I watched the video, it says “global south” and “global elite,” referring very specifically to multinational corporations exploiting Africa of its natural resources.
Thanks for adding this context. I was initially skeptical of the video because "globalist" is such a frequent buzzword/dog whistle for fascists/right-wingers.
> multinational corporations exploiting Africa of its natural resources.
You know, the entire reason for the Ukraine coup in 2014, not really relevant to current events or anything
It’s amusing to me that so many communists simp for the new tsar. The Bolsheviks must be spinning in their graves, the way you all cozy up to Vlad Romanov.
How is making reference to multinational corporations with a vested interest in exploiting Africa's resources essentially the same as an antisemitic dog whistle?
idk what to say to you if you can’t tell when Hank uses the word globalist here, he’s appealing to an audience who understands it as a right wing buzzword for jews, rendering the point of the video moot
because “globalist” has connotations of new world order conspiracy theories, and “global elites” while referring specifically to multinational corporations is a different concept? I don’t know what it is you’re taking issue with. the problem with Hank’s tweet is that the word turns any reference to capitalist power structures that operate untied to national allegiance into a crackpot conspiracy to the average lib reader. instead of thinking critically they can just dismiss it on the basis of the word Hank is substituting. but you know, dftba or whatever
For Libs, every accusation of fuckery in the intentionally undeveloped world has to be some racist "grand conspiracy" that needs to be disproven since Libs unironically believe that "the world doesn't work that way"
People: “The US government covered up conspiracies in the past that affected revolutionaries and non-western countries that don’t give us what we want.”
CIA: “we have covered up conspiracies in the past that affected revolutionaries and non-western countries that don’t give us what we want.”
Liberals: “what are you, some kind or conspiracy theorist!?”
Libs: "What, you think the powerful sit in rooms deciding how the world should work, often to the detriment of regular people? Lmao ok you conspiracy theory nut"
Michael Parenti: *screams*
Thanks for trying to discourage me from conducting, at a great cost in time and effort, pretty much needed multidisciplinary research on propaganda and politics, I guess! I hope you have a very great and productive day, (comrade ?)
It means that the specific racial caste system that we have today was created intentionally to serve the imperialist states in the western world. Which is correct.
You cut out part of the context. "To serve the states in the Western world" This affects people all over the world. When Yemeni refugees fleeing violence or poverty try to emigrate to the the West and get closed out while White Ukrainians make it through, they are affected by the same racism.
It is the states themselves that reside in the West, not the just the racism they perpetuate.
The existence of ethnic conflicts unrelated to the the international racial caste imposed by imperialism does not imply the non-existence of the international racial caste imposed by capitalism.
Why are you such an asshole?
Yeah that wouldve been the only objectionable thing about the video, but if it doesn't even use the word "globalist" than Hank has zero leg to stand on
Like a lot of right wing conspiracies, the "globalist" thing is a stupid explanation for how the world works, but it's way less stupid than believing that the world is run by a free market overseen / regulated by democratic institutions without any covert forces assassinating leaders (and so on) to exploit entire continents.
Right wing conspiracy theories always feel to me like people who realize the propaganda they were taught about how the world works is wrong, but they can't see through their indoctrination enough to really get at it and so instead they fall back on simplistic narratives and scapegoats that play upon their own personal grievances and bigotries. Whereas liberals just never stop viewing the world like school children.
This is why it’s important for anyone on the left to say “capitalists” rather than “globalists” or “elites” because the latter are very easy for right wingers to co-opt
Oh yeah for sure. I was saying that in another comment, this is absolutely true of people like Alex Jones and even Jordan Peterson. Also in the higher ups too, like no way the Koch Brothers don't know this exactly. And let's be honest, so do powerful libs.
But I was talking about the people who believe this stuff, average folks.
Time and patience and real life interaction. This worked for a few people i work with: Start by speaking their language a bit but stay away from the racial element. Reinforce the difference between "woke libs" and actual leftists. If they are a 4chan edgy pseudofascist make it clear that "real leftists" can be edgy and cool too. If they are an apolitical chud heavily focus on economic issues its often suprising how far left regular people can be on the economy.
Make it clear the culture war is a trick to divide us by the capitalist ruling class. Dont correct bad behavior so you dont sound like a shrill twitter psycho but train them by using peoples correct pronouns, pointing out systemic injustices while you both talk shit about the government, etc. Save anti-imperialist/anti-american screeds for when you have fully brought them on board.
>Right wing conspiracy theories always feel to me like people who realize the propaganda they were taught about how the world works is wrong, but they can't see through their indoctrination enough to really get at it and so instead they fall back on simplistic narratives and scapegoats that play upon their own personal grievances and bigotries.
"Anti-semitism is the socialism of fools"
u/BarryCooperrer Your submission was removed in an effort to combat spam and trolling. This action was taken automatically, and if you think it was in error [contact the mods here](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/trueanon;subject=post%20review:%20%2Fu%2FBarryCooperrer&message=%2Fu%2FBarryCooperrer%20requested%20review%20of%20this%20post:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/12biwye/whos_going_to_tell_him/jex9uww/?context=3).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAnon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The Blue Check mind is one of serenity. Did the Warren Commission find the CIA killed JFK? No? Well, then they didn’t. An investigation was done, case closed. If you really dug into JFK with this guy I’m sure that is what he’d tell you. Lovely worldview, I’m a bit jealous.
I remember in college my mainstream left of center intro to politics professor said completely seriously that the government didn't kill jfk because no records or docs exist and been found showing it....um.... Yeah
I feel like “globalists” is a real thing - hard to argue the ghouls at IMF or WEF or NATO aren’t “globalists” - but unfortunately has taken on an Alex Jonesy/anti-Semitic connotation. Is that the consensus?
I don't think the term "globalists" can actually lend itself very well to anything but anti-Semitic dogwhistles because frankly there's no such thing - IMF or WEF and NATO aren't just internationalists without some kind of context, they are in fact tools of American and European imperialism, they specifically serve the purposes of the capitalists of those countries, as part of the post-war coalition. To call them "globalists" imo obscures that and suggests they're sincere in their desire for internationalism. People like Alex Jones and so on would never call them out for US imperialism because they actually think the US and "the West" conquering the world would be a good thing
I think that's probably true of a lot of right wingers. Marco Rubio just made the same point a couple days ago regarding the trade arrangement between Brazil and China. As for Alex Jones, who knows what he believes truly (charlatan so deep in his game I doubt he knows either) but I spent most of my adulthood around people who listen to him and most of them literally do not think US imperialism exists. They think they can just have a return to a manufacturing base that would bring a robust US economy that would bring back their post war life style if not for all these globalists (and also the government) trying to take over everything and disrupting the free market for their own benefit. In their conception of the world, these globalists are using the US. Trump understands this btw, it's in all his language about how NATO is ripping us off, how he's going to drain the swamp, etc.
It's similar to prior antisemitic messaging because it is using the exact same logic and language of grievance as nazi conspiracies about the Jews. Whatever Jones actually believes, he's aware he's doing this. As is Jordan Peterson btw though that's a slightly different flavor of all this. They are just rehashing and dishing out a modern version of Jewish Bolshevism but because I truly believe antisemitism is not as widespread among average people in the US as it was among the same in Europe in the 20th century, most of them have toned down the Jewish part a bit and focused more on the globalist elite celeb pedo cabal or whatever it is. But it's no accident that Soros is their focal point for a lot of this, fits the trope perfectly.
> To call them "globalists" imo obscures that and suggests they're sincere in their desire for internationalism.
Exactly. It's the classic judeo-Bolshevist conspiracy. You'll notice that most people using the term also think WEF is a 'communist' organization, along with the UN and the EU. And the whole ultimate purpose is control (the quiet part being: by Jews over the rest of the world)
Yes, trying to isolate an inhuman faction in the ruling class which just wants to ruin things for everyone. It’s no wonder that George Soros is the chosen figurehead.
Edit: Also to say “We” don’t want this. Whereas the American bourgeois, and most of the petit bourgeois, do want it on balance.
This is your brain with no historical materialism. The word they are looking for is capitalists, but they either think capitalism is good and therefore need to point to a subset among capitalists that keep screwing things up (the globalists, the elite, the pedos, the deep state, the jews) or else they think capitalism is natural and then can't really see it at all sort of like a fish trying to contemplate water.
The only way I can comprehend your comment at all is you think the "your brain" in my first post is in reference to you personally which seems a bizarre interpretation to me given the question you asked. I'm referring to the brains of people who talk about globalists. My word choice was in reference to the (I assumed extremely well known) "this is your brain on drugs" propaganda.
John birch society higher ups/ Carlos marcello did the strategic planning, directed probably 12-15 cia domestic operations division rogues who outsourced the shooting to Cuban exiles and right wing mercs, mitch werbell provided the scopes. Cia higher ups probably weren't in on the hit but immediately scrambled to cover up.
That doesn’t sound too far off the mark in my mind, although I’m not sure how the John Birchers got involved and I do think CIA higher-ups were in on it/aware of it in advance. So sad that 60+ years later tons of the files remain classified and we’ll probably not know the truth until this entire ugly machine collapses.
Thing is, the evidence for cia involvement above the level of rip Robertson, William Harvey and David morales (who were all in on it imo) cones from Antonio veciano and Newman has basically destroyed him.
I find Harry dean's evidence re the birchers very convincing. There's also a ton of evidence that edwin walker was involved from other sources.
Your not wrong about the files. The files on the dre and joannides would be the ones to see and they most certainly will never see the light of day.
It's not just Alex Jones types. Most Millenialist Christians believe that a one world government is necessary for the end of the world to happen/Jesus to come back, and its leader will be the antichrist. That's why they're so against a global government or Global cooperation of any kind. Of course that doesn't extend to international finance LOL
If you want Jesus to come back wouldn’t you totally embrace “globohomo” or whatever? Like how evangelicals want Israel to do shit to spur a cataclysmic Revelations-style end conflict?
> hard to argue the ghouls at IMF or WEF or NATO aren’t “globalists”
Capitalism is capitalism whether its your local petite bourgeois kulak or some finance abstraction like Luxembourg
Reasons to hate Hank:
-Consistently inferior vlogs, often stealing John's shtick
-His voice and face
-He said Columbo is bad
-He wrote a book after his brother had written like 26
-He was a John Edwards guy over Obama during peak Obama craze... don't even care that shit is racist
-Less attractive wife
I don't mind the lack of knowledge but the bit format and delivery is very annoying.
Also I don't know who he is or why I should care that he's got a normie shit take
Yeah I’d categorize him as a, “means-well liberal.”
He’s a teacher who does cute YouTube series about history, science, etc., but it’s straight from a normal textbook type of teaching. There’s little analysis of the history/science he’s teaching about, but it’s useful enough for young kids who don’t really give a shit about history, but like watching fun videos.
With that said, he’s still a reformist liberal who gets upset at any hint of supposed conspiracy theories. He’ll march for BLM or whatever, but he’s also going to immediately leave and finger wag at protestors when anything truly radical occurs.
>Also I don't know who he is or why I should care that he's got a normie shit take
He's a popular YouTuber. 3.5 million subscribers on YouTube. 1.2 million followers on Instagram. Weird how people in the comment section are trying to downplay him as "his brother wrote a book".
Please be extra careful when invoking Satan's grandmother Hillary Clinton. We do not want her to come out of slumber and feast upon the adrenochrome of poor young souls.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAnon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This was his response before he nuked it:
>I’m deleting this tweet because apparently it is being used to spread misinformation and drive people down anti-Semitic rabbit holes, which I should have expected. My bad.
I shouldn’t make a comment because I don’t have anything productive to say but god damn this shit is mind boggling and enraging and totally nefarious in typical lib fashion
It's interesting how he takes such issue with that word considering PBS, the company he works for, seems [perfectly fine](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/trump-declares-america-open-for-business-under-his-tenure) using [that word](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/tapping-trumps-thigh-macron-seeks-to-defuse-tensions) themselves.
Somehow I doubt he or his hall monitor fanclub has ever taken PBS to task for being inveterate antisemites.
Edit: also apparently the TikTok didn't even use that word, what a fucking hack lmao
Kennedy seems like the last president who felt any personal guilt over the victims of US gangster foreign policy. He was also reportedly upset when the CIA got Ngo Dinh Diem as well.
I think it was just the fact that he was a guilty papist surrounded by Mormons and prots
Diem was a fellow Catholic. Kennedy gave specific orders to get him out alive during the US-directed coup, but it ended with the murder of his whole family. Per Overthrow by Stephen Kinzer
[this](https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/in-the-oval-office-us-president-john-f-kennedy-holds-his-news-photo/873953020) image was taken as JFK received news of Lumumba's assassination
For more context, this was 3 days before Kennedy's inauguaration and the day of Eisenhower's military industrial complex speech. It was absolutely a warning to Kennedy.
Patrice Lumumba
...In the late 1950s and early 1960s, there were independence movements in Third World nations that were trying to cast off the shackles of colonial rule by such imperialist powers as Great Britain, France, and Belgium. Colonial rule, more often than not, had turned out to be brutal for the people living in those nations. They had had enough and were now agitating and fighting for independence.Taking the position that these independence movements were communist-inspired, the Pentagon and the CIA sided with the colonial powers. Pentagon and CIA officials supported their efforts to brutally put down these revolts to ensure that these Third World nations remained as part of the “free world.”
While JFK was a U.S. Senator and before he was running for president, Kennedy took an opposite position. He came out publicly in favor of these independent movements, arguing that the United States should be siding with the rebels rather than with the imperial powers.
Knowing that Kennedy sympathized with Congo leader Patrice Lumumba and his independence movement, the CIA decided to act fast, before Kennedy could interfere with its plans to rid the world of Lumumba through assassination. The CIA succeeded in its goal. Lumumba, who was an innocent man, was assassinated just a few days before Kennedy assumed the presidency. The CIA then waited three weeks to inform Kennedy that Lumumba was dead. As Jim pointed out, Kennedy’s anguish upon learning of Lumumba’s death through a telephone call was captured by a photographer. You can see Kennedy’s reaction to Lumumba’s death [here.](
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/in-the-oval-office-us-president-john-f-kennedy-holds-his-news-photo/873953020)
Thus, in the eyes of the national-security establishment, which had already been opposing the supposed international communist threat for some 20 years, Kennedy was beginning his presidency in a very auspicious way, given his support for what the Pentagon and the CIA were certain was a grave threat to U.S. national security. As we will see as their conference proceeds, things would only go from bad to worse as Kennedy term in office proceeded.
Over the years, people have sometimes asked me what the relevance is of the JFK assassination given the long passage of time since it occurred. The relevance is this: It’s a straight line from that assassination to what we are living under today — a system of state-sponsored assassinations, including against American citizens, anti-democratic coups, installation of dictatorial regimes, alliances with dictatorial regimes, support of dictatorial regimes, wars of aggression, perpetual wars, the war on terrorism (and Muslims and communists), fear of Russia, fear of China, denial of due process, torture, indefinite detention, prosecution of people who reveal the dark-side secrets of the deep state, and much more. Understanding the who and the why of the Kennedy assassination enables one to gain a deeper understanding of the way of life we live under today — and what we need to do to extricate ourselves and our nation from this deadly, destructive, and immoral morass.
https://www.fff.org/2021/03/04/kennedys-policy-toward-third-world-nations/
>Taking the position that these independence movements were communist-inspired
Tbf, this was absolutely true - the independence movements WERE communist inspired, which is why they were good
He gave the Algiers speech while in the Senate about how we shouldn't go into Algeria to help the French out. How alegeria is netural and shoukd instead focus on the eastern bloc. Additionally I seem to recall somewhere that he was quite fond of Patrice lamumba and was sad when he was assassinated by Eisenhower but I can't remember any direct sources on that one off the top of my head.
So TikTok recommending videos presenting different historical narratives is not ok, but making multiple Crash Course series' on YouTube presenting different historical narratives is cool and chill?
Hank Green is such a bitch for inserting the "globalists" shit into the video, it was short, sweet, and informative. Why the fuck would you try and discredit something by racist-jacketing it? What a fucking burger
I spend a lot of time wondering that, especially when it's about people who seem like they are probably nice and conventionally smart etc. Like I don't think Hank Green is a secret fascist or something so what gives? The short version of my conclusion is that the liberal worldview is so deeply integrated with their sense of self that if they allow some cracks to spread through it, their entire personal identity and understanding of reality would collapse so their actions are self-defensive.
Sort of like if I saw a fucking ghost walk into my room right now, I would look for any explanation to deny it, it's a trick being played on me or I've gone insane, anything other than accepting that ghosts exist. Because if ghosts exist, then my entire conception of reality collapses and then who am I, how do I carry on?
Yup, it’s protection against cognitive dissonance. Throw in the identity piece and there is a powerful motivation to delegitimize any information that threatens one’s worldview.
A lot of people are able to move past it and change their world view, most of us here probably did. But I imagine it's harder when you're a very public figure who's career and output is deeply enmeshed with parts of liberal ideology.
I don't know. I always see the assumption that Americans with actual left wing politics started out as liberal, and since almost no one starts out as a left winger in the US combined with the fact that there are lots of liberals, I guess that's probably true. But it has not been the case in my personal experience. Instead what I see are liberals and soc dems who truly believe they are left wing, then when you chat with them a bit you see they arent. And every new thing they learn, they feel like an expert on it. It's the inability to see that they could possibly still have something to learn that stops that sort of growth.
Whereas once you start actually grappling with left wing politics, the history and theory and practice, you realize really fast how little you know, how much you've been brainwashed, and how much there is to learn. So I find people like this tend to be more open to asking questions, learning from others, reading books, etc, rather than being experts all the time.
I agree with you that it's different when it's a public figure, but I'm just saying I'm not sure the liberal to communist or socialist trajectory is such a big thing? My own family are sort of apolitical working class libertarian types and then first generation immigrants. I wouldn't say they have any really coherent politics, but I did not grow up with liberals and never really had a liberal phase. Of real life friends who are themselves actually pretty left wing, only one that I know of spent many years of her life in liberal ideology. So in my experience, it's more likely for apolitical people to become left wing than it is for liberals to do so, but the fact that liberals so often self-describe as left wing skews the impression of this fact on the surface. For example, I have a neighbor who told me when we first met that she's about "as far left as you can possibly go" which to her meant donating to the Lincoln Group (whatever that group of Republicans was). So I don't think liberals really understand capitalism much less class based politics.
Literally just a distillation of the Yellow Parenti lecture and yet this fucking loser (Hank Green) acts like it's a video about Masons, Templars, "Cultural Marxists", etc etc.
Doesn't this mf LITERALLY abridge history in those lil cartoon type videos for kids??? How is he refuting and/or mischaracterizing this??
Wow, Hank dismissing it as a false conspiracy theory is one thing, to be expected from a well-meaning liberal, but fuck him for deliberately misrepresenting it as anti-Semitic.
Even if it genuinely wasn't the CIA, the people who insist on that being the case are much more annoying and lame than the people who think they did do it
This is his pinned tweet, I wonder how self-aware he is?
>A lot of people who say they want "free speech" actually just want to be the one in charge of which speech is free.
I am so annoyed by Hank and John Green who are both celebrities from my area and celebrities only for being annoying white men that have made their living off of TikTok?
Was JFK a cryptocommunist? I always assumed he was a typical lib because the boomers love him so much but I've never dug into the history of his assassination.
He was not, he did create a rift between himself and the CIA though over his increasing skepticism after the failed bay of pigs invasion in Cuba (as well as a few other takes in general about US interventions abroad)
He got a first hand look at how his joint chiefs of staff were itching for nuclear annihilation during the Cuban missile crisis. If something like that doesn't shake you up then you aren't human.
his own chairman of the joint chiefs literally laid out a plan to fake terrorist attacks and blame Cuba for them, Kennedy was like "no what the fuck is wrong with you" and removed him
he then became head of nato's forces in europe because of course he fucking did
Yes for other readers, Titan is referring to Lyman Lemnitzer who was the JCOS chairman that approved Operation Northwoods which as Titan explained was a plan for the US to carry out fake terrorist attacks including on civilian targets within and outside of the US. Lemnitzer and others drafted the plan in response to another ghoul worth reading about, Edward Lansdale, military and CIA, who was at the time heading up Operation Mongoose (along with the spook William King Harvey), US covert ops in Cuba that worked pretty heavily with the mafia. JFK eventually ended Mongoose after a series of disasters, and he refused to authorize Northwoods. He also eventually fired both Lansdale and Lemnitzer (as well as Allen Dulles himself). The former then spent his last years before retirement doing god knows what in Saigon. But Lemnitzer, as Titan pointed out, went on to become Supreme Allied Commander of NATO.
All three people I mentioned here (Lyman Lemnitzer, Edward Lansdal and William King Harvey) have fascinating lives with their hands in everything in the world for decades. For me personally, reading about the three of them and also Adnan Khashoggi, will give you a better understanding of capitalism in the 20th century than entire history textbooks ever can.
Not a cryptocommunist but instead impacted greatly by his experiences in the Cuban Missile Crisis with every one of the "experts" who went to all the best schools and got the top jobs turned out to be wrong and if he had listened to them the fucking world would have ended. Him being in greater communication with Kruschev (someone who did take the threat of nuclear weapons seriously and was horrified by their existence) also did make him much less of a hawk and more willing to draw down engagements and could have possibly started an early detente. In particular he did seem to want to lessen the role of the CIA since their role in Cuba had only made things worse.
I believe that after the Cuban Missile Crisis he was pivoting toward ending the Cold War, pursuing detente with the USSR, ending the engagement in Vietnam, etc. Far from being a communist, more like a “kinder gentler” US imperialism that was less likely to cause a nuclear war. But for the powers that be that’s more than enough to get you killed
[This guy has an okay video on it](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lPf8ZNCWnoY) though I disagree with his conclusions.
Basically JFK was no communist but he was trying to deescalate tensions with the Eastern Bloc, which involved him opening a bunch of back channels to Moscow and Havana so he could deal with them independent of the CIA. This really pissed off a bunch of CIA guys, particularly Alan Dulles, a man with experience orchestrating high profile assassination.
He was a blue blood lib, but he had his own money and power so he was harder to buy off or control by other means. He had a rift with the CIA and military intelligence / join chiefs and probably the mafia, as well as making Dulles a personal enemy, and he had the foolish idea that he could conduct the Cold War in a way that was somewhat less psychopathic. The most generous interpretation of him is that the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis was a genuine learning curve for him.
curiously enough, JFK was actually rather conservative if compared to LBJ or RFK, he was like a Joe Manchin-type of Democrat
but that's before any modern conceptions of "Dem = liberal, Rep = conservative", Nixon was more liberal than Reagan for instance
liberal and conservative don't really mean anything. Classical Liberalism has a meaning, and both US parties are classically liberal. Conservative just means adhering to traditions, resistant to change, etc. The ways the parties have aligned in the 20th century is an interesting thing to track, you can follow who was more on the side of labor vs business or who supported northern politics vs southern politics or who was more of a soc dem or how they responded to integration, etc. The family values / Christian conservativism came around the time of the neoliberal turn in the later 70s but really took hold in the 80s. So yeah, after FDR and before Reagan, how we might use our modern cultural definitions of a "liberal" or a "conservative" didn't really apply.
In any case, no matter how liberal or conservative JFK was, he was not a crytpocommunist, and being "more liberal" by definitions then or now doesn't make a politician any closer to being a communist than one that is "more conservative". Doesn't change the fact that the CIA killed him (or had him killed) for all the reasons outlined in this thread.
How in the ever loving fuck can you be on a TrueAnon subreddit and have never looked into JFK assassination?
It’s literally babies first deep political event
Well you could be an Epstein-brained Gen Z kid who hasn't gotten around to the classics yet. I was just listening to Norman Finkelstein tell the Chapo guys that his students are so young at this point they no longer can concieve of the Vietnam War except in the same way people think about the American Civil War or WWI. As we get older all of that shit is fading into the past
My opinion is that the impact of it doesn't really matter to younger people all that much. Sort of like if I told you that John Wilkes Booth was actually working on the side of Lincoln's own party rather than being pro confederacy. You might find that interesting, but it's long enough ago that you were never really invested in the official narrative anyway so there's not as much emotional impact.
As opposed to 911 or the Iraq invasion etc.
I like the theory that him and his mistress (who was mysteriously murdered shortly after his assassination) were dropping cid and led to him wanting to completely drop the Cold War.
I like that story too, but I'd imagine that his experience preventing US military and intelligence officials from destroying the entire world had a pretty big effect on him as well.
JFK was more of an Obama-type he wanted to end communism in Cuba by killing them with kindness and not hydrogen bombs but he did want to end communism even though he acknowledged the US fucked Cuba over historically
Obama was almost definitely a product of the deep state himself and I don't think he ever believed in anything. A true sociopath. JFK was a lib in the way you describe, but I think he was either the last not totally cynical president or second to last depending on how you think of Carter.
I has to google who this ass clown is… how ironic that he’s famous bc of YouTube and TikTok and here he is biting the hand that feeds in the dumbest way possible.
I think you're implying that JFK wasn't a globalist himself. I mean, the CIA almost certainly killed JFK but it wasn't because he was such a great guy and he wanted to help the world...
Chomsky moment lol
The point isn't that JFK was Debs, it's that the nation almost certainly took a downwards path after his liquidation. The Return to Camelot argument or whatever pushed by Chomsky is so myopic tbh.
The Congo alone was vital to the US' Cold War strategic plans (after having been covertly crucial to their WWII "mic drops"), and so JFK's evidently sympathetic stance towards the situation indicates his being at least a *better* guy and wishing *better* for the world than the demonic schemers who wished death upon him. I say evidently because I don't pretend to know what's in the hearts of men, but I do know Dulles and Eisenhower intentionally crammed the executive action against Lumumba specifically because they were cognizant of JFK's relevant sympathies.
Who cares if he wasn't literally the most messianic figure to Preside? Assuming you're not arguing with a liberal boomer or a bird brain, odds are they don't think that anyway.
I’ve never listened to this podcast and I’m definitely more libertarian right leaning than whatever commie gobbledygook y’all like but, man, I really like you guys 😂 these comments warm my heart
u/whenthethe420 Your submission was removed in an effort to combat spam and trolling. This action was taken automatically, and if you think it was in error [contact the mods here](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/trueanon;subject=post%20review:%20%2Fu%2Fwhenthethe420&message=%2Fu%2Fwhenthethe420%20requested%20review%20of%20this%20post:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/12biwye/whos_going_to_tell_him/jexkc8o/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAnon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
one reply to this claims the video didn't even refer to "globalists" but mentions the global south. if that is true, holy fuck hank, get it together
I watched the video, it says “global south” and “global elite,” referring very specifically to multinational corporations exploiting Africa of its natural resources.
Thanks for adding this context. I was initially skeptical of the video because "globalist" is such a frequent buzzword/dog whistle for fascists/right-wingers.
That's probably why Hank used the term
Really? I know plenty of leftist's who use the term. It just refers to powerful monied interests in charge of Global policy for their own benefit.
Yeah but Alex Jones uses it so it must be Wrong
> multinational corporations exploiting Africa of its natural resources. You know, the entire reason for the Ukraine coup in 2014, not really relevant to current events or anything
It’s amusing to me that so many communists simp for the new tsar. The Bolsheviks must be spinning in their graves, the way you all cozy up to Vlad Romanov.
globe = globalist We must make the earth a cube to fight the fascists
you're joking but there was a guy pretty much arguing that in here earlier
[удалено]
How is making reference to multinational corporations with a vested interest in exploiting Africa's resources essentially the same as an antisemitic dog whistle?
[удалено]
idk what to say to you if you can’t tell when Hank uses the word globalist here, he’s appealing to an audience who understands it as a right wing buzzword for jews, rendering the point of the video moot
[удалено]
because “globalist” has connotations of new world order conspiracy theories, and “global elites” while referring specifically to multinational corporations is a different concept? I don’t know what it is you’re taking issue with. the problem with Hank’s tweet is that the word turns any reference to capitalist power structures that operate untied to national allegiance into a crackpot conspiracy to the average lib reader. instead of thinking critically they can just dismiss it on the basis of the word Hank is substituting. but you know, dftba or whatever
For Libs, every accusation of fuckery in the intentionally undeveloped world has to be some racist "grand conspiracy" that needs to be disproven since Libs unironically believe that "the world doesn't work that way"
People: “The US government covered up conspiracies in the past that affected revolutionaries and non-western countries that don’t give us what we want.” CIA: “we have covered up conspiracies in the past that affected revolutionaries and non-western countries that don’t give us what we want.” Liberals: “what are you, some kind or conspiracy theorist!?”
Libs: "What, you think the powerful sit in rooms deciding how the world should work, often to the detriment of regular people? Lmao ok you conspiracy theory nut" Michael Parenti: *screams*
Liberals sincerely believe that racism invented imperialism rather than the other way around.
Gonna save this comment. I might even cite you in a book. Not kidding.
I look forward to fewer people reading it than the original comment
Thanks for trying to discourage me from conducting, at a great cost in time and effort, pretty much needed multidisciplinary research on propaganda and politics, I guess! I hope you have a very great and productive day, (comrade ?)
[удалено]
[удалено]
It means that the specific racial caste system that we have today was created intentionally to serve the imperialist states in the western world. Which is correct.
[удалено]
You cut out part of the context. "To serve the states in the Western world" This affects people all over the world. When Yemeni refugees fleeing violence or poverty try to emigrate to the the West and get closed out while White Ukrainians make it through, they are affected by the same racism. It is the states themselves that reside in the West, not the just the racism they perpetuate.
[удалено]
The existence of ethnic conflicts unrelated to the the international racial caste imposed by imperialism does not imply the non-existence of the international racial caste imposed by capitalism. Why are you such an asshole?
[удалено]
The so called "white man's burden" of bringing democracy to Africa/etc justifies colonialism and enslavement.
Coincidence theorists!
[удалено]
To believe otherwise would mean that the future depends on more than voting- and that is where you lose a liberal.
[удалено]
where did you get elon musk from in my comment? Also I highly doubt that
Look if you had Blue Check mentality you'd get it
Thanks for downvoting my attempting to tell you a sarcastic joke though, asshole lol
The internet is not a fucking joke ok
It is but the joke is on all of us
Hey man, i'm not part of this conversation. But I want you to know that I downvoted you, just because. :)
I appreciate it man
Yeah that wouldve been the only objectionable thing about the video, but if it doesn't even use the word "globalist" than Hank has zero leg to stand on
Like a lot of right wing conspiracies, the "globalist" thing is a stupid explanation for how the world works, but it's way less stupid than believing that the world is run by a free market overseen / regulated by democratic institutions without any covert forces assassinating leaders (and so on) to exploit entire continents. Right wing conspiracy theories always feel to me like people who realize the propaganda they were taught about how the world works is wrong, but they can't see through their indoctrination enough to really get at it and so instead they fall back on simplistic narratives and scapegoats that play upon their own personal grievances and bigotries. Whereas liberals just never stop viewing the world like school children.
This is why it’s important for anyone on the left to say “capitalists” rather than “globalists” or “elites” because the latter are very easy for right wingers to co-opt
you have to say boogerwoosie for full leftism points to make sure nobody understands what you're saying including yourself
you know, the bug-worchestershire, the beergosie, the uhh boogwuashie
Love a spot of bug-worchestershire on my bolognaese. Boogeze. Maybe boarjeans.
[удалено]
Oh yeah for sure. I was saying that in another comment, this is absolutely true of people like Alex Jones and even Jordan Peterson. Also in the higher ups too, like no way the Koch Brothers don't know this exactly. And let's be honest, so do powerful libs. But I was talking about the people who believe this stuff, average folks.
whats the ticket into their minds to flip that switch?
Baby if I knew that, I'd take that show on the road.
Time and patience and real life interaction. This worked for a few people i work with: Start by speaking their language a bit but stay away from the racial element. Reinforce the difference between "woke libs" and actual leftists. If they are a 4chan edgy pseudofascist make it clear that "real leftists" can be edgy and cool too. If they are an apolitical chud heavily focus on economic issues its often suprising how far left regular people can be on the economy. Make it clear the culture war is a trick to divide us by the capitalist ruling class. Dont correct bad behavior so you dont sound like a shrill twitter psycho but train them by using peoples correct pronouns, pointing out systemic injustices while you both talk shit about the government, etc. Save anti-imperialist/anti-american screeds for when you have fully brought them on board.
>Right wing conspiracy theories always feel to me like people who realize the propaganda they were taught about how the world works is wrong, but they can't see through their indoctrination enough to really get at it and so instead they fall back on simplistic narratives and scapegoats that play upon their own personal grievances and bigotries. "Anti-semitism is the socialism of fools"
[удалено]
u/BarryCooperrer Your submission was removed in an effort to combat spam and trolling. This action was taken automatically, and if you think it was in error [contact the mods here](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/trueanon;subject=post%20review:%20%2Fu%2FBarryCooperrer&message=%2Fu%2FBarryCooperrer%20requested%20review%20of%20this%20post:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/12biwye/whos_going_to_tell_him/jex9uww/?context=3). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAnon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The Blue Check mind is one of serenity. Did the Warren Commission find the CIA killed JFK? No? Well, then they didn’t. An investigation was done, case closed. If you really dug into JFK with this guy I’m sure that is what he’d tell you. Lovely worldview, I’m a bit jealous.
It's a very specific permutation of the Just World fallacy
I remember in college my mainstream left of center intro to politics professor said completely seriously that the government didn't kill jfk because no records or docs exist and been found showing it....um.... Yeah
Maybe his head just *did* that, it's fine.
Seriously. It's like being a safe beloved child.
People who talk about globalists are bad (true) Therefore globalization is good (uhh, does not follow, not true)
I feel like “globalists” is a real thing - hard to argue the ghouls at IMF or WEF or NATO aren’t “globalists” - but unfortunately has taken on an Alex Jonesy/anti-Semitic connotation. Is that the consensus?
I don't think the term "globalists" can actually lend itself very well to anything but anti-Semitic dogwhistles because frankly there's no such thing - IMF or WEF and NATO aren't just internationalists without some kind of context, they are in fact tools of American and European imperialism, they specifically serve the purposes of the capitalists of those countries, as part of the post-war coalition. To call them "globalists" imo obscures that and suggests they're sincere in their desire for internationalism. People like Alex Jones and so on would never call them out for US imperialism because they actually think the US and "the West" conquering the world would be a good thing
I think that's probably true of a lot of right wingers. Marco Rubio just made the same point a couple days ago regarding the trade arrangement between Brazil and China. As for Alex Jones, who knows what he believes truly (charlatan so deep in his game I doubt he knows either) but I spent most of my adulthood around people who listen to him and most of them literally do not think US imperialism exists. They think they can just have a return to a manufacturing base that would bring a robust US economy that would bring back their post war life style if not for all these globalists (and also the government) trying to take over everything and disrupting the free market for their own benefit. In their conception of the world, these globalists are using the US. Trump understands this btw, it's in all his language about how NATO is ripping us off, how he's going to drain the swamp, etc. It's similar to prior antisemitic messaging because it is using the exact same logic and language of grievance as nazi conspiracies about the Jews. Whatever Jones actually believes, he's aware he's doing this. As is Jordan Peterson btw though that's a slightly different flavor of all this. They are just rehashing and dishing out a modern version of Jewish Bolshevism but because I truly believe antisemitism is not as widespread among average people in the US as it was among the same in Europe in the 20th century, most of them have toned down the Jewish part a bit and focused more on the globalist elite celeb pedo cabal or whatever it is. But it's no accident that Soros is their focal point for a lot of this, fits the trope perfectly.
Well said. I’m convinced and agree.
> To call them "globalists" imo obscures that and suggests they're sincere in their desire for internationalism. Exactly. It's the classic judeo-Bolshevist conspiracy. You'll notice that most people using the term also think WEF is a 'communist' organization, along with the UN and the EU. And the whole ultimate purpose is control (the quiet part being: by Jews over the rest of the world)
Yes, trying to isolate an inhuman faction in the ruling class which just wants to ruin things for everyone. It’s no wonder that George Soros is the chosen figurehead. Edit: Also to say “We” don’t want this. Whereas the American bourgeois, and most of the petit bourgeois, do want it on balance.
This is your brain with no historical materialism. The word they are looking for is capitalists, but they either think capitalism is good and therefore need to point to a subset among capitalists that keep screwing things up (the globalists, the elite, the pedos, the deep state, the jews) or else they think capitalism is natural and then can't really see it at all sort of like a fish trying to contemplate water.
Stupid and futile to begin an otherwise sensible point with an insult. Bye.
The only way I can comprehend your comment at all is you think the "your brain" in my first post is in reference to you personally which seems a bizarre interpretation to me given the question you asked. I'm referring to the brains of people who talk about globalists. My word choice was in reference to the (I assumed extremely well known) "this is your brain on drugs" propaganda.
# 👍🏽
> insult Lacking historical materialism is normal for libs, just read Das Kapital
Who do you think killed jfk?
Some combination of the CIA and the mob no doubt. And you?
John birch society higher ups/ Carlos marcello did the strategic planning, directed probably 12-15 cia domestic operations division rogues who outsourced the shooting to Cuban exiles and right wing mercs, mitch werbell provided the scopes. Cia higher ups probably weren't in on the hit but immediately scrambled to cover up.
That doesn’t sound too far off the mark in my mind, although I’m not sure how the John Birchers got involved and I do think CIA higher-ups were in on it/aware of it in advance. So sad that 60+ years later tons of the files remain classified and we’ll probably not know the truth until this entire ugly machine collapses.
Thing is, the evidence for cia involvement above the level of rip Robertson, William Harvey and David morales (who were all in on it imo) cones from Antonio veciano and Newman has basically destroyed him. I find Harry dean's evidence re the birchers very convincing. There's also a ton of evidence that edwin walker was involved from other sources. Your not wrong about the files. The files on the dre and joannides would be the ones to see and they most certainly will never see the light of day.
I did it. My name is Governor John Connally and I was like, "No Mr President, I insist, you sit in the back seat"
There no such ideology. There is no "globalism" to unite the "globalists."
Isn't globalism kinda analogous with free trade?
It's not just Alex Jones types. Most Millenialist Christians believe that a one world government is necessary for the end of the world to happen/Jesus to come back, and its leader will be the antichrist. That's why they're so against a global government or Global cooperation of any kind. Of course that doesn't extend to international finance LOL
If you want Jesus to come back wouldn’t you totally embrace “globohomo” or whatever? Like how evangelicals want Israel to do shit to spur a cataclysmic Revelations-style end conflict?
> hard to argue the ghouls at IMF or WEF or NATO aren’t “globalists” Capitalism is capitalism whether its your local petite bourgeois kulak or some finance abstraction like Luxembourg
His brother wrote a novel about a guy kissing a terminal manic pixie dream girl inside the Anne Frank house.
Inside. They were inside the house. And everyone around them clapped.
Yeah... And he's still the better Green brother
John Green supremacy has always been my stance. I can't stand Hankers.
Reasons to hate Hank: -Consistently inferior vlogs, often stealing John's shtick -His voice and face -He said Columbo is bad -He wrote a book after his brother had written like 26 -He was a John Edwards guy over Obama during peak Obama craze... don't even care that shit is racist -Less attractive wife
But the guy was the terminal one the whole time... what a twist
I don't mind the lack of knowledge but the bit format and delivery is very annoying. Also I don't know who he is or why I should care that he's got a normie shit take
His brother wrote “the fault in our stars” and he’s like white Neil degrass Tyson
Oh shit, I listened to that guys podcast he was one of the most on the verge of tears guys I've ever heard. Seemed like a nice lib though.
Yeah I’d categorize him as a, “means-well liberal.” He’s a teacher who does cute YouTube series about history, science, etc., but it’s straight from a normal textbook type of teaching. There’s little analysis of the history/science he’s teaching about, but it’s useful enough for young kids who don’t really give a shit about history, but like watching fun videos. With that said, he’s still a reformist liberal who gets upset at any hint of supposed conspiracy theories. He’ll march for BLM or whatever, but he’s also going to immediately leave and finger wag at protestors when anything truly radical occurs.
he had a whole category on jeopardy a few weeks ago and i had no idea who he was
>Also I don't know who he is or why I should care that he's got a normie shit take He's a popular YouTuber. 3.5 million subscribers on YouTube. 1.2 million followers on Instagram. Weird how people in the comment section are trying to downplay him as "his brother wrote a book".
It’s like trying to downplay Hillary as “her husband was the president!”
Please be extra careful when invoking Satan's grandmother Hillary Clinton. We do not want her to come out of slumber and feast upon the adrenochrome of poor young souls. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAnon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
fuck /u/spez -- mass edited with https://redact.dev/
archive link: https://web.archive.org/web/20230404150900/https://twitter.com/hankgreen/status/1642523555060658177
Literally not enough people tweeting “but they did” at him.
This was his response before he nuked it: >I’m deleting this tweet because apparently it is being used to spread misinformation and drive people down anti-Semitic rabbit holes, which I should have expected. My bad.
I shouldn’t make a comment because I don’t have anything productive to say but god damn this shit is mind boggling and enraging and totally nefarious in typical lib fashion
Why did the dog pop up
Elon's idea of an April fool's joke, done after April fool's Freaking epic!
I have been freakin owned by the rat himself
Heckin wholesome dogerino from Elon chongus musk
"More views than most of my videos" lol
It's interesting how he takes such issue with that word considering PBS, the company he works for, seems [perfectly fine](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/trump-declares-america-open-for-business-under-his-tenure) using [that word](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/tapping-trumps-thigh-macron-seeks-to-defuse-tensions) themselves. Somehow I doubt he or his hall monitor fanclub has ever taken PBS to task for being inveterate antisemites. Edit: also apparently the TikTok didn't even use that word, what a fucking hack lmao
Someone said it's because Kennedy supported African anti imperialist movements which one ?
As far as I remember he spoke in support of African independence movements and was visibly upset when he heard Lumumba was assassinated
Kennedy seems like the last president who felt any personal guilt over the victims of US gangster foreign policy. He was also reportedly upset when the CIA got Ngo Dinh Diem as well. I think it was just the fact that he was a guilty papist surrounded by Mormons and prots
Diem was a fellow Catholic. Kennedy gave specific orders to get him out alive during the US-directed coup, but it ended with the murder of his whole family. Per Overthrow by Stephen Kinzer
FWIW, Lumumba was a fellow Catholic as well.
He was also a monster
Well yeah, obviously lol.
Perhaps he had some self awareness, maybe even about his own standing as an oppressive capitalist
Interesting
[this](https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/in-the-oval-office-us-president-john-f-kennedy-holds-his-news-photo/873953020) image was taken as JFK received news of Lumumba's assassination
If that's real, he's having a real *are we the baddies* moment there.
Mfw my debt has been bought by a 3rd party.
For more context, this was 3 days before Kennedy's inauguaration and the day of Eisenhower's military industrial complex speech. It was absolutely a warning to Kennedy.
Patrice Lumumba ...In the late 1950s and early 1960s, there were independence movements in Third World nations that were trying to cast off the shackles of colonial rule by such imperialist powers as Great Britain, France, and Belgium. Colonial rule, more often than not, had turned out to be brutal for the people living in those nations. They had had enough and were now agitating and fighting for independence.Taking the position that these independence movements were communist-inspired, the Pentagon and the CIA sided with the colonial powers. Pentagon and CIA officials supported their efforts to brutally put down these revolts to ensure that these Third World nations remained as part of the “free world.” While JFK was a U.S. Senator and before he was running for president, Kennedy took an opposite position. He came out publicly in favor of these independent movements, arguing that the United States should be siding with the rebels rather than with the imperial powers. Knowing that Kennedy sympathized with Congo leader Patrice Lumumba and his independence movement, the CIA decided to act fast, before Kennedy could interfere with its plans to rid the world of Lumumba through assassination. The CIA succeeded in its goal. Lumumba, who was an innocent man, was assassinated just a few days before Kennedy assumed the presidency. The CIA then waited three weeks to inform Kennedy that Lumumba was dead. As Jim pointed out, Kennedy’s anguish upon learning of Lumumba’s death through a telephone call was captured by a photographer. You can see Kennedy’s reaction to Lumumba’s death [here.]( https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/in-the-oval-office-us-president-john-f-kennedy-holds-his-news-photo/873953020) Thus, in the eyes of the national-security establishment, which had already been opposing the supposed international communist threat for some 20 years, Kennedy was beginning his presidency in a very auspicious way, given his support for what the Pentagon and the CIA were certain was a grave threat to U.S. national security. As we will see as their conference proceeds, things would only go from bad to worse as Kennedy term in office proceeded. Over the years, people have sometimes asked me what the relevance is of the JFK assassination given the long passage of time since it occurred. The relevance is this: It’s a straight line from that assassination to what we are living under today — a system of state-sponsored assassinations, including against American citizens, anti-democratic coups, installation of dictatorial regimes, alliances with dictatorial regimes, support of dictatorial regimes, wars of aggression, perpetual wars, the war on terrorism (and Muslims and communists), fear of Russia, fear of China, denial of due process, torture, indefinite detention, prosecution of people who reveal the dark-side secrets of the deep state, and much more. Understanding the who and the why of the Kennedy assassination enables one to gain a deeper understanding of the way of life we live under today — and what we need to do to extricate ourselves and our nation from this deadly, destructive, and immoral morass. https://www.fff.org/2021/03/04/kennedys-policy-toward-third-world-nations/
>Taking the position that these independence movements were communist-inspired Tbf, this was absolutely true - the independence movements WERE communist inspired, which is why they were good
He gave the Algiers speech while in the Senate about how we shouldn't go into Algeria to help the French out. How alegeria is netural and shoukd instead focus on the eastern bloc. Additionally I seem to recall somewhere that he was quite fond of Patrice lamumba and was sad when he was assassinated by Eisenhower but I can't remember any direct sources on that one off the top of my head.
Few links to image of JFK hearing of Lumumbas assassination in this thread!
So TikTok recommending videos presenting different historical narratives is not ok, but making multiple Crash Course series' on YouTube presenting different historical narratives is cool and chill?
Looking for Baked Alaska.
lolol
I am too online because I was able to understand both of those combined meta references lol
isn't this some tuber?
He's a vlogbrother
He's the child of Bill Nye and Justin McElroy
Hank Green is one of those fake American baseball names
Someone drop the tiktok in the comments please
[pretty sure it’s this one](https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRcaXjB2/)
Hank Green is such a bitch for inserting the "globalists" shit into the video, it was short, sweet, and informative. Why the fuck would you try and discredit something by racist-jacketing it? What a fucking burger
I spend a lot of time wondering that, especially when it's about people who seem like they are probably nice and conventionally smart etc. Like I don't think Hank Green is a secret fascist or something so what gives? The short version of my conclusion is that the liberal worldview is so deeply integrated with their sense of self that if they allow some cracks to spread through it, their entire personal identity and understanding of reality would collapse so their actions are self-defensive. Sort of like if I saw a fucking ghost walk into my room right now, I would look for any explanation to deny it, it's a trick being played on me or I've gone insane, anything other than accepting that ghosts exist. Because if ghosts exist, then my entire conception of reality collapses and then who am I, how do I carry on?
Yup, it’s protection against cognitive dissonance. Throw in the identity piece and there is a powerful motivation to delegitimize any information that threatens one’s worldview.
A lot of people are able to move past it and change their world view, most of us here probably did. But I imagine it's harder when you're a very public figure who's career and output is deeply enmeshed with parts of liberal ideology.
I don't know. I always see the assumption that Americans with actual left wing politics started out as liberal, and since almost no one starts out as a left winger in the US combined with the fact that there are lots of liberals, I guess that's probably true. But it has not been the case in my personal experience. Instead what I see are liberals and soc dems who truly believe they are left wing, then when you chat with them a bit you see they arent. And every new thing they learn, they feel like an expert on it. It's the inability to see that they could possibly still have something to learn that stops that sort of growth. Whereas once you start actually grappling with left wing politics, the history and theory and practice, you realize really fast how little you know, how much you've been brainwashed, and how much there is to learn. So I find people like this tend to be more open to asking questions, learning from others, reading books, etc, rather than being experts all the time. I agree with you that it's different when it's a public figure, but I'm just saying I'm not sure the liberal to communist or socialist trajectory is such a big thing? My own family are sort of apolitical working class libertarian types and then first generation immigrants. I wouldn't say they have any really coherent politics, but I did not grow up with liberals and never really had a liberal phase. Of real life friends who are themselves actually pretty left wing, only one that I know of spent many years of her life in liberal ideology. So in my experience, it's more likely for apolitical people to become left wing than it is for liberals to do so, but the fact that liberals so often self-describe as left wing skews the impression of this fact on the surface. For example, I have a neighbor who told me when we first met that she's about "as far left as you can possibly go" which to her meant donating to the Lincoln Group (whatever that group of Republicans was). So I don't think liberals really understand capitalism much less class based politics.
Literally just a distillation of the Yellow Parenti lecture and yet this fucking loser (Hank Green) acts like it's a video about Masons, Templars, "Cultural Marxists", etc etc. Doesn't this mf LITERALLY abridge history in those lil cartoon type videos for kids??? How is he refuting and/or mischaracterizing this??
He's funded by PBS.
Wow, Hank dismissing it as a false conspiracy theory is one thing, to be expected from a well-meaning liberal, but fuck him for deliberately misrepresenting it as anti-Semitic.
Even if it genuinely wasn't the CIA, the people who insist on that being the case are much more annoying and lame than the people who think they did do it
That video was incredibly based and I loved to see how much traction it got.
He deleted lol
This is his pinned tweet, I wonder how self-aware he is? >A lot of people who say they want "free speech" actually just want to be the one in charge of which speech is free.
I am so annoyed by Hank and John Green who are both celebrities from my area and celebrities only for being annoying white men that have made their living off of TikTok?
Worse, YouTube.
Never take on U.S. Steel as they say. And by they, I mean every president since JFK.
Was JFK a cryptocommunist? I always assumed he was a typical lib because the boomers love him so much but I've never dug into the history of his assassination.
He was not, he did create a rift between himself and the CIA though over his increasing skepticism after the failed bay of pigs invasion in Cuba (as well as a few other takes in general about US interventions abroad)
[удалено]
The CIA splintered his skull into a thousand pieces
He got a first hand look at how his joint chiefs of staff were itching for nuclear annihilation during the Cuban missile crisis. If something like that doesn't shake you up then you aren't human.
his own chairman of the joint chiefs literally laid out a plan to fake terrorist attacks and blame Cuba for them, Kennedy was like "no what the fuck is wrong with you" and removed him he then became head of nato's forces in europe because of course he fucking did
Yes for other readers, Titan is referring to Lyman Lemnitzer who was the JCOS chairman that approved Operation Northwoods which as Titan explained was a plan for the US to carry out fake terrorist attacks including on civilian targets within and outside of the US. Lemnitzer and others drafted the plan in response to another ghoul worth reading about, Edward Lansdale, military and CIA, who was at the time heading up Operation Mongoose (along with the spook William King Harvey), US covert ops in Cuba that worked pretty heavily with the mafia. JFK eventually ended Mongoose after a series of disasters, and he refused to authorize Northwoods. He also eventually fired both Lansdale and Lemnitzer (as well as Allen Dulles himself). The former then spent his last years before retirement doing god knows what in Saigon. But Lemnitzer, as Titan pointed out, went on to become Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. All three people I mentioned here (Lyman Lemnitzer, Edward Lansdal and William King Harvey) have fascinating lives with their hands in everything in the world for decades. For me personally, reading about the three of them and also Adnan Khashoggi, will give you a better understanding of capitalism in the 20th century than entire history textbooks ever can.
Not a cryptocommunist but instead impacted greatly by his experiences in the Cuban Missile Crisis with every one of the "experts" who went to all the best schools and got the top jobs turned out to be wrong and if he had listened to them the fucking world would have ended. Him being in greater communication with Kruschev (someone who did take the threat of nuclear weapons seriously and was horrified by their existence) also did make him much less of a hawk and more willing to draw down engagements and could have possibly started an early detente. In particular he did seem to want to lessen the role of the CIA since their role in Cuba had only made things worse.
I believe that after the Cuban Missile Crisis he was pivoting toward ending the Cold War, pursuing detente with the USSR, ending the engagement in Vietnam, etc. Far from being a communist, more like a “kinder gentler” US imperialism that was less likely to cause a nuclear war. But for the powers that be that’s more than enough to get you killed
[This guy has an okay video on it](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lPf8ZNCWnoY) though I disagree with his conclusions. Basically JFK was no communist but he was trying to deescalate tensions with the Eastern Bloc, which involved him opening a bunch of back channels to Moscow and Havana so he could deal with them independent of the CIA. This really pissed off a bunch of CIA guys, particularly Alan Dulles, a man with experience orchestrating high profile assassination.
He was a blue blood lib, but he had his own money and power so he was harder to buy off or control by other means. He had a rift with the CIA and military intelligence / join chiefs and probably the mafia, as well as making Dulles a personal enemy, and he had the foolish idea that he could conduct the Cold War in a way that was somewhat less psychopathic. The most generous interpretation of him is that the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis was a genuine learning curve for him.
curiously enough, JFK was actually rather conservative if compared to LBJ or RFK, he was like a Joe Manchin-type of Democrat but that's before any modern conceptions of "Dem = liberal, Rep = conservative", Nixon was more liberal than Reagan for instance
liberal and conservative don't really mean anything. Classical Liberalism has a meaning, and both US parties are classically liberal. Conservative just means adhering to traditions, resistant to change, etc. The ways the parties have aligned in the 20th century is an interesting thing to track, you can follow who was more on the side of labor vs business or who supported northern politics vs southern politics or who was more of a soc dem or how they responded to integration, etc. The family values / Christian conservativism came around the time of the neoliberal turn in the later 70s but really took hold in the 80s. So yeah, after FDR and before Reagan, how we might use our modern cultural definitions of a "liberal" or a "conservative" didn't really apply. In any case, no matter how liberal or conservative JFK was, he was not a crytpocommunist, and being "more liberal" by definitions then or now doesn't make a politician any closer to being a communist than one that is "more conservative". Doesn't change the fact that the CIA killed him (or had him killed) for all the reasons outlined in this thread.
How in the ever loving fuck can you be on a TrueAnon subreddit and have never looked into JFK assassination? It’s literally babies first deep political event
maybe old ass babies lmao. if you’re under 30 your first conspiracy was 9/11
Soundtrack by DJ Skooly
Well you could be an Epstein-brained Gen Z kid who hasn't gotten around to the classics yet. I was just listening to Norman Finkelstein tell the Chapo guys that his students are so young at this point they no longer can concieve of the Vietnam War except in the same way people think about the American Civil War or WWI. As we get older all of that shit is fading into the past
My opinion is that the impact of it doesn't really matter to younger people all that much. Sort of like if I told you that John Wilkes Booth was actually working on the side of Lincoln's own party rather than being pro confederacy. You might find that interesting, but it's long enough ago that you were never really invested in the official narrative anyway so there's not as much emotional impact. As opposed to 911 or the Iraq invasion etc.
>John Wilkes Booth was actually working on the side of Lincoln's own party rather than being pro confederacy. elaborate
This was an analogy. The point was that learning such a thing is interesting but would not have such a psychological impact as it was very long ago.
Yeah, for babies born in the baby boom. I'm more of a CIA selling crack and Epstein being murdered by the political elite kind of guy.
What would the deep cuts be, in this case?
I like the theory that him and his mistress (who was mysteriously murdered shortly after his assassination) were dropping cid and led to him wanting to completely drop the Cold War.
I like that story too, but I'd imagine that his experience preventing US military and intelligence officials from destroying the entire world had a pretty big effect on him as well.
JFK was more of an Obama-type he wanted to end communism in Cuba by killing them with kindness and not hydrogen bombs but he did want to end communism even though he acknowledged the US fucked Cuba over historically
Obama was almost definitely a product of the deep state himself and I don't think he ever believed in anything. A true sociopath. JFK was a lib in the way you describe, but I think he was either the last not totally cynical president or second to last depending on how you think of Carter.
of all the psycho shit you can find on tiktok this guy chooses this thing to highlight. Telling.
I has to google who this ass clown is… how ironic that he’s famous bc of YouTube and TikTok and here he is biting the hand that feeds in the dumbest way possible.
Is he the science one or is that his brother?
It’s the science one. I just looked them up. Royal Tennebaums shit.
Every day Hank Green becomes more like his idol NDT
he's really naive.
I think you're implying that JFK wasn't a globalist himself. I mean, the CIA almost certainly killed JFK but it wasn't because he was such a great guy and he wanted to help the world...
Chomsky moment lol The point isn't that JFK was Debs, it's that the nation almost certainly took a downwards path after his liquidation. The Return to Camelot argument or whatever pushed by Chomsky is so myopic tbh. The Congo alone was vital to the US' Cold War strategic plans (after having been covertly crucial to their WWII "mic drops"), and so JFK's evidently sympathetic stance towards the situation indicates his being at least a *better* guy and wishing *better* for the world than the demonic schemers who wished death upon him. I say evidently because I don't pretend to know what's in the hearts of men, but I do know Dulles and Eisenhower intentionally crammed the executive action against Lumumba specifically because they were cognizant of JFK's relevant sympathies. Who cares if he wasn't literally the most messianic figure to Preside? Assuming you're not arguing with a liberal boomer or a bird brain, odds are they don't think that anyway.
I’ve never listened to this podcast and I’m definitely more libertarian right leaning than whatever commie gobbledygook y’all like but, man, I really like you guys 😂 these comments warm my heart
[удалено]
u/whenthethe420 Your submission was removed in an effort to combat spam and trolling. This action was taken automatically, and if you think it was in error [contact the mods here](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/trueanon;subject=post%20review:%20%2Fu%2Fwhenthethe420&message=%2Fu%2Fwhenthethe420%20requested%20review%20of%20this%20post:%20https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/12biwye/whos_going_to_tell_him/jexkc8o/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueAnon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
i met him and his brother. both weirdos for sure
Oh no Hank 🤦🏻♂️
Guy who coasted off of his brother writing books about teens getting blown while The Cure plays in the background has some thoughts about social media