#ideology — Public Fediverse posts

Orbán Lost, but Patriotism Did Not — A  Structural Diagnosis

This article was originally published in Vol. 6 No. 2 of our print edition. In…
#Hungary #HU #Europe #Europa #EU #2026elections #anti-communism #Erosion #Federalism #Fidesz-KDNP #globalism #hír #Hungarianparliamentaryelection #hungary #Ideology #illiberalstate #liberaldemocracy #lostelection #Magyarország #patriotism #PeterMagyar #Politics #sovereignty #Tiszagovernment #TiszaParty #ViktorOrbán #west
https://www.europesays.com/3138961/

“Funding Hebron’s Expansion: A UK Charity Is Quietly Bankrolling One of Israel’s Most Extreme Settler Enclaves”

by Nouri in Manufactuting Dissent on Substack

@[email protected]
@[email protected]
@[email protected]
@iran
@iraq
@palestinenews
@uk_politics
@UKLabour
@thegreenparty
@[email protected]
@[email protected]
@guardian

“A British nonprofit, The #JerusalemTrust, has been moving close to £200,000 into #Yeshivat #ShaveiHevron — a religious school sitting inside one of the most hardline settlement compounds in occupied #Hebron. The #Guardian exposed the transfers, but the real story is what those payments enable on the ground. Shavei Hevron isn’t a normal school. It’s part of a settlement known for #extremist #ideology, #armed #settler #patrols, and routine violence against Palestinians”

https://open.substack.com/pub/mandissent/p/funding-hebrons-expansion-a-uk-charity

#Press #SocialMedia #Gaza #PalestinianGenocide #Zionism #SettlerColonialism #Resistance #DecolonizePalestine #GlobaliseTheIntifada #Iran #War #Trump #Israel #Kach #Smotrich #UK #Labour

“Funding Hebron’s Expansion: A UK Charity Is Quietly Bankrolling One of Israel’s Most Extreme Settler Enclaves”

by Nouri in Manufactuting Dissent on Substack

@[email protected]
@[email protected]
@[email protected]
@iran
@iraq
@palestinenews
@uk_politics
@UKLabour
@thegreenparty
@[email protected]
@[email protected]
@guardian

“A British nonprofit, The #JerusalemTrust, has been moving close to £200,000 into #Yeshivat #ShaveiHevron — a religious school sitting inside one of the most hardline settlement compounds in occupied #Hebron. The #Guardian exposed the transfers, but the real story is what those payments enable on the ground. Shavei Hevron isn’t a normal school. It’s part of a settlement known for #extremist #ideology, #armed #settler #patrols, and routine violence against Palestinians”

https://open.substack.com/pub/mandissent/p/funding-hebrons-expansion-a-uk-charity

#Press #SocialMedia #Gaza #PalestinianGenocide #Zionism #SettlerColonialism #Resistance #DecolonizePalestine #GlobaliseTheIntifada #Iran #War #Trump #Israel #Kach #Smotrich #UK #Labour

Tommaso Piazza reviews Gabriele Contessa's book Science Denial in SERRC, https://social-epistemology.com/2026/06/12/a-review-of-gabriele-contessas-science-denial-tommaso-piazza/

An eralier review was by Maya Goldenberg, https://social-epistemology.com/2026/04/29/science-denial-post-trust-and-epistemic-blame-a-review-of-contessas-science-denial-maya-goldenberg/

#science #tiede #denial #scienceDenial #epistemology #socialScience #climateDenial #pseudoscience #postTruth #truth #misinformation #trust #motivatedInquiry #evidence #reasoning #motivatedReasoning #harm #egoism #collectiveResponsibility #society #futures #planetEarth #resistance #belief #ideology #epistemicSecurity #psychology #philosophyOfScience #philosophy #filosofia

Tommaso Piazza reviews Gabriele Contessa's book Science Denial in SERRC, https://social-epistemology.com/2026/06/12/a-review-of-gabriele-contessas-science-denial-tommaso-piazza/

An eralier review was by Maya Goldenberg, https://social-epistemology.com/2026/04/29/science-denial-post-trust-and-epistemic-blame-a-review-of-contessas-science-denial-maya-goldenberg/

#science #tiede #denial #scienceDenial #epistemology #socialScience #climateDenial #pseudoscience #postTruth #truth #misinformation #trust #motivatedInquiry #evidence #reasoning #motivatedReasoning #harm #egoism #collectiveResponsibility #society #futures #planetEarth #resistance #belief #ideology #epistemicSecurity #psychology #philosophyOfScience #philosophy #filosofia

“McAleer said that a sense of #belonging, rather than explicit #extremist #ideology, is often the entry point.” www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...

A white nationalist group visi...

#frg #usa #israel #palestine : #zionism / #ethnonationalism / #supremacy / #greaterisrael / #essay

„Criticism of the #ideology underpinning Israel's foundation remains contentious in Germany. In the US, however, a significant shift is taking place. The Zionist consensus within the Jewish community is fracturing and debate is opening up.“

https://qantara.de/en/article/israel-and-palestine-how-talk-about-zionism

#frg #usa #israel #palestine : #zionism / #ethnonationalism / #supremacy / #greaterisrael / #essay

„Criticism of the #ideology underpinning Israel's foundation remains contentious in Germany. In the US, however, a significant shift is taking place. The Zionist consensus within the Jewish community is fracturing and debate is opening up.“

https://qantara.de/en/article/israel-and-palestine-how-talk-about-zionism

#frg #usa #israel #palestine : #zionism / #ethnonationalism / #supremacy / #greaterisrael / #essay

„Criticism of the #ideology underpinning Israel's foundation remains contentious in Germany. In the US, however, a significant shift is taking place. The Zionist consensus within the Jewish community is fracturing and debate is opening up.“

https://qantara.de/en/article/israel-and-palestine-how-talk-about-zionism

A quotation from Thoreau

It is never too late to give up our prejudices.

Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) American philosopher and writer
Walden; or, Life in the Woods, ch. 1 “Economy” (1854)

More about this quote: wist.info/thoreau-henry-david/…

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #thoreau #henrydavidthoreau #beliefsystem #bias #change #prejudice #reform #worldview #ideology

The Problem with Democracy.

👉 https://brywillis634737.substack.com/p/the-problem-with-democracy

If you follow my work closely, you know that I am a vocal critic of Democracy and Enlightenment Age ideals. I share a summary overview in this Substack post. I do love my Nano Banana pig image.

#philosophy #politics #blog #podcast #democracy #substack #critique #language #ideology #power #propaganda #hegemony #rhetoric #scepticism

The Problem with Democracy.

👉 https://brywillis634737.substack.com/p/the-problem-with-democracy

If you follow my work closely, you know that I am a vocal critic of Democracy and Enlightenment Age ideals. I share a summary overview in this Substack post. I do love my Nano Banana pig image.

#philosophy #politics #blog #podcast #democracy #substack #critique #language #ideology #power #propaganda #hegemony #rhetoric #scepticism

#blackbirdcoop #leftists #ideology #pedantism

THIS! Exactly on point.
(That's why I'm not a leftist but an anarchist. We shut up and DO organize the #community based on #mutualhelp. Want to join? Visit your local #RepairCafe ^.^ #takeaction )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8gVFuWay8o

#blackbirdcoop #leftists #ideology #pedantism

THIS! Exactly on point.
(That's why I'm not a leftist but an anarchist. We shut up and DO organize the #community based on #mutualhelp. Want to join? Visit your local #RepairCafe ^.^ #takeaction )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8gVFuWay8o

RE: https://republik.social/@republik_magazin/116544052826172922

@ANosthoff hat zusammen mit Felix Maschewski wieder einen richtig guten Essay am Start. Klare Leseempfehlung. 👍

#techfascism #darkenlightenment #dunkleaufklaerung #techfaschismus #SiliconValley #techbros #ideology #ideologie

RE: https://republik.social/@republik_magazin/116544052826172922

@ANosthoff hat zusammen mit Felix Maschewski wieder einen richtig guten Essay am Start. Klare Leseempfehlung. 👍

#techfascism #darkenlightenment #dunkleaufklaerung #techfaschismus #SiliconValley #techbros #ideology #ideologie

#341: How Radical Should You Be In Your Belief?

https://youtu.be/mOoLMJQRrQY

How radical should you be in your belief? If you believe in something, shouldn’t you aim to believe in it more? So, let’s discuss.

All of us have our ideas that we prefer over others. All of us may have our political, religious, cultural preferences. There’s nothing wrong with that. That’s what we do. That’s what makes us human.

If we believe deeply that something is correct, that something is good, should we not think also that more of that is better? It’s a seductive idea and it seems logical initially. If you are X, if you believe in X, shouldn’t you believe in it more so? That seems to be the case because otherwise why would you believe in it? Is your belief really that weak that you can’t strengthen it?

So that’s the idea. And if you for some reason don’t want to fully commit, maybe you really never believed it completely. Maybe you’re not really a true believer. That’s the other part of the idea.

However, I would say this ignores certain facts about ideas, because every idea — whether it’s a religion, a philosophy, a cultural preference — typically has safeguards. When you look at all the big religions, they have some sort of clause, some sort of warning against taking it too far. Because that’s what the very idea of divinity is. That’s what the very idea of God is: that which we as human beings cannot completely understand. God is that which we cannot even approach so much that we can be certain of what God is. Because if we could, wouldn’t that mean in some way that we could become God? And that’s the very warning that most religions promote.

Believe, but don’t assume for a moment that you have all the answers.

There’s this joke that camels always look at humans in a specific way. The joke is that God has 100 names. We know 99 of them. But the camel knows all 100. And that’s why the camel looks so superior.

But that is the idea of religion. The idea of religion is a combination — as strange as this may sound — of belief and humility. We are not God. We are not everything in the universe. We are not all-knowing. We are not omnipotent. And we will never get there. So whatever you think of as God — whether you think that’s a religious idea, whether you think that’s nature, whether you think that’s the universe, whether you think that’s just the ultimate good — this idea is clear: do not pretend to be all-knowing yourself. Have some sense of humility.

Now that also goes for philosophy. You may say, I follow philosopher so-and-so. But philosophy is an ongoing conversation about wisdom — the love of wisdom; that’s what philosophia means. Each idea in philosophy lives in interaction with other ideas. Philosophy is more than just footnotes to Plato. Plato can be footnotes to Plato — if you look at the Laws and the Republic, there are two very different ideas there, and more than two.

Philosophers are typically smarter than those who follow a specific philosophy. Because every philosopher knows that in order to put out the strongest version of their idea, they have to leave some of the complications out. But there are always complications. And philosophy X always lives in some form of exchange with philosophy Y or Z or however many there are. Every idea lives in an ecosystem of ideas. It lives in relation with others.

Philosophy X may be good or better in certain respects than philosophy Y. Maybe philosophy Y is good in other aspects. But the truth emerges in the interaction between the two.

So you may believe that the individual is the source of all morality. But how far do you want to take this? Do you believe this to the complete abdication of responsibility for others? Do you believe this to the complete rejection of the state? Similarly, if you believe the state is the authority over everything else, at which point does this have to stop? At which point does the state have to even question itself as to how far it should go?

Everything costs money. Does this mean that everything should be judged by its price tag? Even though price is not a static thing — it depends on a lot of factors. Is the price tag always the value of something, or is it just our momentary expression of our social and cultural priorities? Of course there’s supply and demand which regulate that. But is that still everything? Aren’t there things where we should find some difficulty putting a price on? Aren’t there some things that we can’t really measure very well? So isn’t there a limit to this kind of positivist, materialist way of looking at things?

Equally, if we say the materialistic world doesn’t matter and we need to live in a more spiritual, contemplative state of mind — that may be true to a point, but eventually bills will have to be paid. You do live in some form of reality, and that reality means that resources typically are limited and there needs to be a prioritizing. How do you organize that?

The material and the spiritual belong together. They will always have friction between each other, but they will always complement each other. If you’re too materialistic — if you believe that only that which can be measured, only that which can be owned, only that which can have a price tag matters — you should maybe think about some more spiritual components of life. If you’re too spiritual, maybe you need to be rooted more in the fact that there’s also a materialist component of life.

If X drowns out Y, sides of X may appear that make it wrong, because you need that balance. And there are more than just two — X and Y is easier, but you could say XYZ or whatever.

So in fact the saying may be true that too much of a good thing is indeed not good. It distorts what it is.

This is why you see me frequently call for moderation. You could argue that too much moderation is also wrong — you need some passion and some intensity and some belief. Well, yes. But moderation can also be just a middle ground between these different poles. All these different ideas around us lead us to negotiate our space within them. Moderation does not mean you don’t have convictions. It means that you question at which point your convictions turn into such a radicality, into such an extreme version, that they become wrong — that they are undermined by their own conviction.

Is radicality the truest expression of an idea? No. It may be the most flamboyant, the most interesting. But it can’t survive well. If you turn too radical, too extremist, your idea may be more attractive to people who really think like you. But then look at history. Every time an idea became too radical, it fails. It has failed. No matter what the idea — because in its radicality, in its extremism, it loses its power of conviction towards those who don’t agree with you. And the number of people in the world who agree with you is always going to be punctuated by the number of people who disagree with you.

If you want to build a successful movement, if you want to build a successful approach to politics, to religion, to whatever your cultural or social idea may be, you need to convince others. You need to find ways of integrating aspects of the other into your own.

Which is why this very familiar symbol of yin and yang — masculine, feminine, black, white, dark, light — shows you these two parts, but there’s always something of the other in the bigger part. You know the symbol.

If we don’t find a way to integrate that with which we disagree — as some sense of doubt, as some sense of humility within our convictions — then our convictions will be nothing but arrogance, nothing but self-congratulatory pose, and turn out to be nothing else than solipsism: centering on yourself and that which you think defines you as the only thing that matters.

[This was originally posted to YouTube as a video. This post is a slightly abbreviated transcript, preserving the oral style of the video.]

#341: How Radical Should You Be In Your Belief?

https://youtu.be/mOoLMJQRrQY

How radical should you be in your belief? If you believe in something, shouldn’t you aim to believe in it more? So, let’s discuss.

All of us have our ideas that we prefer over others. All of us may have our political, religious, cultural preferences. There’s nothing wrong with that. That’s what we do. That’s what makes us human.

If we believe deeply that something is correct, that something is good, should we not think also that more of that is better? It’s a seductive idea and it seems logical initially. If you are X, if you believe in X, shouldn’t you believe in it more so? That seems to be the case because otherwise why would you believe in it? Is your belief really that weak that you can’t strengthen it?

So that’s the idea. And if you for some reason don’t want to fully commit, maybe you really never believed it completely. Maybe you’re not really a true believer. That’s the other part of the idea.

However, I would say this ignores certain facts about ideas, because every idea — whether it’s a religion, a philosophy, a cultural preference — typically has safeguards. When you look at all the big religions, they have some sort of clause, some sort of warning against taking it too far. Because that’s what the very idea of divinity is. That’s what the very idea of God is: that which we as human beings cannot completely understand. God is that which we cannot even approach so much that we can be certain of what God is. Because if we could, wouldn’t that mean in some way that we could become God? And that’s the very warning that most religions promote.

Believe, but don’t assume for a moment that you have all the answers.

There’s this joke that camels always look at humans in a specific way. The joke is that God has 100 names. We know 99 of them. But the camel knows all 100. And that’s why the camel looks so superior.

But that is the idea of religion. The idea of religion is a combination — as strange as this may sound — of belief and humility. We are not God. We are not everything in the universe. We are not all-knowing. We are not omnipotent. And we will never get there. So whatever you think of as God — whether you think that’s a religious idea, whether you think that’s nature, whether you think that’s the universe, whether you think that’s just the ultimate good — this idea is clear: do not pretend to be all-knowing yourself. Have some sense of humility.

Now that also goes for philosophy. You may say, I follow philosopher so-and-so. But philosophy is an ongoing conversation about wisdom — the love of wisdom; that’s what philosophia means. Each idea in philosophy lives in interaction with other ideas. Philosophy is more than just footnotes to Plato. Plato can be footnotes to Plato — if you look at the Laws and the Republic, there are two very different ideas there, and more than two.

Philosophers are typically smarter than those who follow a specific philosophy. Because every philosopher knows that in order to put out the strongest version of their idea, they have to leave some of the complications out. But there are always complications. And philosophy X always lives in some form of exchange with philosophy Y or Z or however many there are. Every idea lives in an ecosystem of ideas. It lives in relation with others.

Philosophy X may be good or better in certain respects than philosophy Y. Maybe philosophy Y is good in other aspects. But the truth emerges in the interaction between the two.

So you may believe that the individual is the source of all morality. But how far do you want to take this? Do you believe this to the complete abdication of responsibility for others? Do you believe this to the complete rejection of the state? Similarly, if you believe the state is the authority over everything else, at which point does this have to stop? At which point does the state have to even question itself as to how far it should go?

Everything costs money. Does this mean that everything should be judged by its price tag? Even though price is not a static thing — it depends on a lot of factors. Is the price tag always the value of something, or is it just our momentary expression of our social and cultural priorities? Of course there’s supply and demand which regulate that. But is that still everything? Aren’t there things where we should find some difficulty putting a price on? Aren’t there some things that we can’t really measure very well? So isn’t there a limit to this kind of positivist, materialist way of looking at things?

Equally, if we say the materialistic world doesn’t matter and we need to live in a more spiritual, contemplative state of mind — that may be true to a point, but eventually bills will have to be paid. You do live in some form of reality, and that reality means that resources typically are limited and there needs to be a prioritizing. How do you organize that?

The material and the spiritual belong together. They will always have friction between each other, but they will always complement each other. If you’re too materialistic — if you believe that only that which can be measured, only that which can be owned, only that which can have a price tag matters — you should maybe think about some more spiritual components of life. If you’re too spiritual, maybe you need to be rooted more in the fact that there’s also a materialist component of life.

If X drowns out Y, sides of X may appear that make it wrong, because you need that balance. And there are more than just two — X and Y is easier, but you could say XYZ or whatever.

So in fact the saying may be true that too much of a good thing is indeed not good. It distorts what it is.

This is why you see me frequently call for moderation. You could argue that too much moderation is also wrong — you need some passion and some intensity and some belief. Well, yes. But moderation can also be just a middle ground between these different poles. All these different ideas around us lead us to negotiate our space within them. Moderation does not mean you don’t have convictions. It means that you question at which point your convictions turn into such a radicality, into such an extreme version, that they become wrong — that they are undermined by their own conviction.

Is radicality the truest expression of an idea? No. It may be the most flamboyant, the most interesting. But it can’t survive well. If you turn too radical, too extremist, your idea may be more attractive to people who really think like you. But then look at history. Every time an idea became too radical, it fails. It has failed. No matter what the idea — because in its radicality, in its extremism, it loses its power of conviction towards those who don’t agree with you. And the number of people in the world who agree with you is always going to be punctuated by the number of people who disagree with you.

If you want to build a successful movement, if you want to build a successful approach to politics, to religion, to whatever your cultural or social idea may be, you need to convince others. You need to find ways of integrating aspects of the other into your own.

Which is why this very familiar symbol of yin and yang — masculine, feminine, black, white, dark, light — shows you these two parts, but there’s always something of the other in the bigger part. You know the symbol.

If we don’t find a way to integrate that with which we disagree — as some sense of doubt, as some sense of humility within our convictions — then our convictions will be nothing but arrogance, nothing but self-congratulatory pose, and turn out to be nothing else than solipsism: centering on yourself and that which you think defines you as the only thing that matters.

[This was originally posted to YouTube as a video. This post is a slightly abbreviated transcript, preserving the oral style of the video.]

A quotation from Hannah Arendt

The only man for whom Hitler had “unqualified respect” was “Stalin the genius,” and while in the case of Stalin and the Russian regime we do not have (and presumably never will have) the rich documentary material that is available for Germany, we nevertheless know since Khrushchev’s speech before the Twentieth Party Congress that Stalin trusted only one man and that was Hitler.

Hannah Arendt (1906-1975) German-American philosopher, political theorist
Origins of Totalitarianism, Part 3, ch. 10 “A Classless Society,” sec. 1 (1951)

More about this quote: wist.info/arendt-hannah/41599/

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #hannaharendt #authoritarian #dictator #ideology #mutualrespect #respect #strongman #totalitarian #trust #tyrant

A quotation from Hannah Arendt

Caution in handling generally accepted opinions that claim to explain whole trends of history is especially important for the historian of modern times, because the last century has produced an abundance of ideologies that pretend to be keys to history but are actually nothing but desperate efforts to escape responsibility.

Hannah Arendt (1906-1975) German-American philosopher, political theorist
The Origins of Totalitarianism, Part 1, ch. 1 “Antisemitism as an Outrage to Common Sense” (1951)

More about this quote: wist.info/arendt-hannah/46497/

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #arendt #hannaharendt #excuse #explanation #historiography #history #ideology #justification #responsibility #theory #bias

A quotation from Hannah Arendt

Caution in handling generally accepted opinions that claim to explain whole trends of history is especially important for the historian of modern times, because the last century has produced an abundance of ideologies that pretend to be keys to history but are actually nothing but desperate efforts to escape responsibility.

Hannah Arendt (1906-1975) German-American philosopher, political theorist
The Origins of Totalitarianism, Part 1, ch. 1 “Antisemitism as an Outrage to Common Sense” (1951)

More about this quote: wist.info/arendt-hannah/46497/

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #arendt #hannaharendt #excuse #explanation #historiography #history #ideology #justification #responsibility #theory #bias

The Echoes of "Third Worldism" Resurface, Coloring Political Discourse

The old 'Third Worldism' idea is back in politics. It changes how people see global power and national identity in 2024. Find out who is affected.

#ThirdWorldism, #PoliticalDiscourse, #GlobalPower, #NationalIdentity, #Ideology

https://newsletter.tf/third-worldism-idea-returns-affecting-politics/

The Echoes of "Third Worldism" Resurface, Coloring Political Discourse

The old 'Third Worldism' idea is back in politics. It changes how people see global power and national identity in 2024. Find out who is affected.

#ThirdWorldism, #PoliticalDiscourse, #GlobalPower, #NationalIdentity, #Ideology

https://newsletter.tf/third-worldism-idea-returns-affecting-politics/

The 'Third Worldism' idea is being discussed again in politics. This is different from how it was used during the Cold War.

#ThirdWorldism, #PoliticalDiscourse, #GlobalPower, #NationalIdentity, #Ideology
https://newsletter.tf/third-worldism-idea-returns-affecting-politics/

The 'Third Worldism' idea is being discussed again in politics. This is different from how it was used during the Cold War.

#ThirdWorldism, #PoliticalDiscourse, #GlobalPower, #NationalIdentity, #Ideology
https://newsletter.tf/third-worldism-idea-returns-affecting-politics/

Fringe to frontline ideology on the net

https://negativepid.blog/from-fringe-to-frontline-the-internet-as-an-ideological-battleground/

#Internet #Ideology #conspiracies #socialMedia #radicalization #politics #hoaxes #extremism #fringeTheories #misinformation #disinformation #negativepid

Fringe to frontline ideology on the net

https://negativepid.blog/from-fringe-to-frontline-the-internet-as-an-ideological-battleground/

#Internet #Ideology #conspiracies #socialMedia #radicalization #politics #hoaxes #extremism #fringeTheories #misinformation #disinformation #negativepid

Fringe to frontline ideology on the net

https://negativepid.blog/from-fringe-to-frontline-the-internet-as-an-ideological-battleground/

#Internet #Ideology #conspiracies #socialMedia #radicalization #politics #hoaxes #extremism #fringeTheories #misinformation #disinformation #negativepid

https://youtube.com/watch?v=fdHik_6zycU

If you only spend one hour in 2026 learning about the Trump White House, make it this one.

#trump #politics #ideology #fascism #stephenmiller #himmler

A little cheer for Donald because he enjoys it so much ✌️😱💩🫶🗽

#meme #renegade #villain #villains #popculture #entertainment #cinema #vision #ideology #evil #fascism #racism #noNazis #usa #America #MAGA #Trump #president #government #politics #future #whitehouse #problem #ethics #movie #doomsday #apocalypse #judgementday #fans #greetings #reminder #protest #resistance

A little cheer for Donald because he enjoys it so much ✌️😱💩🫶🗽

#meme #renegade #villain #villains #popculture #entertainment #cinema #vision #ideology #evil #fascism #racism #noNazis #usa #America #MAGA #Trump #president #government #politics #future #whitehouse #problem #ethics #movie #doomsday #apocalypse #judgementday #fans #greetings #reminder #protest #resistance

A little cheer for Donald because he enjoys it so much ✌️😱💩🫶🗽

#meme #renegade #villain #villains #popculture #entertainment #cinema #vision #ideology #evil #fascism #racism #noNazis #usa #America #MAGA #Trump #president #government #politics #future #whitehouse #problem #ethics #movie #doomsday #apocalypse #judgementday #fans #greetings #reminder #protest #resistance

I discuss A Language Insufficiency Hypothesis, Chapter 1: A Genealogy of Insufficiency – From Ancient Greece through the 20th Century.

👉 https://youtu.be/A-yoDtJ_ICE

#philosophy #language #video #youtube #genealogy #hypothesis #foucault #semantics #pragmatics #communication #power #ideology #structure #plato #aristotle #Wittgenstein #shadows #augustine #Locke #Liebnitz #Nietzsche #Gödel #Saussure #barthes #shannon #cognition #cognitivescience #rationality

I discuss A Language Insufficiency Hypothesis, Chapter 1: A Genealogy of Insufficiency – From Ancient Greece through the 20th Century.

👉 https://youtu.be/A-yoDtJ_ICE

#philosophy #language #video #youtube #genealogy #hypothesis #foucault #semantics #pragmatics #communication #power #ideology #structure #plato #aristotle #Wittgenstein #shadows #augustine #Locke #Liebnitz #Nietzsche #Gödel #Saussure #barthes #shannon #cognition #cognitivescience #rationality

I discuss A Language Insufficiency Hypothesis, Chapter 1: A Genealogy of Insufficiency – From Ancient Greece through the 20th Century.

👉 https://youtu.be/A-yoDtJ_ICE

#philosophy #language #video #youtube #genealogy #hypothesis #foucault #semantics #pragmatics #communication #power #ideology #structure #plato #aristotle #Wittgenstein #shadows #augustine #Locke #Liebnitz #Nietzsche #Gödel #Saussure #barthes #shannon #cognition #cognitivescience #rationality

I discuss A Language Insufficiency Hypothesis, Chapter 1: A Genealogy of Insufficiency – From Ancient Greece through the 20th Century.

👉 https://youtu.be/A-yoDtJ_ICE

#philosophy #language #video #youtube #genealogy #hypothesis #foucault #semantics #pragmatics #communication #power #ideology #structure #plato #aristotle #Wittgenstein #shadows #augustine #Locke #Liebnitz #Nietzsche #Gödel #Saussure #barthes #shannon #cognition #cognitivescience #rationality

I discuss A Language Insufficiency Hypothesis, Chapter 1: A Genealogy of Insufficiency – From Ancient Greece through the 20th Century.

👉 https://youtu.be/A-yoDtJ_ICE

#philosophy #language #video #youtube #genealogy #hypothesis #foucault #semantics #pragmatics #communication #power #ideology #structure #plato #aristotle #Wittgenstein #shadows #augustine #Locke #Liebnitz #Nietzsche #Gödel #Saussure #barthes #shannon #cognition #cognitivescience #rationality

Der Kampf der USA gegen Antifaschistismus (Antifa)

Aktueller Ausgangspunkt für diese Entscheidung dürfte die Rede von Thomas DiNanno, Under Secretary im US-Außenministerium sein, die er am 12.12.2025 Ungarn hielt.

In dieser Rede machte der US-Vertreter u.a. deutlich, dass die USA:

1. Antifa als terroristische Bedrohung definieren vergleichbar mit dschihadistischen Organisationen,

2. eine Legitimation für umfassende repressive Maßnahmen gegen Antifa-Strukturen sehen,

3. weiterhin an einer auchInternationalen Kriminalisierung der Antifa arbeiten und dieses Vorgehen europäisiert sehen wollen,

4. eine ideologische Umdeutung vornehmen: Antifa wird als eigentliche Form des Faschismus und Gefahr für die Aufklärung gelabelt.

Ein politisches Machwerk, das, wenn es in Europa auch nur ansatzweise auf größeren Wiederhall stoßen sollte (schon vorher ging bspw. Ungarn in genau diese Richtung), alle linken Strukturen in Existenznot bringen könnte.

https://www.state.gov/opening-remarks-for-under-secretary-dinannos-participation-in-the-u-s-hungary-interagency-counterterrorism-dialogue

#antifa #dinanno #usstatedepartment #USstates #facism #neofacism #nationalsecurity #nationalsecuritystrategy #brd #mittwoch #deutschland #außenpolitik #Innenpolitik #politik #Antifaschismus #terror #Dschihad #nationalsozialismus #ideology #uspolitics #USPolitik #uspoliticschaos #uspoliticsdanger #hungary #ungarn #budapest #antifaost #antifaost2

Der Kampf der USA gegen Antifaschistismus (Antifa)

Aktueller Ausgangspunkt für diese Entscheidung dürfte die Rede von Thomas DiNanno, Under Secretary im US-Außenministerium sein, die er am 12.12.2025 Ungarn hielt.

In dieser Rede machte der US-Vertreter u.a. deutlich, dass die USA:

1. Antifa als terroristische Bedrohung definieren vergleichbar mit dschihadistischen Organisationen,

2. eine Legitimation für umfassende repressive Maßnahmen gegen Antifa-Strukturen sehen,

3. weiterhin an einer auchInternationalen Kriminalisierung der Antifa arbeiten und dieses Vorgehen europäisiert sehen wollen,

4. eine ideologische Umdeutung vornehmen: Antifa wird als eigentliche Form des Faschismus und Gefahr für die Aufklärung gelabelt.

Ein politisches Machwerk, das, wenn es in Europa auch nur ansatzweise auf größeren Wiederhall stoßen sollte (schon vorher ging bspw. Ungarn in genau diese Richtung), alle linken Strukturen in Existenznot bringen könnte.

https://www.state.gov/opening-remarks-for-under-secretary-dinannos-participation-in-the-u-s-hungary-interagency-counterterrorism-dialogue

#antifa #dinanno #usstatedepartment #USstates #facism #neofacism #nationalsecurity #nationalsecuritystrategy #brd #mittwoch #deutschland #außenpolitik #Innenpolitik #politik #Antifaschismus #terror #Dschihad #nationalsozialismus #ideology #uspolitics #USPolitik #uspoliticschaos #uspoliticsdanger #hungary #ungarn #budapest #antifaost #antifaost2

A quotation from Victor Hugo

An invasion of armies can be resisted; an invasion of ideas cannot be resisted.
 
[On résiste à l’invasion des armées ; on ne résiste pas à l’invasion des idées.]

Victor Hugo (1802-1885) French writer
The History of a Crime [Histoire d’un Crime], ch. 10, Conclusion [tr. Joyce & Locker (1878)]

More info about (and translations of) this quote: wist.info/hugo-victor/13066/

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #victorhugo #concept #idea #ideology #inevitability #memes #present #time

A quotation from Victor Hugo

An invasion of armies can be resisted; an invasion of ideas cannot be resisted.
 
[On résiste à l’invasion des armées ; on ne résiste pas à l’invasion des idées.]

Victor Hugo (1802-1885) French writer
The History of a Crime [Histoire d’un Crime], ch. 10, Conclusion [tr. Joyce & Locker (1878)]

More info about (and translations of) this quote: wist.info/hugo-victor/13066/

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #victorhugo #concept #idea #ideology #inevitability #memes #present #time

A quotation from Victor Hugo

An invasion of armies can be resisted; an invasion of ideas cannot be resisted.
 
[On résiste à l’invasion des armées ; on ne résiste pas à l’invasion des idées.]

Victor Hugo (1802-1885) French writer
The History of a Crime [Histoire d’un Crime], ch. 10, Conclusion [tr. Joyce & Locker (1878)]

More info about (and translations of) this quote: wist.info/hugo-victor/13066/

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #victorhugo #concept #idea #ideology #inevitability #memes #present #time

A quotation from Victor Hugo

An invasion of armies can be resisted; an invasion of ideas cannot be resisted.
 
[On résiste à l’invasion des armées ; on ne résiste pas à l’invasion des idées.]

Victor Hugo (1802-1885) French writer
The History of a Crime [Histoire d’un Crime], ch. 10, Conclusion [tr. Joyce & Locker (1878)]

More info about (and translations of) this quote: wist.info/hugo-victor/13066/

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #victorhugo #concept #idea #ideology #inevitability #memes #present #time

A quotation from Victor Hugo

An invasion of armies can be resisted; an invasion of ideas cannot be resisted.
 
[On résiste à l’invasion des armées ; on ne résiste pas à l’invasion des idées.]

Victor Hugo (1802-1885) French writer
The History of a Crime [Histoire d’un Crime], ch. 10, Conclusion [tr. Joyce & Locker (1878)]

More info about (and translations of) this quote: wist.info/hugo-victor/13066/

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #victorhugo #concept #idea #ideology #inevitability #memes #present #time