Laura Loomer Publishes Op-Ed in RT, Calls Herself the “Most Banned Woman in the World”

Everyone’s favorite right-wing female Jew lunatic Laura Loomer this week published an op-ed in Russian state owned media outlet RT, claiming to be the most censored woman in the world.

I think the claim is probably true, though frankly, I don’t really pay much attention to women generally, and have probably paid more attention to Loomer than to any other right-wing female, just because she was involved in so many bizarre incidents. OGs will remember the thing with the tires, for example. Then there were the incidents where she was accused of forcing men to have sex with her on the threat she would publicly label them anti-Semites. Then that weird thing she did in Nancy Pelosi’s yard, which no one understood. And so on. She was just generally an effective attention grabber.


For those who don’t know the backstory, the short version is this: Laura Loomer was probably the most prominent Jew this side of Jared Kushner involved in the Donald Trump movement in 2016. Due to her support for Trump, and probably for being racist against Moslems or something, she was inevitably banned from everything. She then ran for Congress in Florida and lost. I don’t personally believe she really had any kind of comprehensive Jewish agenda in involving herself with right-wing politics, beyond the obvious Israel-centric agenda to promote the interests of Israel and attack Moslems. I think she was probably banned from everything for the same reasons everyone else was banned from everything: because she supported Trump and various agendas that the Jews in general do not agree with. There is also some evidence that she may be mentally ill in some way (though clearly not enough to inhibit her from functioning).

Full disclosure: Loomer took part in a campaign to get me banned from things after Charlottesville, and was specifically responsible for getting a Discord server that a bunch of readers used banned. That turned out to be a blessing in disguise, frankly, as it was not shortly after that revealed that Discord was cooperating with the SPLC and ADL to spy on right-wingers.

(By the way, I still recommend, now more than ever, that none of you ever log into Discord, not even for seemingly innocent gaming reasons. For several months, there were “Discord leaks” of chats by right-wingers, and the whole idea was that it was infiltrators – then it turned out that the company was selling the chat logs directly to Jews. And of course, now the government can also buy that data, due to a new “rule” – not even a law, apparently – implemented after the January 6 assault on our nation’s podiums.)

Given that Loomer did this, I’ve had a hard time feeling sorry for her being banned from everything. Obviously, I don’t think she should be banned, and I do not in any way believe in banning my enemies (nor do I even specifically consider Loomer an enemy). I believe in freedom of speech, period. But it is just funny, that she went out there calling for me to get banned, then ended up in a situation where she is “the most banned woman in the world.” Most hilariously, the video report she did on my guys’ Discord server was done alongside Gavin McInnes – and we see what happened to him. Most likely, he’s going to get dragged before Congress in the next months, possibly prosecuted for something related to illicitly joking around. “High crimes and horseplay.” Something along those lines.

After being banned from Twitter, Loomer handcuffed herself to the door of the Twitter offices, demanding that they unban her. Hilariously, her secondary demand was that they ban Louis Farrakhan, because of things he’d said about Jews. Instead of advocating for total freedom of speech (as, frankly, most people on the right do), she was advocating explicitly for privileging her speech because she was Jewish.

For the record, I think Loomer has since said that no one should be banned, but at the time of her protest, she had a sign saying that Louis Farrakhan was a Jew hater and should be banned. It almost had a religious undertone, where she was suggesting that someone else could be banned in her place, like when the Jews said that Jesus should be killed in place of the criminal Barabbas.

Anyway. Um. You know. Whatever.

The article in RT is good, if a bit pointless at this stage in the game. She notes that Mike Lindell, creator of MyPillow and who was recently banned from everything for suggesting that there was something amiss about the 2020 election, has recently stated that he is considering running for Governor of Minnesota. She notes that she was banned from Twitter before running for office in Florida. When she won her primary, Twitter had a policy of giving any candidate who has won a primary for national or state office an official blue check Twitter account. However, instead of giving her the account, Twitter changed the policy and said that if you’ve previously been banned from Twitter and you win a primary for state office, they don’t have to give you your account back.

Loomer goes on to explain that if Mike Lindell were to decide to run for office, he would not be allowed to use Twitter, which would significantly hamper his ability to campaign. Putting a very fine point on it, she notes that this is clear and open election meddling by these tech companies, and suggests that Twitter could ban any Republican who publicly states they are considering running for office, which would then prevent them from being able to use the internet to campaign, which would more or less ensure they lose their election.

It’s very unfortunate how this has all happened, but mentally ill or not, Laura Loomer is part of the group of people who is responsible for it. When she was helping her fellow Jews to get me banned from everything, she was saying “private companies can choose who they do business with.” So, while I was coming up with all kinds of nightmare scenarios that allowing monopoly tech companies to go unregulated would inevitably lead to, she was pushing that kook libertarian gibberish about “just start your own monopoly.”

All of libertarianism was invented by Jews, from Ludwig von Mises and Ayn Rand to Milton Friedman and Murray Rothbard. Jews more famously invented the doctrine of Marxism, with its namesake Karl Marx being only the first in a line of Jew ideological leaders within that field. People used to say “but how can the Jews promote two ideologies, which seem to be the opposite of one another?”

Now we understand: because the ideology of libertarianism leads to the same results as the ideology of Marxism. Ultimately, it makes zero practical difference whether a small group of elite Jews in the government are controlling society, or whether a small group of elite Jews running monopoly companies are controlling the society. In either case, you are put in a situation where you are not allowed to voice political dissent. And within the libertarian system, these companies end up having control over the government, which means that virtually nothing at all is different.

Related: Why Do Socialists Promote Global Warming?

Laura Loomer has been forced into a place where she is forced to violate her own ideology due to practical concerns about the way this ideology is affecting her life. The Marxists of Russia ran into the same issue, when it turned out that collectivization was simply impossible to implement. Before his death, Lenin himself was saying that markets would have to be introduced, because otherwise the government and society were going to collapse completely.

My position is that there is no good reason that anyone should have one of these ideologies in the first place, and public policy should be based around pursuing specific social goals, and political and economic policy should be decided based on how those goals are best served.

It’s mostly too late to do anything about anything, but at some point, something is going to have to be done about something. We shouldn’t forget where ideology led us, and we should never again allow ideology to drive society. I fully support the Constitution, and the idea of outlining a list of inalienable rights of the individual. But beyond those very simple and basic protections, society needs to decide what the purpose of the government is, and make policy decisions that serve that purpose.

In Vladimir Putin’s recent lecture to the lunatics of Davos, he noted the monopoly system of tech companies is probably good for business, but that we need to figure out if it is good for society. What those who promote ideology say is that you can never ask what is good for the society, because the ideology will create a perfect society in the end, if you just stick to it. This has failed with Marxism and it has failed with libertarianism.

Generally, the purpose of a government should be to provide a good life for the people. This should involve protections of families, first and foremost, and allow the members of the family to leave meaningful lives. Generally, if you are not a theocracy, “a meaningful life” involves personal freedom and economic prosperity.