can get it, but as soon as you have too many people trying to get it, the system collapses.

You have one Champagne Socialist win something, and suddenly, the intellectually-limited press thinks there is a "revolution."

Nice try. You have a commercialized version of it: rich mommy and daddy funding your delusions and giving you stuff without you having to work or think is not socialism.

It is a big nothing. You have one. Not a trend.

You have middling former New York Times editors slamming the current regime for not getting excited over a Champagne Socialist.

Nah, you're all alike.

Journalism is so desperate to get back at Trump, they are not only willing to throw half their citizens under a bus, but they are willing to back any destructive and already proven to be toxic ideology.

We already know socialism doesn't work. Ask people in the former Yugoslavia, but we have many other countries that exploded. It appeals to people who like someone to guarantee everything as they put absolutely no risk, investment, or work into it. It goes against human nature, and at its core, is the equivalent of a political scam and Ponzi scheme.

It would have been infinitely simpler for journalism to look inward, admit openly to their own flaws with humility and have a genuine willingness to change, and then try again.

Instead, they are having a real and collective mental breakdown and are grasping at dead straws.

You have trash propaganda such as the Nation babble without a coherent argument or a modicum of common sense.

You want a better way. Work. Earn. Fight. Modify. Change. Grow.

Independently, as in, not expecting Mommy Government to bail you out because not everyone can be a rock star.

Rock stars can't be rock stars, either.

It is a devolution of a pathetic sort. People want change? No, they want guarantees. They want sure things. They do not want different. They want someone to do all the dirty work so they can go bragging to their siblings how much better they are doing and how Divinely and Eternally Right they were on top of a delusional and non-existent pecking order.

The seeds of this began when journalism decided covering deceptive starlets and con men grifters was easier than actual real and hard digging.

It has gone down hill from there.

Imagine a new generation that actually has contributed a sum total of zero new political theories, ideas, or anything -- they are literally contributing to the stale and static climate by rehashing old lemon politics that messed up the lives of millions of people before them.

How did this happen?

Because Millennials are neglected and feral, yet sheltered -- they were starved for facts because the journalism during their critical years ignored them, giving no facts or context, just showing them some fake celebrity bosom and bubble gum celebrity gossip, and then those expendable celebrities babbled about politics they knew nothing about, and then that's what passed for information.

And you cannot expect evolution of thought when you retreat. That's Western journalism's legacy. Narrative, propaganda, lies, and fantasy.

F.R.E.E.D. is needed to counter those fillers. We need a rational voice to tell us that you do need boundaries, reasoning, facts, and an understanding of reality -- countering the greedy notion that you can have everything, but contribute nothing in the bargain.

We are seeing a dead profession grasp at straws. If there were to be a Civil War in the US tomorrow, the Left would lose. As in, get wiped out in a matter of a couple of months. You have soft and sheltered people who think they are part of a nonexistent "resistance" who have no clue about strategy or fighting -- or even recognizing defeat from victory going against veteran realists who are cunning and control more power than they ever let on, let alone being the side who thinks they are entitled to get things without knowing how to earn them in earnest. Words are empty, and in an Internet Era, cheap.

It would be different if you had starving people who had to claw to survive and were tired of oppression. This is a generation who had helicopter parents hassle teachers to inflate marks, pulled strings for their kids to get jobs, paid for mortgages, bills, and other trinkets, and paid lavishly for music and art lessons as they drove them around and gave in to tantrums. It is a completely different mindset with too many buffers blinding a generation to the real dangers that exist. It happened in the former Yugoslavia and the results were disastrous.

But the signs of sheltering are everywhere because there has been no genuine breakthroughs where there should have been. There should have been new political schools come out by now. We should have had alternatives to journalism, too. The Left dragged their feet, staying in a narrative holding pattern, and honestly thought they could shame, bully, and intimidate everyone to walk lockstep with their decrees. You cannot be a dictator if you have no power or control.

In an Age of Propaganda, there is no perspective. There is cheering when there is defeat, and illusions of change because a Champagne Socialist won in a game of chance.

We have no journalism.

That is reality number one.

And when you realize that is the first reality, everything you think you know begins to reveal themselves to be lies as they all laugh in your face...