Alright conservatives, explain yourselves. How did liberals gain control over almost all of mass media...

Alright conservatives, explain yourselves. How did liberals gain control over almost all of mass media, education and pop culture?

Hard Mode: Explain without referencing (((them))).

Other urls found in this thread:

unqualified-reservations.blogspot.pt/2007/04/formalist-manifesto-originally-posted.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_System_(economic_plan)
youtube.com/watch?v=Tb8cErokGFs
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Idk you tell us (((expert)))

Edward Bernays

Americans had it too good for too long.

Good times breed soft, weak people.

I'm not writing an essay for you, you lazy shit.

Social media + virtue signaling


Deadly combination and caused people to replace with what worked with what sounded nice

>explain the effect without the (((cause)))

we're not here to come up with bullshit for you to feed to normies, Shlomo.

People who are r-selected tend to choose the creative arts over more practical vocations.

It doesn't help matters when the few who succeed end up living in what is effectively a city-scale echo chamber where they are lavished with money, fame, and attention.

It's a lot easier to sit around and complain rather than going out and actually working.
Extra time sitting around = more time to perfect arguments = more polished during elections etc.

The long march through the institutions.

I think its related to how media companies produce capital- If the popular, mass cultural opinion is going toward the left, the companies follow suite and eventually become a product of their own desire to fulfil quota,

>how did the wealthy and powerful come to control the extremely limited and extremely expensive distribution channels of information

Gee man I don't know.

Ever since the civil rights movement in the 60s, America has been a predominantly liberal country. Generations of being raised on this system has made most big institutions of government and media liberal. Now that a counter-culture movement of conservatism is upon us, right-wingers are gaining power which is a direct threat to the establishment.

So swings the pendulum of common sense politics. In another 10 years when people get more used to seeing opposing viewpoints on social media there won't be the same kind of contention.

Because conservatives have been weak and cowardly and decided to take their gold plated pensions and money off into the sunset and let leftists take their positions once they'd retired.

Money, basically. Why speak up or bother to use the energy to fight back when you can just take the money and run and have a quiet life?

Leftists fought and won, we wanted a peaceful, quiet life and let them be instead of fighting back.

because conservatives will defend hollywood taxcut because muh principle. Worst case conservatives would leave that organizations alone, Shitlibs would work to damage mass media who oppose them while in power.
It is thus rational to take liberal side.
Good thing we now have Bannon and those fags will suffer.

honest answer: the right let down its guard. it allowed its own institutions to become compromised.
mccarthy saw it happening and tried to fight it, but he didn't get the backup that he would have needed, and he failed. ever since then, the erosion has continued slowly but steadily, and eventually brought us to where we are today.

"diversity is our strength" = more audience = more $

After the great depression when the government stepped in to fix the economy that conservative capitalists ostensibly broke with their tampering of the stock market.

The new appeal to help the common man that FDR and the democrats spearheaded during this time won over the hearts of those populous entertainers such as authors and movie stars. Those who objected to this new system (didn't want the government tampering with the free market) were branded as careless, rich, out of touch with reality and a hater of the poor.

start here:
unqualified-reservations.blogspot.pt/2007/04/formalist-manifesto-originally-posted.html

Guy A hiring/endorsing guy B.
Redefining terms so that "leftist" becomes "normal" and "rightist" is "crazy."
Having children and credulous patrons as their only monitor.

this coupled with sociopathic control freaks regardless of (((ethnicity)))

...

>Ever since the civil rights movement in the 60s
Are you forgetting pic related

Women voting
White moralfaggot genetics

Jews like to hover towards non productive work like finance, media, social "science", and other chattering class nonsense jobs that most Anglos and other whites find boring and disgusting.

The only useful jews are in STEM.

he said you can't reference ((()))

Read Unqualified Reservations.

TL;DR: Intellectuals value chaos. Liberalism is chaos. Thus the culture-makers spread liberalism.

(((They))) spread it deliberately primarily because they're embedded in this sort of culture.

Truth be told (((they))) would not survive the collapse of the west by more than a decade. I feel people give (((them))) and their intellectual prowess too much credit in that regard.

They're simply chipping away and hoping it'll not come down on their heads, but personally I doubt the Chosenites will survive it either.

For-profit institutions like the media and mass culture aren't controlled by some liberal elite who want to make more liberals. They're controlled like any business, they want to make money. If the audience wants to hear liberal nonsense, they'll sell it. If the audience wants to hear conservative nonsense? A provider will arise for that, too. As for education, I'm going to assume you mean college. Liberals only control education if you ignore business and economics departments, STEM departments, as well some of the humanities.

It's about money, not ideology.

>The only useful jews are in STEM.
And those aren't even ethnic Jews. They're Aryans, same as pre-conquest Iranian and the Indian upper castes.

Difference is economic progress with wide consensus vs social progress with strong divisions

Pretty much everyone, Republican or Democrat, agreed with the economic reforms that FDR wanted to make to some extent. People like Eisenhower would be seen as economic Liberals nowadays.

The 60's bought social change that completely threatened the existing social and cultural systems, and that was divisive because many did not agree with the changes that wanted to be made.

>If the audience wants to hear conservative nonsense? A provider will arise for that, too.
Feelio when MSNBC is trying to become cuckservative now.

this desu

(((they))) are just naturally drawn to collectivist, liberal mindsets. Partially because of WW2, but mostly because they're the most urbanite ethnic group that ever existed

>Pretty much everyone, Republican or Democrat, agreed with the economic reforms that FDR wanted to make to some extent
not really.
read your history

>the most urbanite ethnic group that ever existed
Huh. That rings true, actually.

Dwight would be in a confused position today. On the one hand, he recognized the value of infrastructure (today, the GOP hates spending money on that) at the same time he was pretty conservative with respect to finances. In fact, it was Dwight who didn't like the idea of having massive amounts of military forces stationed all around the world and instead adopted a ''massive retaliation'' doctrine using nuclear weapons to stave off potential conflict, more bang for your buck.

Dwight would be called a socialist today, though. The GOP has gone HARD to the right.

>Pretty much everyone, Republican or Democrat, agreed with the economic reforms that FDR wanted to make to some extent.
Go read Three New Deals and Basic Economics and come back once you're done.

>Liberals only control education if you ignore business and economics departments, STEM departments, as well some of the humanities.

difference is that even if they lean conservative (which the majority doesnt), STEM professors will keep their politics out of the classroom
meanwhile lib professors literally dedicate entire lectures to spouting marxist propaganda about privilege and shit like that

Wow bankers who literally print money and charge the tax payers interest on it have enough money to monopolize the media to keep themselves in power?

Pussy.

Pussy has magic powers.

I can never tell if an ausposter is being sincere or not
I think three replies in under three minutes means something though

The people pretty much loved FDR. The 2 term-limit rule was a mercy rule for the Republicans.

Well, we need to reduce their taxes. That'll show them!

>Explain without referencing (((them)))
That is literally the answer though.

FDR loved segregation and the south much like how Wilson loved the Klan. FDR didn't even support making lynching a federal crime. He also refused to let in Jews from entering the US, mainly because of jew's long history of anarchist terror attacks in the US.

Democrats used to be based.

FDR's real problem was that he was soft on communism for foreign policy reasons.

they lie better than conservative dinosaurs

>Dwight would be called a socialist today, though. The GOP has gone HARD to the right.
I feel like Trumpism is partially about fixing/turning back the clock on that.

Getting the nation back to work, that sort of thing.

(As an aside, holy shit you people need to do something about the folks tainting the net with barely-contained glee about just how many jobs automation will cost all in the name of invalidating Trump's protectionist ideas. Shit's perverse).

(Mind, I feel like it's all a bit too late. Protectionism works best when the economy's close to peaking not sort of so-so).

we should just abolish our entire media and financial system and replace it with a nationally sovereign one.

Germany had a good system imo with a centrally owned bank in charge of credit creation and a media where only ethnic Germans could report the news.

What? Politics plays a huge role in how economics is taught, as well as business education. STEM departments less so, but instructors are not robots and their beliefs will always shine through. As to the humanities, there are plenty of conservative holdouts like history, religion, language, and classics. If you're looking for gross asymmetry, you go to the social sciences.

Of course, maybe things are different in Germany? I don't know, I've never visited.

basic NRx shit, look up Moldbug and the Cathedral

read the gentle intro on unqualified reservations

this is all ancient Sup Forums history

we need to abandon the cancerous ideology of a "do nothing" government

The government should be in charge of military, public infrastructure, utilities, funding for tech, etc.

neoliberalism and globalism must die.

Well, Trump may WANT to refocus the GOP to being closer to the center (which, is a good strategy to increase its appeal) but the GOP donor class is hellbent against it. Moreover, factions in the GOP, like the Tea Party, are unabashedly anti-government. So, even if Trump is a traditional pro-business Republican, the modern GOP is anti-government. There is a difference there, an important one.

They first took over the Universities, especially liberal arts programs that feed those industries.

Fuck the donors and fuck JEB!

and the tea party is long dead anyway

It's time for America to rebuild it's nationalist, protectionist, anti immigrant, pro infrastructure system as intended by Hamilton.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_System_(economic_plan)

If you are against protectionism then you are basically a Marxist.

The Tea Party isn't dead, at least, the anti-government message isn't dead. Market fundamentalism, the natural partner of anti-government/public resource direction, is alive and well.

Counter culture.

>Germany had a good system imo with a centrally owned bank in charge of credit creation

Any nation that takes a huge steaming dump onto ''''''''''''''''''''''private'''''''''''''''''''''''''''' (it's not, that's probbaly the biggest fucking lie in economic theory with even communism being more sound than the idea private banks are anything more than public welfare recepients) banking system by either

1) Privatizing everything so if a bank goes it goes no questions asked no bailouts delivered

or
2) Nationalizes all of it

prospers.

Fucking.

LYBIA managed to unshit itself with that simple change, and nobody here needs to be told how fukken rare a working Arabic/African nation is.

>anti-government
Only in some cases.

"It should be a state issue" seems to be triggering the HELL out of everyone in all parts of the establishment, also I'm currently laughing my ass off because

"Trump is taking the GOP more towards the centre" is so hilariously against every single narrative we're being fed despite being shockingly true.

Hell, a guy whome I really respect - he does the small busines meme so well he's considering retirement at thirty - who considers Trump a bit of a faggot but not horrible said the only reason Trump didn't run as a Democrat was because of how easy the GOP was to manipulate.


Really engages the cortex.

Agreed. Night Watchman state is probably the ideal. Small, efficient, HIGHLY active.

If a branch of government just sits there it has not raison d'etre.

A government's power should be limited, not spread out. Small but important difference.

When nobody would hire Jews in the 19/20th
century they started new industries to create
jobs for themselves, including media, hollywood

etc...
Just as a rule of thumb, half the time the Jews
are to blame.

>the anti-government message isn't dead.

Nah it's dead

the only wing left are a the libertarians and the donors. And the libertarian Party is a total joke while the donors are irrelevant.

youtube.com/watch?v=Tb8cErokGFs

A private system ensures that depositor's savings are wiped out every few years when banks create unsustainable bubbles

this happened in the US in the 1800s all the time. Wildcat banks would start up, create a bubble, and then die and lose all their customers savings.

Right wingers won the elections and politics, Leftists won the culture via Hollywood, Music and media, from the 50s onwards, showing "humanity", protesting for love and peace has been a "progressive, hippie, left-wing" thing to do. And now that we're in [The Current Year], The Left see it as an importance to maintain control over the media, education and culture, because whenever the Right was in control, the country was at war with someone.

This goes back to the old saying of "Good times create weak people, weak people create tough times, tough times create Strong people, Strong people create good times" We're currently living in "the good times" because people are comfortable with the way things are.

Also.
Without referencing (((them))) is just throwing away the huge part of this. Since (((they))) are at the forefront of these progressive movements that are creating "the good times".

I'm well aware of the risks. However the system isolates the risks rather than creating a deadman's trigger that CTRL + ALT + DEL's the economy.

because all the things that you just mentioned are inherently effeminate fields. More effeminate = more liberal, which is why all these fields are 99% liberal.

Another theory is that all the real brave men died in world war 1 and 2 and didn't reproduce, therefore their better genes died with them.

this applies to britain, france, germany and russia
but not to america
united states didnt lose millions upon millions of men in the wars

Most liberals have a need to always express themselves. Also having the spotlight on you all the time and getting praised for defending something all the time fucks your brain up with pride.

...

the banking system dying would be a boon to the real productive economy

only the financial parasites benefit from the current status quo.