How long has Conservatism, Inc. been controlled opposition? Is there a single legacy conservatism outlet that isn’t up to its eyeballs in dirty donor money? At this point, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn National Review is partly funded by Soros bucks.
National Review Is A Shill For Big Tech
Feb 20th, 2019 by CH
36 Responses to “National Review Is A Shill For Big Tech”
Leave a Reply
Search
Archives
PAGES
GAB UPDATES
Recent Comments
Categories
GAME
MAGA MEN
SYLLOGISM AND SYNTHESIS
-
TOP POSTS
-
Help! Most of my comments never end up on the blog. What is wrong here???
LikeLike
We’ve all been down that road. The ways of WP are unfathomable but it’s best to keep away from common trigger words.
LikeLike
But Google doesn’t be evil!
LikeLike
Breitbart?
LikeLike
considering Breitbart is the *only* right leaning news outlet with notable viewership…its most likely controlled, just enough to make shekels and feed the demand…but stops short of hard hitting real talk.
Breitbart was jew.
and fox news isn’t conservative. its center at best.
LikeLike
“Breitbart was jew.”
not by blood. which is everything that means for them
LikeLike
Fox? lol
stop it with the left/right thing…the left is correct about half the shit, the right the other half.
orthodox parties are just garbage – they stake their tents as if they are “left” or “right” but they’re just 50% shit with 50% shit you agree with.
Fox shills for establishment narratives. They are hugely pro war
LikeLike
Helps explain the bipartisan coup d etat against Trump
LikeLiked by 1 person
markgm28: You mean the bipartisan effort to provide political cover so that President Kushner has an excuse to ignore the promises that his Trump-shaped ventriloquist dummy spoke to get him elected?
(The “nepotism” in this family runs deep. President Kushner even lets his father-in-law sit in the big chair.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Biggest mistake Trump ever made was giving Kushner so much power. Prior to Trump’s campaign the Kushners supported politicians and causes that were diametrically opposed to everything Trump stood on. How could this circle ever be squared?
LikeLike
this is farcical
Kushner was nowhere and nobody during the campaign
he gained power after the election bc he has some strange affiliation or common ground with so many people in government that I just can’t seem to put my finger on and nobody else can either
Hey, AIPAC got more money for Israel for their wall than Congress set aside for ours!
LikeLike
Straight out of the KGB/SVR playbook.
Central never failed to penetrate their opponents and turn them… dupe them.
Read the second half of The Unholy Trinity for how that played out more than seventy-years ago with the NKVD.
Yeah, it worked like a charm.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Conservatism, Inc., a US subsidiary of International Zionism, Ltd.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The Old Right died out in the 1960s; Nixon rode in on its last gasp, helped by massive White terror over LBJ-era nigger riots in hundreds of American cities. (Nixon then proceeded to embrace Red China.) The New Right rose in the 1970s, driven by Jewed churches and Zionist televangelists preaching for the shekels. Why do the results surprise anybody?
Like it or not (and I don’t), Conservatism in America has always been dependent on Christianity. So, let’s take stock of that era: The Catholic church was post Vatican II. The major Protestant churches were pinko “social gospel” and/or completely Zionized. The last major opposition was the Mormon Church, which fell to influence in (if memory serves) 1978 when President Carter threatened a weak Mormon leader over the church’s “racism”. Some independent churches survived; but they were politically insignificant.
The first big win of the New Right was Reagan, a fanatical Zionist. Sort of like the first big win of the Alt Right is President Kushner. Plus ça change…
LikeLiked by 1 person
This analysis hits the nail on the head. I just think you might have underestimated the impact of Vatican II which flipped the Church(30% of American population) from ally to enemy. And don’t underestimate the role of the (((conversos))) in Vatican II and its groundwork.
LikeLiked by 1 person
that’s a fair recitation.
however, the aggrandizement of women through the 60s had more to do with this than anything else.
Suffrage brought in 100% more voters. The 60s were the time that boomers decided that the laws of nature and historical wisdom were inapplicable. The pinnacle of this is Lennon’s Imagine. They think that is unalloyed “good” but to me it sounds like a nightmare. Literally everything in that song is kind of the epitome of boomer 60s-ism equalist drugged up hazy nonsense.
But growing up in a world where you could fall in a hole and get rich…really what you have to imagine is how easy this generation had it. The USA literally won that world war in an economic sense. We took no damage and emerged with all the world’s manufacturing, largest oil supply, and most of the scientific minds and technology.
Nobody told the boomers the horrors of reality it took to get there.
Conservatism was dependent on Christianity…but so was liberalism. I mean, dude, equalism takes Jefferson’s words and they parade them around incessantly. The cucked out protestant churches use christianity all the time to justify things.
And they’re right. I have no idea why we continue to have this discussion/argument here. It is not my intent to conduct a continual polemic against this religion but for the fact that commenters CONTINUE to bring up “christianity” as if it bears no relation to the ACTUAL LITERAL words of jesus.
Insofar as “conservatives” were using “christianity” they were using a false form the same as Ch@rles M@rtel or Cortez or Pizarro were.
the new self-destructive liberal version of christianity is the TRUE FORM if you intend to follow the ACTUAL words of the guy the religion is named after. This religion was not always the vanguard of the Roman Empire or white expanionism; for most of the first century it was just a fringe doomsday cult.
LikeLike
In a Cleansing, these cucks would be the first to go. Rightfully so.
LikeLike
National Review … Shill …
How long has Conservatism, Inc. been controlled opposition?
National Review was usurped by the Jews in its inception. Dig deeply for the history of how its founding was spearheaded by Professor Willmoore Kendall, who personally selected the young William F. Buckley Jr., and how Jews gained control of it right when it started in 1955. Buckley was happy enough to cover for them, and attack anyone on the Right he deemed insufficiently kosher. This caused some serious damage on the Right at a critical point back in the late 1950s/early 1960s.
Nothing is new but to those who know not what has gone before.
(Though I disagree with him on many issues, Kendall was a good man. Good enough that Yale University hated him, and paid him an apparently terrific sum of money to buy off his tenure so they could get rid of him. He was then welcomed by the University of Dallas, which at the time was not yet overtaken by liberals.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
they are putting big shekels behind those who are going to get them even more shekels
the great majority of presstitute whorehouses of today are non profitable
thought control tanks are growing like mushrooms after rain
all of them are mouthpieces of a well organized anti white anti masculine propaganda which end goals is the total demasculinization and reducing white man to a politically insignificant working slave
you turn around and everywhere you hear brain dead normies repeating their lies
you walk streets everywhere you see the degenerates that follow their prescriptions
you want to scream but you realize that a scream cannot be heard in the city of lost souls
LikeLiked by 1 person
you turn around and everywhere you hear brain dead normies repeating their lies
Last year I took a lot of heat ’round chere for noticing that the much-ballyhooed death of the (((MSM))) was greatly exaggerated.
LikeLike
boomer- everything is not about you for fuck’s sake
LikeLike
Orwell called this “doublethink.” It’s the ability to hold two mutually contradictory beliefs in one’s mind at the same time.
Example: “Women are strong and independent” coexists in the sh*tlib mind with “Women need special parking spaces, lower physical fitness standards and special help entering STEM fields.”
Logic got nuttin’ to do wid it.
LikeLike
So the National Review promotes leftism because it is corrupt, not simply because it wants to promote evil for its own sake. This actually raises my opinion of NR.
LikeLike
Igor: Why are those two options mutually exclusive? NR has been that way since about 1955. In its earliest years, it served as a shield to deflect anti-Communists from the Jews and Jewishly important things. As of now, it’s been an all-out Zionist rag for the past few decades. So… maybe it also takes payola? Every Jewboy knows the rule, “business is business”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Allum Bokhari complaining that Sundar Pichai’s company gave money to a rag that endorsed Ted Cruz. This is why I say burn it down. Maybe whatever rises from the ashes will involve actual Americans, not foreign vultures bickering over the choicest bits of America’s corpse. it is amazing how many “American” controversies raised in the media involve no Americans and are being discussed exclusively by foreigners.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The only way the White race will survive on the North American continent is to utilize the strategy outlined in Harold Covington’s novels. The southern half of the contiguous United States is already demographically finished, but we can take control of much of the northern half using the Covington strategy.
LikeLike
HAC’s novels are a remarkable body of creative works, the most thoroughly detailed and carefully thought-out blueprint we have IMO for implementing the 14 words.
LikeLike
I’ve been mentioning the late, great Covington’s novels ’round chere for the last few years, and to be frank, I’m surprised (among purported alt-R yeggs such as these) that they haven’t gotten more of a shout out.
LikeLike
There, um, are tons of white people in South America, you know?
LikeLike
I was surprised that the Weekly Standard was closed on the basis of finance. Surely the price of keeping such a reliable cuckservative mouthpiece open would have been small change to some wealthy (((nation-wrecker)))?
LikeLike
Bill Kristol became a liability. He absolutely torched his own career and credibility with his mad never Trump frothing.
See their recent ludicrous article on the Covington kids.
LikeLike
weekly standard became so bad that even boomers arent reading anymore.
national review was never profitable, but it seems to have a certain relevance to older, dying people
LikeLike
A few years back National Reviews readership.had an average age of 65
LikeLike
fusionism is a mistake.
since they “Mixed” traditional moral conservativsm with “free market” and minarchism we gotta neither of those things.
the “free market” actually gave more power and money to powerful people to destroy any traditional value left on society
LikeLike
“How long has Conservatism, Inc. been controlled opposition? Is there a single legacy conservatism outlet that isn’t up to its eyeballs in dirty donor money?”
Q U E S T I O N S A R E R A C I S T
LikeLike
Hahahaha
LikeLike