Category: Viewpoints

Objective journalism is a farce. Every journalist allows personal opinion to influence their work. The Fifth Column’s journalist openly share their biases with the reader. The opinions are those of the author and do not reflect the opinions of The Fifth Column.

Against Voting

There are conditions under which victims can share responsibility for a crime. Following are three examples:

Three people are hiding in a closet because a home invader breaks into their home. All three people are victims of this invasion. If two of the three people secretly decide that their best chance for survival is to come out of hiding and give up the third person to the invader in exchange for their own safety, it would not be inappropriate to say that they share responsibility for the outcome of what happens to that person despite the fact that they are not primarily responsible for the situation itself. It might even be said that the third person would blame them and accuse them of being complicit in the crime despite the fact that all three people were victims.
Someone robs a bank and takes a group of twenty people hostage. All twenty people are victims of this crime. After a few hours, the robber gets careless. The hostages secretly work out a plan to best him and turn him over to the police. As the group goes to spring their plan into action, two of the hostages get cold feet. They inform the robber of the plan, throw themselves at his mercy and swear their allegiance to him, thereby alerting him and preventing everyone’s escape. All twenty people are victims, but the other eighteen people are still going to blame those two for preventing their escape.
The Federal government goes $200 trillion into fictitious debt that it intends to hold over the heads of tax cattle to bleed them for resources. Every once in a while, elections are held to create the perception that the tax cattle ARE the government. In the entire history of this system, the fake debt and taxes have only ever gone up and never down, and the people who win the elections are never accountable to the tax cattle; in fact, they are granted salaries that are paid for with tax theft. Some tax cattle are enthusiastically supportive of this system, perceive it as a net gain to themselves, and vote in favor of its expansion. Some tax cattle are wary of this system, but still believe that elections are the only way to lessen the burden of the fake debt and tax theft on themselves. Among these, some want theft-funded free college. Some want theft-funded social security. Some want theft-funded food and healthcare.

What is Donald Trump’s Endgame?: Revisited

Back in February, I wrote an article speculating about what Donald Trump was trying to achieve with his bid for the presidency. Given the strong social ties between the Trump and Clinton families, I concluded that Trump does not actually want to be president and that the likely reason for his candidacy was to help Hillary Clinton’s campaign. I argued that his campaign was a deliberate attempt to alienate the demographics that the Republican Party needs to win the general election. Since I wrote that article, Donald Trump has done just that and has become the GOP’s presumptive nominee. Hillary Clinton has also come close to winning the Democratic nomination. In light of these developments, it is worth revisiting my previous theory about Trump.

Since my previous article, Trump’s actions have largely conformed to the theory that I put forth. I argued that Trump would probably gain a following amongst the most extreme parts of the GOP and then leave the party, which would leave the Republicans divided and unable to contest the general election. However, Trump’s campaign has been unexpectedly successful and he has since become the frontrunner of his party. In this position, Trump has been able to sabotage the Republican Party. Trump has increasingly taken extreme “policy positions” and has, in the process, made him and the Republican Party very unpopular with important voter demographics. This has basically assured his defeat in the general election. His antics have also tarnished the reputations of many of the other Republican candidates and are threatening the reelection prospects of Republicans in the House and Senate. This has caused civil war within the party that has left them in disarray.

Brexit equals forfeiting EU’s unique human rights protection

While the Brexit vs Bremain debate has been- and will continue to be- argued and analysed to death, one very important issue has escaped mainstream attention: human rights. The EU’s European Court of Justice, its laws and its Charter of Fundamental Rights safeguards our human rights more than the European Court of Human Rights. What’s more, the EU’s justice is much easier to access than that available through the ECHR. A case can only be heard by the ECHR once a case has gone through all the domestic courts- which is usually costly and very time-consuming. However, EU law can be applied directly by even the lowest level domestic courts; so if an EU law would mean you’d win your case at the District Court in Glasgow, then win it you shall, and immediately.

EU law protects Britons from age, race, sex, belief, disability and sexuality discrimination (see overview of EU discrimination law here).

The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights further safeguards our rights to privacy, education, being fairly dealt with by the police, and practising our religion/belief amongst many others.

If Britain leaves the EU, we forfeit all of this protection, forever.

This Election Season Must Remain Non-Violent

With both Ted Cruz and John Kasich dropping out of the race, Donald Trump has become the Republican candidate for the general election. This nightmare scenario has set the stage for a turbulent general election season. This development, which has raised the specter of a dysfunctional future in which fascism rules America, has left many people in the US scared and angry. This has driven many people who oppose Trump to violently lash out, most recently at protests in Costa Mesa and Burlingame in California. This, however, is very short sighted and will only divide the country further.

I have previously written about how the use of violence in the name of anti-fascism will inevitably be used by Donald Trump to discredit his enemies. Despite this, anti-fascist protesters have continued to use violence to express their displeasure about Trump’s vitriolic ideology. They often justify this by arguing that anti-fascists and the United States as a whole will lose their credibility if people don’t make a vocal stand against Trump. In addition, they would argue that the public’s failure to react to Trump would amount to appeasement to fascism, which is comparable to how the Weimar Republic reacted to Hitler in the 1930s.