Dave Chappelle performed 'FAKE' Saturday Night Live monologue in rehearsal before unveiling new version on air... as he's blasted for anti-Semitic jokes by the ADL

submitted by [deleted] from (dailymail.co.uk)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Yin 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The NAACP was started by communist jews serving international banking. It wasn't started to "help" black people.

[–]Insider 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

are communist jews extra dumb? considering they gained all their wealth and power through capitalism

[–]Yin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

One of the first tenets of communism is central banking. There are many layers to the psychology of why the world's most powerful people in high finance central banking allow communism to exist as the pinnacle of sheep herding ideology for commoners. Communism forms a symbiosis of overthrowing nations, to try to fold them into a one world government ruled by technocratic elites. Globalists have bankrolled a 150 year Zionist-communist religion, successfully converting the "revolutionary" spirit in weak people to empower globalist finance agendas (race hustling, feminism, vax poison, medical tyranny, cashless society, mark of the beast, NWO one world government, fake "science", fake "environmentalism") while those peons remain in their slave class status.

Leaders being bankrolled are smarter. The followers are extra dumb. That's the power of Hollywood fiction making them fear the alternative of "another holocaust" if they allow anyone to criticize the top elites who hide behind hijacked Jewish identity for this exact reason. It's a vicious cycle and it forms a paradox that backfires, because the commoner jews feed the vicious cycle by not acknowledging this sickness (out of fear) and it makes the commoner non-jews angrier. For some reason all others can face criticism all day long but not them? Vicious power game.

[–]Insider 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

how was the central banking system created in the Western world? Did they implement communism in order to create the Federal Reserve?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

Communist society also involves the absence of private property, social classes, money, and the state. Communists often seek a voluntary state of self-governance, but disagree on the means to this end.

Based on this definition of communism, how do elites and slaves exist if there are no social classes? How do states rule without a state? How do they have central banking without money?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

There have been communist states, thats obviously an incorrect definition, but so is his. He is referring to 'Cultural Marxism' which ironically isn't something Marx wrote about, but seems to mean any socially authoritarian left wing government.

To have Communism you just need some arrangement that lacks markets, and public ownership of the means of production, as opposed to capitalism having a market economy with privately owned means of production.

[–]Insider 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

have there been states with purely public ownership of the means of production?

It seems as if that most countries are mixed, with a few things that are publicly owned, but controlled through the government. 10 Euro countries where public ownership is completely normal: https://weownit.org.uk/blog/top-10-countries-where-public-ownership-totally-normal

But I don't hear those countries being referred to as commie states.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

have there been states with purely public ownership of the means of production?

Yes, for instance the USSR

"Private ownership of enterprises and property had essentially remained illegal throughout the Soviet era, with Soviet communism emphasizing national control over all means of production but human labor"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization_in_Russia

Also communist China - under Mao, not the capitalists masquerading as communists in the CCP

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3024256

Also Communist Cuba

https://time.com/5937706/cuba-private-business/

If you don't have mostly complete public ownership of capital, it isn't really Communism. But anyways, these are your textbook Marxist states, and they all have this defining feature

[–]Yin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Western central bankers (almost all "jewish" or fake-jewish dynastic tribes) consolidated their power (wealth + aristocracy > politics, institutions) in a relatively short window of time, igniting in the 18th century. Their power grew rapidly every generation. The world was getting smaller and easier to buy through all forms of influence, stealing, cheating, lying, warring. After owning and interbreeding with the British Empire, it wasn't long before central bankers were in position to own the US via the Federal Reserve, thus all of the US's affairs, and thus every other "western" nation.

"Western" communists particularly advocate for central banking. It's not only to shore up control over everything locally but also for the same reason so-called "non communist" "capitalist" globalists do: globalist-capitalists and communists of the "western" variety are two sides of the same beast. Both are fronts of globalist-communism: elite banker ideology. The ideology is born of the same Zionist mythos which seeks power as a superior. A priority of powerful bankers is to keep power. Their many centuries of dynasty plotting is moving closer to achieving ways to permanently lord over "western" civilization, over a permanently dependent lower class, in a manner that will never face challenge/revolution (similar to China). One-world-government technocracy will be a system seemingly impossible to escape from, under an Order of chilling bureaucracies laced in positive language, in which to be entrenched from birth, into medical tyranny, to be lorded over by a hierarchy that can and will "cancel" you if you fall out of line.

Owning the wealth as in the literal concept (banking, printing, management) owns the people. Everyone is under a spell to have to conform to it for survival thanks to large bureaucracies / hierarchies running on it. "Western" "communism" is the fake revolutionary solution bankers deploy to the commoner retards, to channel the regular people's rebellious spirit, to overthrow western nations into globalism. It's like giving cattle different paths into the same ending. Most people can be bought. People who can't be bought can be silenced by people who can be bought or at least who fear losing access to the little aspects of society they're allowed to partake in should they not conform.

History lesson:

Rule or be ruled. Wealth must be owned by people whose ideologies aren't seeking to destroy you and your ideology, and that itself requires strong ideological tribalism that seeks to maintain its survival vs. the consequences of apathy.