Purapipe promotering

En video på YouTube om Purapipe.


Glad jeg er inne i denne. Ser særdeles lovende ut.

Planlegger å børsnotere om ca 12 mnd. Alt går etter planen.
Redigert 14.01.2022 kl 22:36 Du må logge inn for å svare

Endelig en skikkelig video som viser hva de holder på med. Og hvilket produkt de har skapt. Dette er vel promoteringsvideoen som går til eventuelle kunder.
Har gått under radaren til de aller fleste. Det blir et fryktelig spennende år. Begynnelsen på et norsk industrieventyr. Som egentlig hadde sin spede begynnelse rett etter 2010.
Skal rett til børsnotering i New York.
15.01.2022 kl 14:15 214

Dinesh D'Souza at Yale University 1. Mar. 2018
There probably will be a lot of questions, so I try to adopt the motto of King Henry 8th used for one of his wife: “I won't keep you too long”.
I want to talk about the very peculiar atmosphere that’s dominated American politics since the election of Trump. A peculiar atmosphere that has metastasized onto the campus. It is having the clear effect of corrupting intellectual debate, and literary making people dough. I hope to not only talk about this but actually to illustrate it by example.
Since Trumps election there's been a whole bunch of issues that has surfaced. None of which have actually been seriously debated.
- We should be debating tax reform
- There really wasn't a tax reform debate
- There wasn’t really a Health Care debate
- There’s not a whole lot of Gun Control debate going on
What you essentially have is an incendiary atmosphere in which when people say things, you sort of get violent reactions. That are triumph of sort of attitude and emotion over intelligence.
This has become the governing mode of communication in America today. I'm going to try to depart from this mode, and try to throw a light on a couple of very important issues that are bit in American politics and also very relevant to the campus. So the reason we haven't had real debate on issues is because 2 cards, 2 accusations have been flying in the air, almost nonstop since November of 16.
The first one is the race card. And the second one, no less inflammatory, is the Fascism card.
The race card is sort of older, and in fact for those of us who have been in American politics now for a generation, it's been customary to make the accusation that the Republican Party is the party of bigotry, of racism. And the Democrat Party is the party of civil rights, of anti-racism. And this was of course transferred under Trump. Trump is a racist, the Republican Party now is the party of bigotry.
The second accusation is somewhat more novel, and that is that Trump is a Fascist. When I say that this is more novel, people would fling this accusation at Reagan, at Bush. "Reagan is a Fascist", but is kind of a throwaway line.
With Trump it is intended. It is intended not only as an insult, but it is intended to justify a whole series of behaviors that would otherwise be unacceptable. So for example: "Let’s boycott the inauguration". If Republicans boycotted Obamas inauguration you could imagine the reaction.
"Let’s violently disrupt the inaugural party’s", "Let’s block speakers on campus", "Let’s try to get Trump out of there by any means necessary", "Let’s get him on obstruction of justice", whether or not there was an underlying crime. As I say this kind of extremism is only justified if America today is sort of Germany in 1933. If in fact Trump is a kind of Hitler, then it might be wanted to use extreme tactics not excluding violence, in order to prevent what might be even greater catastrophes’ in the future.
So, what I want to do is actually beg the question. I want to probe right into it and ask:
- “What is Racism”?
- And are these ideologies, if we can call them that, on the left or on the right? 
Mussolini and the Democrat Party
I'm gonna begin with talking a little bit about Fascism, because fascism is actually a topic that is hardly understood at all. When people talk about Fascism, they define it in a way that make absolutely no sense.
"Trump is a Fascist because he is an ultra-nationalist". "He wants to make America Great Again".
"Hey, didn't Hitler wanted to make Germany Great Again"?
This is the argument. But it is not really an argument because nationalism has never been a core defining feature of Fascism. It is an attribute of it, but it is not a defining feature of it, and in fact nationalism is equally present on the left as on the right. Gandhi in India was a nationalist. Mandela in South-Africa was a nationalist. So was Che Guevara. So was Fidel Castro. All the anti-colonial leaders where ultra-nationalists. Nytro Magana for example. Many others. Winston Churchill was nationalist, as was de Gaulle. Abraham Lincoln was a nationalist, as where the American Founding Fathers.
No, it's beyond stupid to refer to all these as Fascist. They obviously weren’t. So nationalism does not actually define who is or is not a fascist. "Well, Trump is a Fascist because he is an authoritarian". "He wants to throw out the constitution, he wants to end the democratic system". By the way, this argument is literally made by pundits as NSMBC and CNN. It's literally made by comedians on every platform. These are people accusing Trump of being an authoritarian, when any real authoritarian would have shut them up in five minutes. Mussolini would have sent a bunch of goons to New York Times and beaten those guys to a pulp.
But, the very fact that Trump is flayed every day on every platform for being an authoritarian, kind of proves that he isn't, because he is not doing anything to these people that are making these accusations. So right away we see that we have to dig a little bit deeper. And I want to suggest that the reason that we don't know a whole lot about these topics, is partly because if we did, the whole debate would change instantly.
For example it is not widely known that the founder of Fascism -the first fascist regime in the world was not Germany- it was Mussolini’s Italy. Established in 1922. Mussolini was a man of the left. He was in fact the most famous Marxist in Italy. Perhaps alongside Gramsci. Mussolini and Gramsci where both admired by the Soviet Socialists. In fact Mussolini was admired by Lenin. When Mussolini started the first Fascist party, Lenin sent a telegram of congratulations.
Why? Because Lenin recognized that Mussolini was a fellow revolutionary of the left. Fascism grew out of the crisis of Marxism. In other words the Marxist realized that the predictions of Marx -the expectation of a proletarian revolution would not occurring. They hadn't happen anywhere. An in the thinking of why, Mussolini come up with the idea that perhaps it is because people is less attached to their class then they are to their country.
Mussolini noticed in World War I for example, that the French socialist fought for France and the British socialist fought for Britain. So Mussolini in a sense created National Socialism. It's a variation of Socialism that not displace class, but simply add the idea of the nation.
Hitler as we all know, was the head of a party called The National Socialist German Workers Party. Amazingly, if you read commentary today, there is an almost comical effort to remove the Socialism from National Socialism. To pretend as if the National Socialist weren’t really a Socialist. Even though all their leading champions - not only Hitler, but Gobbles for instance. Goebbels said: between nationalism and socialism there has to be a priority. Which comes first? The nationalism or the Socialism? He says Socialism! Socialisms the noun and Nationalism is the adjective. Nationalism qualifies what type of Socialism we're trying to do.
All of this is camouflaged today because in World War II we saw the communist on this side and the Fascist on this side, thus lending credence to the idea that if communism was on the left, the fascist must have been on the right. This is actually a complete non-sec adore. Let’s remember that ideology that’s wary close to each other, which are almost kissing cousins, have had regicidal and genocidal wars that has lasted for decades if not for centuries.
Consider the Shia and the Sunni. The Shia and The Sunni are both inside the house of Islam. They differ only by a hair in actual theological beliefs, and yet the Shia and the Sunni has been fighting for a long time. Fighting not only over fine points of theology but over territory and over power.
The word Fascism literary refers to a bunch of sticks tightly bound together. Fascism in its core meaning simply Collectivism. The power of the centralized state. That is the indisputable meaning of Fascism. This meaning was fully recognized by the fascist and by the Anti-Fascist.
So for example in the 1930s, FDR was a huge admirer of Mussolini. FDR saw Italian Fascism as -on the left, he knew that- more progressive than “The New Deal". FDR sent members of his brain trust to Fascist Rome to study Italian Fascism, to bring some of those idea to America. Mussolini for his part reviewed FDRs book "Looking Forward" in an Italian magazine, and his review can be summarized in this way:
"This guy is one of us. He is a Fascist."
So, there was a mutual admiration society between The New Deal Democrat's and the Italian Fascist in the early 1930s.

HITLER and The Democrat Party (Dinesh D'Souza)
But now I want to get a little more serious, and talk about Hitler. And in doing this, I’m actually going to refer very specifically to the work of 2 very prominent scholars who are right here at Yale.
The first is James Whitman. In a book that he published very recently called "Hitler’s American Model".
And the other is Timothy Snyder. A prominent historian here at Yale.
I want to start with Whitman’s book where he describes, in the opening of the book, a meeting in 1935 of the leading Nazis who are in the process of drafting The Nuremburg Laws. The Nuremburg Laws where the laws that made Jews into second-class citizens. They prohibited intermarriage between Jews and other Germans. They confiscated Jews property. They in wove all kinds of segregation of Jews into ghettos, and also state-sponsored discrimination against Jews.
And as the Nazis are in this meeting they had a stenograph present because they thought they were starting the world’s first racist state. One of the Nazis who had studied in America, essentially put his hand up metaphorically speaking, a