Many of my readers have already seen Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov’s videos on ideological subversion, but on the off chance some of you have not, take a gander at this:
The stereotype of the KGB was that of a spy agency, a sort of spook counterpart to the CIA. But in reality, their primary weapon was ideological subversion, the deconstruction and brainwashing of a people, such that they can no longer come to sensible conclusions about anything. To use a modern and practical example, the human species has two genders, male and female, and an exceptionally small number of individuals who have very specific physical abnormalities (XXY/Klinefelter syndrome, for instance), who possess traits of both to varying degrees. Another small subset of individuals have a desire to be the opposite gender, but they were nonetheless born male, or female.
Ideological subversion has set into the culture to such a great degree, that stating the simple truth that there are only two genders is enough to incur the wrath of most of Academia, and one of America’s two major political parties.
You’ll notice that in this short video, Yuri places a timetable on ideological subversion, and this timetable is fixed around generations of students. Infiltration of Academia is how the KGB initially demoralized and subverted the American system. Now of course the KGB is gone now, and whatever Putin’s KGB past and Russian nationalistic ambitions, he does not appear to be behind the ideological subversion taking place today. Indeed, the previously-subverted are the ones most likely doing the subversion today, like a mad scientist project gone haywire.
The students subverted back in the 1960s still occupy many positions of power today, but they are falling by the wayside. Today’s academics are arguably worse than the generation that preceded them. Yuri explains that they are programmed to think and react in certain ways, to certain stimuli. They are trained like Pavlov’s dog. When someone cries “racist” they are trained to initiate a Maoist struggle session. When someone cries “rape” they are trained to believe the accusation in the face of all available evidence to the contrary. Virtue signalling is the method by which they communicate and relay relative status, and their position in the Progressive hierarchy.
To quote Yuri: “the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible.” You can’t reason with them anymore, because they don’t listen to reason. They listen to virtue signalling, to NewSpeak. It is instructive to view them as speaking an almost entirely different language. Communication is extraordinarily difficult. Conversion is impossible.
They are useful idiots, however. Yuri also tells us that when these people see the true fruits of equality and social justice, they will revolt. The subverters know this. The people in power will want to dispose of the idiots as soon as they are finished with us. They are a tool of the enemy, no more, no less.
Sadly, Yuri was ultimately proven to be correct. Though the Soviet Union collapsed of its own internal contradictions, the ideological subversion of the United States was already largely complete. That is why, 25 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, Marxism still commands such great respect from the Left and has, in many ways, become much more virulent than it was in Reagan’s day. The infection is even within us, dear readers. I will provide some psychological examples for you.
When I say “nationalist” what is the first thing that comes to mind? For most Americans, nationalism is tainted by Nazism. Any mention of nationalism brings up images of fascists, and genocidal maniacs, and racial supremacists. Why? Nationalists, i.e. people who love their country and its people, have been around since the dawn of civilization. Nationalism is neither inherently good, nor evil. It merely is. Certainly it can be used for evil purposes, as the Nazis did. But it can also be used for good purposes, as used by the patriots of the American Revolution. Yet the word is irrevocably tainted. That is ideological subversion at work. Pride in your country brings feelings of guilt, for things you have never done, nor would ever countenance yourself.
When the accusation of racism is leveled at a person, the first instinct is usually defensive in nature. It is to attempt to prove that you are not guilty of the charge. You might point to a friend of the race in question, or in one of my friend’s cases, his very own wife. And then you say “see, I can’t be a racist, because I genuinely like these people.” No, this is ideological subversion at work. The charge should be dealt with in the exact opposite manner. One ought to say “prove it! Prove your claim that I am racist.” They’ve no proof — they almost never do. The accusation is a political weapon designed to discredit you. Alternatively, you can also respond as I’ve suggested in the past with “fuck you.” That works, too. Francis at Liberty’s Torch, has suggested saying something along the lines of “well, by your definition, fine, I’m a racist. Now what?”
Being defensive plays into their hands, for they can say “see, he feels bad, that’s why he’s being defensive about it, more evidence that he’s a racist!” Saying “prove it” won’t work on them and their ilk, of course. But it will work for those who are not entirely subverted. Those who still adhere to the concept of innocent until proven guilty will get it right away.
Nonetheless, the guilty feeling, the horror at being called a racist, is a form of ideological subversion. You don’t want to be seen as one, because the culture at large has told you how horrible it is, and so you do everything you can to not appear racist. This is a weapon that was tried on me very recently.
The thing to understand here, is that when you feel a sort of guilt or revulsion when you know you shouldn’t — because you are not guilty of the crimes in question — that’s probably ideological subversion at work. This is everything from your school teachers to mass media attempting to control your thinking, to make you question your own beliefs at an emotional level rather than a rational one, while applying no such critique to theirs.
The thing that still confuses me, however, is the end goal. Yuri was worried it would be a prelude to Soviet attack through more direct means. Obviously that is no longer a possibility. Yet we are seeing the destabilization right now, the unprecedented resistance to Trump’s administration. We see even semi-serious calls for secession in places like California.
So who is waiting to take power, should Trump fail? Thoughts?
Recently, Germany’s MPs decided to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, a politically sensitive topic because of Turkey’s strategic position and NATO membership. Turkey, naturally, doesn’t want to admit it ever occurred. Indeed, they don’t want to admit other peoples ever lived in Turkey. It’s a combination of the usual behavior from the Islamic world combined with militant Turkish nationalism. Business as usual in the wrecked remains of the old Byzantine world.
Even the BBC puts the word genocide in quotations, as if the thing is somehow in dispute. Like Dr. Evil is describing his laser beam in air quotes.
“Genocide” says the BBC.
The genocide happened. My own family speaks of it. Areas containing Armenian ruins, graveyards, churches, and even entire cities no longer have any Armenians in them. Where did they all go, I wonder? Did they all just decided to leave peacefully, perhaps, and cede the land to peace-loving Turkish immigrants?
Still there in 1914. Where did they all go?
The official Turkish line is that the Armenians tried to conquer them and were understandably fought off in a defensive action which, regrettably, resulted in some innocent deaths (but not very many). It’s a line of bullshit spun by amateur propagandists who cannot even manage to make a coherent argument.
My own Armenian ancestors came from a region called Cilicia, which was once a Byzantine province that drifted out from Imperial control after the Seljuk Turks invaded Byzantium, became independent for a time, and was eventually conquered in turn by the Mameluke Turks, and then the Ottomans. There are no Armenians left there, either.
None here either.
So the thing happened. And to spin a line that the Armenians were the aggressors is foolish in the extreme. An argument can be made that some were Russian collaborators during the war, but it must be said that in this era Russia was no great friend of Armenia either. Certainly the Soviets wasted no time absorbing Armenia as a province after the war. Russia, however, was at least willing to concede the existence of Armenians. The Young Turks party in the Ottoman Empire wanted to erase all non-Turkish elements in the Ottoman Empire. Trebizond was still a largely Greek city in this age, in the middle of old Pontus. Today it likewise is Turkish.
I’ve read the first-hand accounts of the genocide, and spent a considerable amount of time researching it. And it must be said that not all Turks were a part of it. My own family was saved because they had a Turkish friend in the Ottoman government who warned them and paid for them to escape. So Turkey admitting that it occurred doesn’t put any personal responsibility on anybody. Most (perhaps all) involved are long dead.
But pretending it didn’t happen is a blatant lie.
I don’t understand why Germany chose this particular moment to admit the thing, but I commend them for doing so.
Soon after the announcement, I posted this to Facebook:
I’ve been avoiding posting inflammatory political stuff lately, at least as much as I am able. The reason is that the political climate of modern America has crossed a worrisome threshold, wherein people are forgetting that the opposing side(s) are still your countrymen, still fellow Americans. I’m not a fan of hardcore identity politics — regardless of the identity in question. Your heritage and various attributes are a part of who you are, there is no denying that, but I don’t advocate shunning those who don’t share every attribute with you.
All that being said, this is an issue that is near and dear to me and my heritage, insofar as my grandfather told stories of our family’s tribulations during World War I, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and the Armenian genocide. I didn’t expect that it would be the Germans who would recognize the thing for what it was before America acknowledged it. Especially since Germany and Turkey have had some deep historical ties. But, perhaps that is because Germany feels a unique responsibility to point this sort of thing out, that it should never happen again.
Regardless of why or how, I salute the Germans for having the courage to do what too many others have failed to do, including my own country. Beware of the fruits of tribalism and identity politics — that is how my own family found itself exiled, how the Jews found themselves in camps, and how many other peoples have been exterminated.
Note that I’m referring to the fact that I avoid posting politically inflammatory things to my public Facebook wall. Considering the direction of modern politics, the recent anti-Trump riots, the SJWs looking to get people fired from their jobs and to destroy businesses… it seems unwise to stir the pot any more than is absolutely necessary. But on this matter I could not keep silent.
I’m wondering if the new Facebook regulations mean this will be removed for hate speech sooner or later.
Anyway, after the post, a few Turkish individuals came out of the woodwork and made some rather unpleasant accusations toward me, spewing blatantly false propaganda. I checked each Facebook profile, and in all instances found a wall absolutely covered with Turkish flags, propaganda, and otherwise.
Not even the most ardent American patriots I have ever met have so much nationalistic material on their Facebook walls. These people were, quite literally (in my opinion, anyway), paid agents of the Turkish government. I’d have difficulty proving this to you, dear reader, in that I have no money trail for them. Nothing that would stand up in a court of law.
But the speed at which they found my post at random, and the utterly fake nature of their profiles gives strong circumstantial evidence to their artificial nature. Turkey is paying people to troll social media with propaganda to avoid admitting that a genocide occurred a century ago. The lunacy of it is staggering to contemplate.
And now they have recalled their ambassador to Germany over it, also. There was a time in which this was considered a precursor to war, and Turkey does this to a nominal NATO ally.
Every country has terrible sins buried in its past. America herself still debates the impact of slavery, Jim Crow, and our broken treaties with the Native Americans. We debate what should be done if, indeed, anything can be done (I don’t think there is much that can be done – history moves in one direction). But we don’t deny the existence of these historical events, especially at an official level, as Turkey has done here.
I want nothing from Turkey, mind you. I am an American. The Armenian side of my family has been here for a century now, there is no going back even if I wanted to, which I don’t. And personally, while I think it would be good if Turkey finally admitted the truth to themselves, I don’t want anything from them. You can’t roll the historical clock back, and every attempt to do so has only resulted in more bodies. But I tire of their punitive antics to try and give life to the lie. Turkey has made a mockery of itself. If any Western country acted half as badly as they do, it would be condemned by every international agency anyone has ever heard of.
It’s only wrong when the West does it.
Erdogan demands that Germany punish its own citizens for insulting him. And far be it for his administration to admit the genocide to themselves, they cannot even stand the notion that another country recognizes it.
All this while boatloads of Islamic refugees continue on into Europe.
What a complete fucking disaster. Pardon my French.
If you read any of my posts to completion, if you suffer through any of my writings, as long-winded as they may be, let it be this one. This is a matter that has weighed heavily on my mind for years. It’s like a secret you can only whisper in hushed circles, an issue you must dance around in public, and I could not summon the courage to say it until now.
For me, life is a game of connections, finding the links between disparate events, times, and places, and reconciling them together into a broader picture. That’s why I started writing here, to link together the pieces of evidence behind the Decline of the West.
Is this the end game?
Reading another post by Francis over at Bastion of Liberty turned into something of a depressing exercise. I will repost the video here. At first, I did not want to discuss it, because there are hints within it that border on Fascism, an ideology as unfriendly to the Libertarian-minded folks like myself as you can get. At the same time, much of my own research has supported the statements contained in this video. These things are happening. Make of them what you will.
I don’t know what that means, except that the future doesn’t look bright anymore:
The Slow Collapse
When I was young, my Armenian grandfather, who was already quite old, would lay back in his recliner and watch Headline News. He was looking for something, I think, a sign that what had happened to his own family in Armenia decades before was happening again. In some ways it is merciful that he passed before the thing came to fruition. But he would often caution me about Islam, and the weakness of the West, that someday we would fail to stand up to evil.
He was always proud to be American, and he worked harder than I ever have in his life, to provide for his family and build a life for himself. He put his brother through college to become a doctor, took care of his mother, raised a family, and spent nearly 50 years working at the China Lake Naval Weapons facility. He never took a sick day or a vacation day if he could possibly avoid it, and when he retired, he had saved up over two years of time. He was well into his 70s, by then. I try to make him proud, now, but I know I don’t have one tenth of the work ethic and drive that he did. Still, I try.
Where is that mindset in the migrants coming to Europe today? “Money money money” one migrant tells us. They are listening to music on their phones, and tossing out food because it isn’t “good enough.” They riot and loot because Germany is not giving them enough. I don’t even know what it is they propose to do.
While some of the illegals here in America lurk around Home Depots looking for actual work, others prefer to enter the drug trade. All of them expect free this, and free that. Students march for free college, insulting the sacrifice my own grandfather made to put his brother through medical school. Families are broken now, and people are distant from one another.
I come from a broken family, two brutal divorces and enough family drama to sink the Titanic. I know very few people outside of my wife’s family that managed to stay together anymore. Westerners are weak, damaged, and focused on all the wrong things. Indeed, their sense of kinship is precisely reversed. Watch the video and see Germans cheering their own destruction, Swedes telling the migrants that the country is “theirs now.” It’s not Sweden, it’s Syria. Or Somalia. Or whatever.
There was an interesting study done awhile ago, called “Kill Whitey.” It was an intellectual exercise wherein people of varying ethnic and political backgrounds were asked to sacrifice one person to save many. Most ethnic groups chose their own ethnicity over that of another. I.e. they would rather sacrifice someone of a different background than their own. But Whites were divided. Conservatives adhered to the same maxim, but Liberals were precisely reversed.
They would choose to Kill Whitey over any other ethnicity. I.e. every group acted as you’d expect except White liberals. Leftists would say that this is proof of Conservative racism, and they might even be technically correct.
But then they would have to admit that their cherished minorities are also racist, something I suspect they would be unwilling to do.
On my Twitter feed this morning, I saw this little gem:
The photo on the left looks a lot life Tarpon Springs, an area near where I live. The picture on the right… well, obviously not. Leftists would have you believe Rhodesia was built upon the backs of impoverished Africans, quasi-slaves, really.
If that were true, I submit that Zimbabwe would look a lot better than it does today. Freed of the oppressive rule of Whites, Africa should have rebounded upward like a beach ball held underneath the water by a fat man, suddenly released.
So what is really going on here? Is race the real problem? Is even considering that prima facie evidence of Nazi-like racism? Let’s dig a little deeper here.
Some months ago, I was talking with a fellow Libertarian-minded individual whom I will call John. Obviously that’s not his real name, but still. John and I were coworkers for some years, and I always thought he had a unique insight into things of an intellectual nature.
He explained to me once that success, as we understand it, is a flawed concept. Humans of different belief systems, races, creeds, religions, etc… do not all want the same things, or prioritize the same metrics for success.
John compared Thomas Sowell, the famous Conservative-Libertarian economist, with Snoop Dawg. Mr. Sowell, he said, made it in the White man’s world (The Western world), did a great job of it, and was well respected by most Conservative Whites. In essence, he claimed, Mr. Sowell appealed to White Americans and White American culture.
It’s worth mentioning that I have more respect for this man than almost any White guy alive today. Not only is he one of the economic greats, the heir to the Chicago and Austrian schools, but he did this by going against the prevailing cultural winds. God, if only the Black students of Mizzou could look up to this man instead of some race-baiting scum. I wish it were so.
Snoop Dawg, he claimed, was similarly successful and well known, perhaps even more so, but utilized the cultural norms of the Black community. He appealed to Black Americans and Black American culture, and did so in spectacular fashion. Snoop didn’t want to be respected for his intellect or his contributions to the future, he wanted to be rich, famous, and have lots of people worshiping him.
But, John explained, this was a conscious decision on the part of Mr. Sowell, and Snoop, as to which culture they would embrace. In America we have the luxury, John explained, to choose which culture(s) we will embrace because the dominant culture was more friendly to others. In Africa, with the Whites a tiny minority, and, in any event, constantly in retreat from previous dominance, leaders there were keen enough to embrace what they saw as Black culture, over the European White culture.
Mugabe, in essence, was a “reactionary” deliberately distancing himself from what he saw as a weak, failing culture. He embraced what he saw as a successful, powerful culture. Why embrace the values of White Europeans who had just lost? His decision to commit genocide against White farmers has a certain rationality to it when viewed this way.
John explained that comfort, financial security, even the elimination of hunger were largely European cultural fixtures. They were not necessarily universals. Of course, any human would prefer to be satisfied as opposed to starving, but some might prefer power over others to physical comfort. Some would rather live in a shithole if that meant they could tell other people what to do.
Offering those men a position in a cubicle farm would, in their minds, be a demotion from getting to be the genocidal warlord of a dump.
Better to rule in Hell, as Mugabe has done, than serve in Heaven, in other words.
Plant Snoop Dawg in Zimbabwe, and he’d do okay for himself. Plant Thomas Sowell there, and they would rip him to pieces. This despite the fact that Thomas Sowell is the more intelligent, rational man, overall.
I don’t know what to make of John’s theory, and in any event, it was a discussion that involved more than a few beers, but the memory stuck with me. Meanwhile, Black students are self-segregating, creating White-free zones, so as to “decolonize” their experiences. Gangsta rap would have horrified previous Black American generations, but is considered the norm now, and offers in fantasy what is reality in Africa: killing of cops, gaining of money, power, and fame, and to hell with everything else. Western culture is in retreat in Western countries themselves.
Western European culture has been in retreat for a long time. It’s been leaving places since long before I was born. Even as technology rapidly expanded, Western culture has been slowly vanishing. First, it disappeared from the distant, loosely ruled colonies. Even that was in stages.
In the first stage, the ruling colonial government was expelled, like in Rhodesia, South Africa, and most South American countries (even in America herself). But, former colonials remained in power for a time. Ian Smith kept a hold of Rhodesia for awhile, the South African apartheid regime stuck around, and in South America, the casta system persisted awhile, with Castizos and Criollos maintaining dominance in the government. Don’t mistake me here, I’m not saying I support those regimes, but nonetheless, the process by which Western culture was expelled from these areas began this way.
Note that even the Marxists generally agree on this count.
After awhile, though, the levers of power fell onto those with little to no European affiliation or loyalty. In some countries, like some of the South American nations, most of the Anglosphere, and otherwise, it seemed to stop here. In Africa and the Middle East, on the other hand, it did not.
The next stage, of course, was dictatorship. And, finally, the extirpation of any remnant of European Western culture. Assad can be viewed as a post-European dictator. His replacement, should he fall, is likely to be of a completely Islamic and religious character. In this view Assad is actually mildly preferable to ISIS.
Now, if this process happened only in the distant areas where Europeans never really achieved a high percentage of the population, I’m not sure it would bother me any. Africa for the Africans is not necessarily something I disagree with.
But, and here’s the important part: this process has now taken root inside Western nations themselves.
I read something on Twitter surrounding this #MizzouHungerStrike thing that I commented on earlier. They wanted to decolonize the university spaces. Now, at first, this sounds like typical Progressive claptrap, but I looked this up. It’s actually a thing.
And in the context of what I’ve written above, it makes a certain kind of bizarre sense. These people view any expression of Western culture as colonial. The word is a stand-in for European, or White, or Western, or whatever.
And it’s not just happening in countries with colonial Western roots, like our own. It’s happening inside Europe itself.
Now, like that Wired article I referenced earlier, the Kill Whitey experiment, Leftists sympathize more with the migrants than their own neighbors. It would make sense, then, that they deliberately work to destroy their own countries and cultures in order to welcome in the newcomers.
They want a Mugabe to come in and push them over the railing in front of the bus because that, in their mind, will save all the downtrodden people.
What they fail to understand is that, like Snoop Dawg, these are individuals who have a different metric for what success means. Success doesn’t mean integrating, or living in a multi-cultural salad bowl. It doesn’t mean a healthy GDP, or scientific and cultural contributions. Success means conquest.
Unfortunately, that’s all too likely to happen now. Watch that video again and see if you see what I saw. Yes, it’s all true. But consider the tone of the video. The subtle references to Jews, as if to say “somebody did this to you.” There are only a couple, and they are short, but there it is, the tiniest beginnings of what happened to Europe time and time again in history: the roots of genocide.
People on the Right have been warning the Leftists of this for decades now. Even Vox has noted that things are starting to spiral out of control, and somebody is going to wind up strung up on a lamppost for it. These are not Right wing people, largely. The Golden Dawn in Greece is fundamentally Left-wing, but it is also nationalist. That seems like a contradiction, but in the bizarre political situation we find ourselves in, it’s not. Some Leftists are waking up to the invasion, but, critically, are NOT abandoning their otherwise totalitarian, Left-wing sympathies.
And they don’t like Muslims very much.
Tom Kratman warned us about this in his book The Caliphate, that Europe is going to be presented with a choice eventually: cultural and racial suicide, or jackboots. He wasn’t sure which one would be chosen, ultimately, but the choice would have to be made eventually.
The warnings of the Right-wing on immigration, Islam and otherwise were made to prevent the necessity of making that choice. We didn’t want things to come to this.
Europe is getting to choose between something Nazi-like and Islam. Native Evil vs. Imported Evil. I understand why Native Evil would be preferable to them. But ye gods what a shit sandwich.
Now I know why my grandfather sat there watching the news all day. He knew it was coming 30 years ago. After all, it had already come for our family in Armenia.
This is how genocide starts, people. This is how World Wars are made.
We told you this was going to happen and you didn’t listen!
Tad Williams will have real Nazis to contend with soon enough. No, not George Bush, or me, or the Sad Puppies, or Gamergaters, or any number of other people he finds unpleasant and wants to tar with the fascism brush. He will have Real. Fucking. Nazis.
And it’s sorry excuses for human beings like himself that made this possible. Thanks, progressives, for bring the planet another episode of war and genocide. Brought to you by Marxists everywhere.
Meanwhile, all of us liberty-minded folks who just wanted to be left alone are left holding the bag in this shitstorm.
Is Donald Trump a President Buckman, as Tom Kratman described? Maybe. But what’s left, now? Aside from Ted Cruz, everyone else has decided to just give up on even having a border in this country.
Maybe the people calling him a Fascist are right. Maybe. But what’s left, now? Jeb Bush? John Kasich? Don’t make me laugh. I like Rand Paul and Ben Carson personally, and think they are good people, but do they have the balls to do what needs to be done? I doubt it.
And then you have Bernie Sanders on the other side, an actual Socialist, and Hillary Clinton who is as corrupt as they come.
The shit sandwich has come to America too. What do you want? A further deterioration of Western culture in America, or jackboots? National suicide or tyranny?
Where to go from here
I’ll answer this in one phrase: I have no fucking idea.
In Armenia, under Ottoman rule, my family had a choice to get on that boat and come to America. European-Africans left Rhodesia, and are now leaving South Africa, too. They vanished from previous colonial enclaves, and have turned over their territories.
There is nowhere left to go.
I just had an exchange with one Leftist on Twitter. Take a look for yourself:
Now, this guy was so ridiculous I suspect he might be a troll. I checked out his Twitter account and he seemed legit, but I don’t trust anything on the Internet anymore. Nonetheless, every one of his talking points I have seen elsewhere on the Twitterverse. His idea for decolonization is to exile Whites to Russia. Europe is for the Syrians (Whites might be allowed to stay if they submit). The rest of the world is off limits to Whites. Note, this man claims to be Black, as far as I can tell.
This is another episode in my long running Twitter series: Who said that, SJW or Stormfronter? Here’s another quote from today’s lineup: “It’s dangerous to them when [blank] people realize their collective power!” In fact, take any SJW statement and remove the ethnicities referenced. You cannot distinguish them from Nazis or other genocidal maniacs. Because they are genocidal maniacs. Except that, as the Kill Whitey study revealed, the White Progressives want to commit genocide against themselves. It is, in their view, the ultimate payment for the sins of their ancestors. Of course, they don’t articulate it quite that way. They rationalize it, make excuses for it, etc… but pretty much everything they hate can be substituted with “Western culture,” “European,” or “White.”
When I started my Who said that, SJW or Stormfronter? series, I didn’t mean for it to become almost literal.
We’re rapidly heading to a point where the choice will literally be SJW or Stormfronter. Anti-White Fascism or Pro-White Fascism. I told Francis over at his place that this worried me. But it’s more than that.
I mourn the death of the ideals of our once-great Republic. Freedom, responsibility, independence and self-reliance. Sarah Hoyt’s books reference the half-mystical Usaian or USA-ian. That’s me. I bleed red white and blue. I want to go back to the way things were, and in that I guess I’m finally embracing myself as a Conservative. I don’t want to choose between Fascist A and Fascist B.
And I’m so tired of being called a Fascist because I don’t want to choose.
I feel like what a Roman citizen must have felt like, on the day that Augustus took office as the First Citizen of Rome. Everything we fought for is gone. Our grand experiment is over, and war is coming. Liberty probably won’t survive it, and it’s questionable if Western Civilization will make it at all.
I don’t know what that means for me in the future. I won’t put on the jackboots. I can’t. It’s anathema to me. But neither, my friends, can I sit here and watch the Left enslave us and kill our culture.
I guess that means I’ll have no shortage of enemies when the fighting starts. But, I’m a Usaian, and we are no strangers to hopeless causes.
Back in the late 80s, John Carpenter released a movie that was destined to become a cult classic: They Live. In the movie, the protagonist discovers, by putting on a pair of special sunglasses, that aliens have invaded the Earth and disguised themselves. They walked among us, controlling us through subliminal propaganda, gaining power so that they might extract resources, bring in more of their kind, and steal wealth from our planet. Naturally they had lick-spittle human allies, as well, who were fully aware that they were dooming their own species. Lately, the catchword “OBEY” has made something of a comeback among the meme makers of the Internet, those denizens of wretched hives (I say this as a term of endearment) like 4chan.
Obey your rulers.
While nominally human, and not actually some kind of alien race from the stars, the quasi-aristocracy of America and the rest of the West is otherwise functionally identical to the invaders of They Live. They extract resources from you in the form of taxation, of market-power via cartel-like activity and, of course, through central banking, one of the essentials in Marx’s own manifesto. The push toward control of the money supply is such that many are now calling for a cashless economy. For cash cannot be so easily traced as electronic money, nor can it be as easily manipulated.
In a cashless economy they could, for instance, institute a negative interest rate (i.e. a tax on savings) in order to force you to BUY BUY BUY BUY. If cash existed, one could withdraw money from the bank and hide it in the mattress when they tried this particular scheme. CONSUME, pleb, for that is what you are for. Conversely they could ruin debtors with the push of a button, by forcing their interest rates to skyrocket. You would have no alternative, because only the central bank could offer you a loan.
This isn’t some grand conspiracy either. Their business is conducted openly, with only the thinnest of moral veneers applied to coat it. They propose to take your money “for your own good.” No, it’s not for your own good, folks, its for theirs. That has always been the excuse of the Left wing, but as Al Gore flies around in a private jet demanding that us plebs reduce our own carbon footprints, it starts to fall on deaf ears.
Social Justice and Progressive Leftism are the human lick-spittles, the toadies, useful idiots and operatives of this group. Take the recent #SadPuppies affair in Science Fiction. It was well known in certain circles that Tor Books (a subsidiary of Macmillan) was, effectively, the arbiter of the Hugo Awards. Patrick Nielsen Hayden and his wife, the great troll of the Torlocks, had a stranglehold on the affair. The question, of course, is who signs their paychecks, knowing full well what it is these people do? Those are your real enemies, though we must sweep aside these toadies in order to gain access to the enemies shielded behind them.
Look at Establishment Republicans and their toady-like behavior. The only reason Donald Trump is surging in the polls is that he has actually taken a hard line stance against illegal immigration and political correctness. Very few people genuinely like Trump, so his popularity is a reflection of just how much the Republican base loathed the Washington Establishment. Whether Trump is a genuine rebel, an aristocrat who has broken with the fold and declared for our side, remains to be seen. Fifty-fifty odds are better than we’ve had in awhile, frankly.
Personally, I’m inclined to give him a chance, but it’s not like I have much of a choice in the matter. It’s Trump or another Chump.
Why are the aristocrats purposefully destroying Western Europe right now? While the tragedy of dying children is well known to us, indeed I commented on it previously, most of the refugees are anything but dying children. They are young men, aggressive and already rioting for more handouts from the plebeians of Europe. That’s right, far from being grateful for “rescue” from their plight, the refugees are angry that Europe is not giving them more, or giving it to them as quickly as they would like.
Here are your “peaceful” Muslim conquerors. They are tearing apart the port because the Greeks are not giving them what they want quickly enough. Constantine XI is rolling around in his grave.
Even in its critically weakened state, the West could crush this nascent invasion with minimal effort if it truly desired to do so. Instead, the defenses of Europe are silent. Indeed, the question on everyone’s mind is how much treasure must be given to these invaders, and what regions of Europe should be ceded to them. These are not the actions of a strong and dynamic civilization, but that of a weak, supplicating one.
The fact is, multiculturalism is a crock. It has always been a crock. But at least some cultures could pretend to get along some of the time. Islam doesn’t even bother to do that much. Tossing hundreds of thousands, or even millions of Muslims into a multicultural stew is like lobbing a live grenade into a nitroglycerin factory. This is so blatantly obvious to anyone with a functional brain cell left in their skull that only one conclusion remains. As Sir Arthur Conan Doyle told us: “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”
Only one possibility remains to us:
The elites, the aristocratic rulers of Western nations around the world, are deliberately destroying their own countries.
Why they are doing this is a mystery to me. Certainly they must be getting something out of it, though I cannot imagine what that could possibly be. It seems to me that destroying the West would be, in effect, killing the Golden Goose. But clearly, some benefit must be had in its destruction.
If only it were this easy.
I do not have a pair of magical sunglasses to give you, so that you may see the propaganda all around you, so that you may know of the enemies in your midst. But that doesn’t change the fact that they are there. They Live. And while they and their servants thrive, the West will continue to be destroyed from within.
Some time ago, I suggested that Socialism’s greatest flaw is in its inability to scale. Two people who get married share resources, money, and expertise. This operates along principles not terribly different from Socialism. Extend this further. Many families are composed of several generations, uncles, aunts, grandparents, cousins, etc… and there is a degree of sharing among them. There was a time where one’s retirement plan was the family.
Indeed, my wife’s grandparents moved in with her parents. They watched the children during the day, contributing what they could (and saving child care costs), in exchange for room and board. But since this was a family unit, it wasn’t accounted like that. It was expected that each contributed what they were able, and took what they needed. Anyone who contributed less than their ability, or took more than their share, would face the wrath of the rest of the family. No matter how Marxist this sounds in theory, it worked well, because the scale was small. Everyone knew everyone else. If someone was slacking or becoming a glutton, it was obvious to all.
Now, the reason I point this is out is not to sing the praises of Marxism, but rather to point out something many on the Right fail to understand: Marxism regards the Family unit as competition. Indeed, Marxists are jealous of the family, because it operates more efficiently and less tyrannically than Socialism does. Good families stick together and support one another in ways Socialist Revolutionaries could only dream about. We might call families Communal instead of Socialist, because families actually have some chance of working in the long term.
Yes. The author of this article genuinely believes in three things.
It is unfair that some parents are better than others.
This needs to be addressed by the state, because unfairness is bad.
Children should thus be wards of the state, and should not be awarded to biological parents.
Now, on some of these points, the author, in the manner typical of progressives, attempts to weasel out of stating his points openly. But it’s pretty hard to take this back:
I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally.
One of the rhetorical tools the Progressives use in their quest for power is reversing the polarity of the argument. Instead of suggesting that, since some parents are better than others, it might be beneficial to encourage the formation of stable families in order that more parents become good parents… the Progressives prefer to suggest that the good parents are to blame for creating disadvantages for the children of bad parents. The author further states:
This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion—that perhaps in the interests of levelling the playing field, bedtime stories should also be restricted. In Swift’s mind this is where the evaluation of familial relationship goods goes up a notch.
Who will restrict the telling of bedtime stories? Why, your friendly Marxist government, of course. You see that with Progressives, everything will be twisted into a defense of Marxist government. They have spent decades attempting to destroy the American family unit, and now that they have succeeded partially, in that many children are raised without functioning families, they say that it is unfair those without families are disadvantaged. Then they use this as justification for destroying the remaining family units, or at least critically weakening them.
This is akin to what they have done where economics is concerned. They impoverish people around the world, then blame those who have not completely fallen into poverty for being “privileged,” thus justifying further government action. To do this, they utilize a human psychological blind spot: a child-like mind’s instinctive dislike for unfairness.
It’s the first lesson of life that those who blindly follow Progressive leaders have failed to understand: life isn’t fair. More on this tomorrow.
A family friend put me up to this short article, written by Alan Grayson. Mr. Grayson is a Democrat, and so we must take his writings with a hefty dose of salt. Nonetheless, he’s on to something. Let’s digest.
For a five-month period that ends this week, every single elected Republican in Congress was a white Christian.
Let me repeat that: every elected GOP Member of the House and Senate was a white Christian.
Now, I’m not certain of the veracity of this statement. But even if he’s wrong and a few minority Republicans existed in Congress during this period, there’s a fundamental truth here. The Republican party is on a trajectory to becoming the White Christian party.
Eric Cantor is Jewish. He left office on August 1 last year. Since then, the entire elected GOP caucus, in both the House and the Senate, has comprised only white Christians.
13% of America is African-American. 9% is of mixed race. 5% is Asian. 24% does not identify itself as Christian. 0% of those groups served as elected Congressional Republicans during the past five months.
GOP motto: “We’re monochromatic!” The GOP: Is it a political party, or is it a tribe?
Now this is where I begin to check out. The implication Mr. Grayson is making, whether or not he wants to admit it openly, is that the Republican Party is racist. It’s a simple answer, but not necessarily the correct one. After all correlation does not equal causation. And it is a sort of pot, kettle, black situation for a Democrat to be lecturing Republicans on their tribal behavior. The Democrats are, after all, undisputed masters of identity politics.
Fredrick Douglass once famously said:
I am a Republican, a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intend to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress.
The Republican party was once the party championed by Blacks, Chinese and White immigrants alike. It was the party that ended slavery. It was the party of the North, not the South. So what changed?
Larry Elder, in his book 10 Things You Can’t Say In America gives us a clue. Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society came on the heels of the Civil Rights era. Political identities were in flux in this era. The Republican dominance of the Black community was up for grabs. Counter-culture was in full swing and Socialists were in vogue.
The Democrat hold on the South had been fading for some time. As support for Jim Crow waned, the Racists abandoned the Democrats for their own “Dixiecrat” party. Prior to this, it was the Democrat party which had pushed segregation, and the Republican party which had opposed it. A Civil War within the Democrat party ensued, between those who wanted to oppress Blacks and those who wanted to use them. Lyndon Johnson ended the rift in the Democrat party by jettisoning the Dixiecrats. But now he needed votes from somewhere else.
As Larry Elder explains in the book, Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society then introduced welfare into minority communities, in order to purchase their loyalty to the Democrats. This was necessary to replace the now-lost Dixiecrats. Libertarians and Capitalists will warn you about the dangers of the welfare state. The Black community is, perhaps, the most poignant example.
It is not commonly known, for instance, that Black income, education and marriage rates were far better in 1960 than today. Don’t mistake this as an argument for segregation, but rather as an argument against the welfare state.
What does this have to do with Republicans? Well, as the South moved away from segregation, reluctantly at first, but more genuinely later, they were attracted to the Republican party. The South had always been very conservative in its ways. Segregation was what welded them to the Democrats. That and memory of the Civil War. But both were gone, and there was no reason for them to vote Democrat any longer. The Democrats, meanwhile, had gone off the reservation and straight into Socialism. JFK was, perhaps, the last prominent conservative Democrat. Today that would be considered a contradiction. And even then, he wasn’t very conservative (just ask a Cuban).
Lyndon Johnson’s success in welding Blacks to the Democrat party was then repeated for many demographic groups. After all, it worked once, why not again? Gays, Hispanics (with the exception of Cubans), Asians (with the exception of Vietnamese exiles), in fact pretty much anyone non-White and/or non-Christian who wasn’t a refugee of Communism was courted by the Democrats. They became the masters of identity (tribal) politics. The Republican party never really found an answer to this, but the White Christians, feeling something was off about the Democrat party, stayed with the Republicans anyway.
It became the de facto White Christian party because the Democrats had successfully lured everyone else away with promises of free stuff. Blacks voted 92% Democrat in 2000. More, obviously, in 2008. In the 1920s, Blacks were voting reliably and mostly Republican.That is how successful the Democrats were. In one century they completely turned the political affiliation and ideology of an entire ethnic group.
It’s a sad state of affairs, because the message of free markets and traditional values isn’t one restricted to White Christians. Indeed, the Hispanic communities are not very distant from the White communities in this regard. I sometimes view them as the “low-hanging fruit” in racial politics. Fred Reed says something fundamentally similar in his article on Hispanic immigration. The Republicans could pluck them with relatively low effort. You could even secure the border properly, if done right. I married into a Hispanic family, and I don’t think they are very enamored of illegal immigration either. It brings in too many Socialists.
But the Republicans don’t know how to. It isn’t so much that I think Republicans are racist. Personally, I’ve felt that the Democrat policies are far more racist than the Republican ones. But the Republicans have been the party of White Christians too long to understand how to appeal to others. And that’s the real problem.
It doesn’t need to moderate its positions so much as tailor its message correctly. In fact, the Libertarian wing of the Republican party has great popular appeal, if it weren’t suppressed by the Establishment Republican old guard. The early Tea Party gained a lot of ground by identifying with this group (it lost steam later). With one swoop they could eliminate most of the common Democrat arguments against them. But they won’t, because the stodgy Old Guard elite keeps watch over the thing. They work hard to ensure nothing really changes. I’m not sure they even want to win. They are content as Fabian Socialists, low-fat Democrats, RINOs, whatever you want to call them.
Mr. Grayson intended this as a hit piece on Republicans, I’m sure. And don’t misunderstand me, I’m not enamored with the party either (although I like Mr. Grayson’s party even less). But, in truth, it could be used as a roadmap back to relevance.