Yes, it seems some connected Alinsky School Community Organiser groups have been videotaped in the act, by independent, viral video journalists. Caught, in the act of unloading telling messages and riot equipment — shields and shield walls are not normal, “peaceful”/lawful protest equipment (and no, shields are not purely defensive) — from a rental truck:
Another . . . augmented . . . vid clip allows us to recognise the renter of the truck (black shorts girl), even as longer shields are being handed out:
This is of course directly connected to the incident where two police officers were shot by rioters in Louisville.
So, we can readily connect riots, red guard cannon fodder cultural revolution activism, the ecosystem of Alinsky School Community organisers and associated astroturfing front groups to backers, funders and CRITICAL X-THEORY ideologues . . . critical theories being rooted in Frankfurt School Culture Form, long march through the institutions marxism. Not to forget, the McFaul colour revolution primer/playbook:
The years since 2000 have seen a surprising new wave of democratic breakthroughs in the postcommunist countries of Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine. This article compares and contrasts these three cases, naming seven common factors which made the breakthroughs in these countries possible:
1) a semi-autocratic rather than fully autocratic regime [–> or perception];
2) an unpopular incumbent [–> alt., media manipulation to demonise and stir critical mass of hostility];
3) a united and organized opposition [–> so, shadowy, orchestrating networks];
4) an ability quickly to drive home the point that voting results were falsified [–> i.e. media narrative domination, which can be just as easily used to slander a scapegoat],
5) enough independent media to inform citizens about the falsified vote [–> too often, this may be the orchestrated media],
6) a political opposition capable of mobilizing tens of thousands or more demonstrators to protest electoral fraud [–> or, red guards as cannon fodder], and
7) divisions among the regime’s coercive forces [–> what of, nests of the connected embedded in state, policing and law-making arms].
[See: Transitions from Post Communism, Journal of Democracy Volume 16, Number 3 July 2005]
Yes, there is a legitimate side to Mr Michel McFaul’s seven point colour revolution (now he has recently tried to rebrand: “democracy breakthrough”) scheme, but in ruthless hands such can readily be twisted into a playbook for coup by cultural revolution; as was pioneered by Chairman Mao in 1966. So, it can be very difficult to discern the truth and the right. On the optimistic case.
On the pessimistic one, both sides are in the wrong and the hungry power seekers may well impose the sort of reign of terror that has been a persistent feature of radical revolutions since 1789.
A Harvard study on the Egypt case gives pause:
In Egypt, protests and strikes began on January 25, 2011 (National Police Day) and lasted for 18 days, bringing together various opposition groups representing a wide cross section of Egyptian society including secularists, feminists, Islamists, anti-capitalists, and many others. Notably, while the January 25 protests were initiated by a group of opposition activists, the Egyptian Arab Spring did not have a centralized leadership and no single element of the opposition was in control. [–> a more balanced view but do not take as gospel] . . . . In 2010, a young man named Khaled Said was beaten to death by two police officers after being dragged out of a cybercafé in in Alexandria. [–> notice, police in a state that was oligarchic, not democratic] Photographs of his disfigured body were shared online. Wael Ghoneim, an Egyptian Google Executive living in Dubai—who would go on to become a prominent Arab Spring youth activist—created a Facebook group called “We Are All Khaled Said,” [–> powerful, connected person] which quickly drew membership in the hundreds of thousands. [–> web amplification, note, plausibility of key narrative does not pivot on substantial truth or fairness, just it appeals to popular feeling and tendencies] . . . . The Facebook page and other social media sites became public forums for the remembrance of Said and for discourse around what he died for. These issues became fundamental to the outbreak of protests in the coming year . . . Small-scale, local demonstrations took place protesting Said’s death, but it was on Ghoneim’s Facebook page that the announcement for the January 25 protests—held on January 25, National Police Day—was first publicized . . . .
Chanting “The People Want to Bring Down Regime” (al-shaab yurid isqat al-nizam), a broad spectrum of protestors, from labor and youth activists to feminists and individual members of the Muslim Brotherhood (there without sanction from the organization), sought political change in the wake of decades of corruption, police brutality, media censorship, unemployment, inflation, and other problems. [–> notice the coalition taking to the streets] The protest took various forms, from the occupation of downtown Cairo’s Tahrir Square [–> notice, the mass rape of an American journalist here] , to labor strikes, acts of civil disobedience, clashes with armed forces, and others. Violence between protestors and the police resulted in 846 deaths and several thousand injuries.
President Hosni Mubarak—in office since 1981—was deposed on February 11, 2011, [–> 4GW overthrow] after which the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) dissolved the Egyptian Parliament, suspended the constitution, and dissolved the nation’s “emergency laws.” Protestor deaths formed the basis of allegations against Mubarak, for which he was sentenced to life in prison in June, 2012, but was released in August 2013 under the post-coup military government.
The pattern is real.
It can be legitimate, it can be partly legitimate, it can be a dirty 4GW coup. Where of course there is no legitimate parallel between Mr Trump (despite his foibles, failings and abrasiveness) and Mr Mubarak, much less Hitler. Shouting Nazi and Fascism to smear simply tells us something is wrong with those resorting to such dirty namecalling.
Discernment and soundness are clearly needed and a key to that is to identify the values, agenda and connexions of spokesmen, organisers and backers. That does run the risk of ad hominem attacks and marginalising legitimate protest but we must realise that we are talking here about who holds the most powerful and dangerous job in the land: executive leadership of the state.
It will help to ponder a revision to the usual political spectrum:
. . . taking due note of Hitler’s own words:
. . . where the dynamics can be drawn out:
Here, we can see that the revised spectrum is a diagonal that takes in most state circumstances: autocracy > raw oligarchy > lawful oligarchy > constitutional democracy > libertarianism > state of nature/ anarchic chaos.
The last is so repulsive that it triggers a recoil to law and order, even at expense of subjugation. (And hence the tactic of stirring mob chaos and riot to destabilise an existing regime deemed too weakened to resist.)
Autocracy is forever one heart attack away from being overthrown or falling. Where, too, no one person can carry the burden of a state, as we may see from a famous incident in the Exodus:
Exodus 18:13 . . . Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood around Moses from morning till evening. 14 When Moses’ father-in-law [Jethro] saw all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this that you are doing for the people? Why do you sit alone, and all the people stand around you from morning till evening?”
15 And Moses said to his father-in-law, “Because the people come to me to inquire of God; 16 when they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.”
17 Moses’ father-in-law said to him, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and the people with you will certainly wear yourselves out, for the thing is too heavy for you. You are not able to do it alone. 19 Now obey my voice; I will give you advice, and God be with you! You shall represent the people before God and bring their cases to God, 20 and you shall warn them about the statutes and the laws, and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do. 21 Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 22 And let them judge the people at all times. Every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. 23 If you do this, God will direct you, you will be able to endure, and all this people also will go to their place in peace.”
This is of course a population of escaped slaves, in a revolutionary situation. It didn’t take long for the need to judge court cases to emerge. Thousands of years later, Bolshevik Revolution trains spreading across Russia would not only bring a printing press but would also be a roving court to resolve village disputes, showing just how important what Moses was trying to do is. Lawful courts and policing or ruthless feuds. That’s part of why we know the anti-police, anti-court, anti-constitutional democracy agendas being pushed . . . why do you think icons and monuments have been persistently targetted? . . . are so misanthropic, so lawless, so anti-civilisational, so utterly irresponsible.
Moses fell into the trap of trying to do it all, and was gently corrected, in a way that raises all the issues of delegation and promotion. And we see how naturally autocracy is pulled into oligarchic leadership, with the debate being controlling principles of justice and having judicious rulers.
The default, natural state of governance, then, is oligarchy; with the strong tendency being towards lawless, domineering oligarchy.
To move beyond that first requires commitment to justice and to a framework of just rules, bylaws or laws. Hence, the hope for a lawful state. For most of history, that is the best we could hope for; if we fall back into ideological oligarchy and domination by would be messiahs, we could face this again.
We here see the natural law principle of built-in law pivoting on moral government with justice as pivot:
This, of course brings to the fore the first duties of responsible reason:
We can readily identify at least seven inescapable first duties of reason. Inescapable, as they are so antecedent to reasoning that even the objector implicitly appeals to them; i.e. they are self-evident. Duties, to truth, to right reason, to prudence, to sound conscience, to neighbour, so also to fairness and justice etc. Such built in law is not invented by parliaments or courts, nor can these principles and duties be abolished by such. (Cf. Cicero in De Legibus, c. 50 BC.) Indeed, it is on this framework that we can set out to soundly understand and duly balance rights, freedoms and duties; which is justice. The legitimate main task of government, then, is to uphold and defend the civil peace of justice through sound community order reflecting the built in, intelligible law of our nature. Where, as my right implies your duty a true right is a binding moral claim to be respected in life, liberty, honestly aquired property, innocent reputation etc. To so justly claim a right, one must therefore demonstrably be in the right. Thus, too, we may compose sound civil law informed by that built-in law of our responsibly, rationally free morally governed nature; from such, we may identify what is unsound or false thus to be reformed or replaced even though enacted under the colour and solemn ceremonies of law. These duties, also, are a framework for understanding and articulating the corpus of built-in law of our morally governed nature, antecedent to civil laws and manifesting our roots in the Supreme Law-giver, the inherently good, utterly wise and just creator-God.
Aquinas brought the issue to focus:
Our problem as a civilisation is that we have been in a long-term rebellion against the idea that God is the pivot of moral government and justice. Often, this is turned into debates over theocratic tyranny and the threat of Christofascist suppression of real or imagined rights.
The answer to such is to rebalance and refocus in light of inescapable first principles. Or else, we will fall victim to crooked yardsticks:
In the present chaos, that may begin to help us navigate soundly. It is clearly too late to avert serious damage to the geostrategic pivot state of our civilisation, now already in rising kinetic component 4th Generation Warfare culture revolution civil conflict with red guards in the streets. (Which carries us full circle to the smoking gun U-Haul a riot case we began with.)
Let us bear in mind geostrategic issues:
Let us so what we can to minimise the damage. END
PS: Proof of concept on fraudulent manipulation of mail in voting, here exposed Sept 2020:
PPS: Exposing an agit-prop pattern coming from enablers of the ongoing McFaul playbook push. Whatever else we may critique about a brawl of a debate, whatever we may think of the NY Contractor manner of Mr Trump, we must carefully notice this too i/l/o the already exposed pattern from above and other signs . . . blatant or subtle, as it tells us all too much about where things really are and the gap that is being commonly promoted between perceptions/feelings and operational 4GW insurgency reality:
Notice, the actual record on Charlottesville regarding “fine people”:
Late breaking: a clearly black representative of The Proud Boys explicitly denies and denounces white supremacism, indicating active steps are taken to exclude such.
Such is so bad that we need a reminder on rebalancing spin:
PPPS: Insurgency escalator for radical revolution: