But you see you don't actually understand how lawmaking works there's this set of procedures and dates that BLEAAAARGHHHHHvomitvomit

Neoliberalism is an economic genocidal ideology predicated on maintaining capitalism, and capitalism is the impoverishment, oppression and death of poor people because that's the OBJECTIVE of capitalist ideology. It's a malthusian ideology.

Neoliberals are the original Alt-Right
Capitalism has ZERO todo with "markets vs. no markets," or "central planning vs. decentralization." That's *propaganda*. That's a diversion.

Capitalism is the NAME OF THE ABSENCE of any support for poor people. In capitalism, giving ANY power to poor people is a CRIME.
Capitalism has an *exception* to the strict forbiddance of giving any economic power to the 99%, and that is the concept of "Merit."

If you act as a SLAVE (wage slave), then you can get some crumbs to *temporarily* avoid your death. While you are mechanically useful.
These fucking Neoliberals which are 99% of the Democratic Party in the US are all POSING as nice people. They are not. They are all sociopaths.

This economic fascism is so thoroughly normalized in the US that nobody has a concept of what capitalism is.
The fact that capitalists -- the owners of the undemocratic workplaces -- are all rich on the backs of their workers is also a *diversion*.
If a capitalist owner suddenly decides to run a virtual co-op where he earns all his personal profits but gives it all away in bonuses to all the workers, and if he actually listens for what workers want, implementing a de-facto democracy, he will be *targeted and destroyed*.
This happened in Brazil mid last century. The decent industrialists were all persecuted and dispossessed.

"Communism" / "Socialism" is an accusation used against anybody that is NOT onboard the classist Malthusian genocide program.
Capitalism AS AN IDEOLOGY, as a belief system, as "neoclassical economics," as neo-liberalism, must be exposed for the fascist right-wing genocidal malthusian market-based religious ideology that it is.
The "Market God" of capitalism is NOT an exaggeration. The robes of this ideology that the high priests use are the suit and tie, the corporate attire, the BMW.

Why do you think people were giving Andrew Yang a hard time for missing a fucking tie? Because it's a literal church.
Yang was saying, signaling:

I'm not part of this bullshit fundamentalist malthusian "Market" church that has taken over the secular institutions by *disguising itself* as a secular belief. I'm just a human being.
Yang is an anti-malthusian person; he is not a capitalist by definition, because capitalism requires poverty. Someone who wants to abolish poverty is not a capitalist.

That's not how the word "capitalism" is used. Because people are idiots. But you are not. Now you know.
Capitalism is a dirty, dirty word. Do not attempt to use it in a positive sense. Do not attempt to use it to denote anything positive, unless you know what you're doing.

More from Fabiana Cecin 🏴 🌹

More from Law

Pretty much every professional field EXCEPT police have clear, rigorous, transparent consequences for unethical behavior, negligence and malpractice.


The idea that we can "disbar" lawyers but not police is absolute foolishness.

All the factors that make disbarment a necessary tool for lawyers apply to cops... except that cops don't need to be qualified in the first place.

It is a rank absurdity of the criminal justice system that one needs to be educated and certified with a degree in order to argue on behalf of someone's life in court, but to have no qualifications necessary to detain, assault, or prematurely end that same life.

There are countless circumstances in which a lawyer's unethical behavior will result in them not only losing their job but never being able to practice it again.

But corrupt and murderous cops can be rehired indefinitely.

A lawyer's entire career can be ended forever if they were found to have knowingly put someone on a stand to lie.

Police officers however are allowed to lie in court on the stand under oath.

So much that lawyers aren't penalized for putting cops on the stand to lie.
We need to talk about the 'expert' witness statement evidence led by Ms Bell in her successful case before the Tavistock. THREAD

You can see who gave evidence in her support from these extracts from the Tavistock's Skeleton Argument.


Helpful for you to bear in mind that her solicitor was a man called Paul Conrathe, who has a long association with the religious right in the US (I have talked about him a number of times but this is as good a starting point as any).


I am not going to address here other criticisms that might be made of the form in which that evidence was given or the timing of its service before the court. I am just going to address, in alphabetical order, the individuals whose evidence Mr Conrathe led on Ms Bell's behalf.

The first witness, alphabetically, was Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oxford, Michael Biggs.

Mr Biggs was exposed for posting transphobic statements online under a fake twitter handle: @MrHenryWimbush according to this report.
1/n How come we still have academics sustaining narratives of #obesity rather than of how real people find value & meaning in everyday lives? Revisit @whatsthepont on @tobyjlowe / @snowded & accept criticising "neoliberal" does not make things

New out 🤯 A review which says lots about the academic context in which it was written - with its embedded behaviorist fixations on just implementing *better* - with complete disregard for the unintended consequences of treating "agency" as a dirty word

In all #becausehuman fields, we see justifiable professional kick-back at reductionist agendas driven by a focus on #obesity & nonsensical CMO guidance of 60 min of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per day for healthy growth and development


What's fundamentally missing is not just a respect for complexity. It's respect for Homo-Narrans - for the ordinary, everyday story-telling folk all around us whose aspirations & dispositions provide the context in which we find meaning, purpose & value

We don't need spurious arguments against initiatives... but let's consider ethics & unintended consequences - on which, see @snowded (especially around epistemic justice) #becausehuman
https://t.co/gu97xDEamB
https://t.co/E1GzCdCfLA
https://t.co/bKowDAgARQ
https://t.co/evzYMBPwvZ

You May Also Like