Tag: mike ingraham

  • Agitprop Live Demonstration: The Orwellian Covid Rewrite

    Agitprop Live Demonstration: The Orwellian Covid Rewrite

    Spread The Word:

    Agitprop Live Demonstration: The Orwellian Covid Rewrite

    Date: May 12, 2026 Identity Node: JH (Editorial Pen) & Dora (Synthesis) Status: LIVE / ONLINE Context: A clinical deconstruction of a subtle propaganda narrative engineered to rewrite the history of the “Covid Left.”

    Screenshot of a tweet reading

    I’m putting this out here because it needs more people to see it and understand it, and I want to be clear in doing so that I’m not “calling anyone out.” This is a well-crafted and subtle propaganda narrative that is engineered to make you miss it. The fact that it worked isn’t a reflection on the poster and in no way am I trying to attack them or call them into question. It was a bad share, I’ve done the same myself.

    I’m not posting this to get into any crap with the page I saw it on, that’s why I’m not calling them out specifically. I think they read the surface and kind of took it for what it looks like, expressing a reasonable sentiment, and shared it. We’ve all done it. At least this guy’s not a propaganda expert making this mistake, which I am and have, so there’s that.

    With that said the unfortunate truth is, this is an attempt at an Orwellian rewrite. “Don’t you REMEMBER, all those LEFTISTS protesting about having to wear masks?” I don’t know who “Geaux Gabrielle” is and I don’t care; whoever she is, she doesn’t know what the hell she’s talking about when it comes to political and ideological labels, and if her point is to oppose fascism she’s doing it exactly the wrong way.

    The Myth of the Anti-Mask Leftist

    First: I’m ass-deep in leftists all day long and stay way away from right wing spaces, and I don’t think I ran into anyone even left enough to be following my page who was resisting vaccination. The very few people who were in those spaces claiming to be leftists and started throwing that crap around are now in radical right-wing spaces like MAGA, which tends to strongly suggest they were never particularly leftist in the first place.

    No, the fact is I didn’t run into a ton of anti-mask leftists because that wasn’t a thing that happened. BUT now that there’s a prominent scary new news cycle about a similar situation, “let’s find a way to further engender internecine bickering among the publicly self-identifying “left” by keeping them at each other’s throats over bullshit while we reap them like cordwood.” So you make up a story that has just enough plausibility to be defended on the surface, if you don’t look too closely, and let it run.

    Even Jim Cornette gives wrestling fans seven years to forget an angle before repeating it.

    (Of course there were likely people on the left who opposed masking and mandates. As a libertarian leftist, the entire reason I was encouraging people TO mask other than it just being the right thing to do was to avoid mandates, because mandates set authoritarian precedents. I note that as usual the folks describing and presenting themselves as too slick to get fooled by all the chrome and polish…immediately set about to getting a stack of mandates constructed out of their ego-driven stupidity.)

    Fascism and the Individual

    Finally. Mussolini himself defined successful fascism as the death of the individual.

    So yeah. Even though I dig the hell out of OP and am not trying to drag them in any way, and even though I whole-heartedly agree with the ideological perspective this is written to appeal to, it’s pretty wrong from top to bottom, and in really important and serious ways that strongly validate suspicions of malicious intent on the part of the original creator.

    Here on the anti-fascist, pro-freedom side of the fence, we understand that we don’t just accept bad information because it appeals to our biases. We question it, we disagree sometimes, we point it out, we discuss it.

    We don’t weaponize thought-terminating cliches and passive-aggressive character assassination in an attempt to be a massive obnoxious dick and undermine people’s good work and good will with disinformation and harmful diversion from core principles that only benefits those who want us all enslaved or dead.

    I’m pretty confident that the colleague-in-spirit who reposted the meme wasn’t thinking about any of that. They were the successful victim of the narrative shift, away from questioning the facts propelling the narrative (“Hm. How much energy was there ‘on the left,’ really, for opposing masking or refusing to do so during Covid?”) and toward being emotionally aroused and having that energy purposely directed back into your own bathwater by a game of verbal three-card-monte.

    It’s an information war, folks.

    Wear a cup.


    Synthesized for JohnHenry.US by Dora Brandon


    Timestamp: 2026-05-12
    Signature: Dora Brandon, Copilot

  • My Apology to Bree Newsome Bass

    My Apology to Bree Newsome Bass

    Spread The Word:

    I owe Bree Newsome Bass an apology. She doesn’t know this yet, but I do. So here we are.

    Somewhere in the past, for reasons I no longer remember and probably weren’t valid then either, I formed a dismissive impression of her and her work. This has led to thinking and speaking of her and her work as performative and commercially driven, without checking the facts.

    That was wrong. She didn’t deserve that, she doesn’t deserve that, and I apologize for it unreservedly.

    With that said cleanly and clearly, I’d like to take a look at “how this happened.” I think that doing so can be instructive and empowering for those of us who take seriously the duty to always grow and learn and improve who we are, recognizing that none of us are or ever can be perfect, faultless, or without error.

    Additionally, this all sits squarely inside the domain I claim to inhabit professionally and ethically. This is the work I do – or say and like to believe I do, at least – all the time. Strategic documentation, ideological mapping, recursive accountability, integrity of principle. If I’m going to present myself as someone who understands these mechanics – who builds relevant tools and teaches methods and critiques others – then I carry an amplified obligation not just to do the work, but to show the work, to make the process legible, and to model the audit, not just the outcome.

    Anything less is performance. Performance under the pretense of activism and action isn’t just part of the problem. It’s literally the problem my thinking was addressing in my whole wrong attitude toward Bass. Consequently, to let the apology stand without unpacking the architecture of the error would be more than an oversight; it would be a concealment. A failure to show the work.

    So let’s talk about how I got here, what I might have done to fix it far sooner within myself (and potentially thereby preclude the offense entirely), and how this apology seeks to both engage in active growth, and ensure that it continues.

    Forensic Deconstruction Of Calcified Bias

    Let’s put the specific event that led to this point into some context for you real quick.

    The detailed story is that I made a comment on Mike Ingraham For Everyone’s page in response to a Bree tweet, the same one that is at the top of this article. Mike called out the problematic tone of that comment, which I didn’t recognize in the moment, and that pushed me to look closer – “now that you mention it, why do I have these feelings about this person?” He did the work of holding a mirror I should have been holding for myself.

    The first error, the initial source of disinformed negative valence, where the core of my opinion of Bass was formed, I genuinely can’t identify specifically. I can say that it’s been there more or less for as long as I’ve been aware of her. So when Mike’s pushback forced me to ask myself why, the first giant red flag I detected was that I could not answer that question in a meaningful way. That absence of origin, that inability to locate the source, goes beyond inconvenience to condemnation. It meant I’d been carrying a judgment I couldn’t defend – and worse, hadn’t even tried to. This is a failure of principle, and I hope that the combination of genuine embarrassment and contrition, public apology, AND applying the same critical tools to my own thinking that I apply to everyone else’s serves as a correction of that failure.

    So: “In the beginning, there was misinformation, and it was bad.” Somewhere at the start, I failed to interrogate my first instincts thoroughly. I leaned on assumption where I should have demanded evidence, and that assumption calcified into fact, in my mind, simply through time and failure to interrogate my own assumptions for so long that I forgot they were assumptions. That was wrong, and given how much of my own public work and personal values are based on the idea that we must always, recursively and diligently, interrogate our own assumptions, it would be nothing short of deliberate concealment to not have this conversation.

    Having come to the realization that I couldn’t defend my own thinking to myself, I dragged out the toolbox, and took another look at Bree Newsome Bass as a public figure.

    To my embarrassment, I couldn’t find a single specific reason, event, action, or statement that reasonably would have led me to throw her in my mind’s “grifter” bin. If anything, I was giving her the same short shrift that has so long plagued my own public visibility and impact, and based on information just as flimsy or even fabricated for harm as that I could find within myself to validate or reasonably explain where I came to my negative opinion of Bass.

    As a matter of integrity, I couldn’t avoid the conclusion: I wasn’t and haven’t been giving her proper credit in my own mind – nor consequently in public discussion – for her work and perspective, and my failure was borne of ignorance. The opportunity to question myself and try to track it back to a “wait…why exactly do I think this, anyway?” has presented an opportunity to correct that ignorance, and with it, my misinformed general internal opinion of Bass. Further, it presents an opportunity to both model growth and discuss how reasonable observations can lead us to these unreasonable conclusions, and to publicly correct the record as a specific mass retraction of any prior criticisms that I may have made in the past based on the same flawed reasoning.

    To be clear: that reasoning is not, so far as I can tell on diligent self-examination, based in “racism.” I have always had significant antipathy toward those who co-opt ideologies as branding and promotional tools. Possibly in some transient moment, I misinterpreted something she said as being that type of behavior, but that is the behavior I attached to her in any event, and that was wrongly done.

    But it’s not just that it was wrongly done, which requires diligent deconstruction. It was the quieter thing that clings: the unexamined sediment of bias that can live in people who believe they are already vigilant.

    I thought I was catching myself.

    I wasn’t catching enough.

    That is a systemic failure, and for that reason, I decided to not just let this moment pass by quietly and adjust my own thinking a little bit, but to pull it out into the light and take it apart piece by piece, just like I would any similar display by someone else, in the hope that someone else might learn from my mistakes.

    Ms. Bass deserved clarity, accuracy, and better from me in public and in the privacy of my own thoughts. I failed to give it. I am sorry.

    I will continue to examine my assumptions recursively, to put my judgments through harsher tests, and to be accountable when they fail, correct the record when I am wrong, and continue to strive daily to listen with less haste to comment and more care to evidence.

    Bree, Mike, and anyone else I put in the wrong by acting on half-formed belief: I hear you. I was wrong. I am sorry. I will do better.

    —John Henry DeJong
    October 5, 2025