11/15/20

It’s Hard to go Forward when you’re Stuck in Reverse

By: Carolyn Alder

The battle every four years to capture the White House is a lose/lose situation.  It seems we are on the verge of self-destruction as the battle rages in the streets, in the media, in Congress, and in the courts.  We have civil unrest instead of domestic tranquility. The other party is not the enemy, party politics is the enemy.  I do not like being stuck in reverse in the political swamp of deceit, revenge, and despair.  But how do we move forward out of the political quicksand pulling us under? The solution is staring us in the face, but we have been ignoring it and abusing it for over 200 years—return to the Constitution.

The original Constitution was designed to select a president without a battle. Sadly, even many of the Founders and Framers took up party banners and were part of the trend to become partisan politicians instead of statesmen.  Instead of following the non-partisan path to statesmanship designed in the Constitution, they pushed toward a democracy of party politics.  George Washington expressed his dismay of this reversal in his farewell address:

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.”

When all else fails—go back and read the instructions. The original Constitution outlined a far superior, non-partisan, multi-step, indirect process to elect a statesman (rather than a partisan politician) to be President of the United States.

The Presidential Electors were to be the first step in the process—not a meaningless rubber-stamp, after years of campaigning, advertising, political revenge, and a popular vote based on campaign promises and government handouts.

Article II, clause ll:

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives…”

It was presumed that the Presidential Electors, would be persons carefully chosen based on their wisdom and experience.

“The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves.”

The constitutionally assigned duty of each Elector was to nominate two presidential possibilities worthy of such a high office.  (Voting for two precluded campaigning for one.)  There were no pre-printed ballots because the Electors were to provide the names of potential candidates, not choose between predetermined candidates.  The Electors were independent and expected to always vote their conscience.  Now, if an Elector casts a vote different than the name submitted by their party, he is called a faithless Elector.  The Electors in each State did not need to agree.  Each Presidential Elector was to submit names of outstanding individuals who had proven themselves to be wise, responsible, uphold the principles of freedom, and the Constitution.  Then,

“They shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government…”

This was the original nominating process outlined in the Constitution. Now we send party delegates to party conventions and support candidates who have effectively self-nominated, to decide who is most likely to defeat the opposing party’s candidate.

The machinations of party politics early-on hijacked the constitutionally assigned duty of the Presidential Electors.  These machinations led to a hastily written and hastily ratified 12th Amendment in order for parties to select both a President and a Vice-president. It states:

“The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves, they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify and transmit sealed to the seat of the government…”

Even with separated lists, Presidential Electors could discuss outstanding statesmen with other Electors in their State. Each Elector was to be an independent thinker, not a rubber-stamp to someone else’s opinion or even to a consensus of opinions.  They were the ones charged with the nominating process.

Then in a joint session of Congress, the President of the Senate opened the sealed certificates and the votes were tallied.  This is when the candidates would be known.  A majority vote of the whole number of Electors appointed (This would be extremely rare without manipulation.) is required for each office. Otherwise,

“the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each having one vote…a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice,”

This type of federal system construction meant that the States (the House of Representatives) would, with extremely rare exceptions, make the final election.  Each State having one vote is an important safeguard to liberty in a federal republic.

Even the 12th Amendment did not actually authorize a popular vote for president even though it greatly facilitated this perversion by political parties of the original plan.

Party politics have destroyed constitutional government in many ways, too numerous to describe here.  Every State Legislature has turned their constitutionally assigned duty of choosing wise Presidential Electors over to the political parties.

The battle of an endless war rages on.  We can’t go forward because we are stuck in reverse in the political swamp. To go forward, a start to restoring the Constitution would be for the States to take back their constitutional responsibilities, such as appointing Presidential Electors who can do their job as described above.

The structure of the original Constitution was intelligently designed to establish and safeguard freedom.  The United States was to be a constitutional representative republic not a democracy.

See:

The Evolution and Destruction of the Original Electoral College

11/6/20

Remember Churchill’s Words to “Never Surrender”

By: Cliff Kincaid

Ben Shapiro is a good talker who can win arguments with left-wingers. But his column, headlined, “No Matter the Outcome, the Woke Lost,” is self-defeating. Operating on the basis of the phrase, “When life gives you lemons, make lemonade,” he seems to think Trump may have lost but the left lost, too. So we’re all losers? That’s not a good approach as we move forward.

The fact is that Joe Biden lost and President Trump won. That’s what Trump is saying, with evidence, and I believe him.

If Shapiro disagrees, let him prove that Biden won legitimately. Trump has cited the evidence of fraud that we saw with our own eyes, as ballot dumps turned Wisconsin and Michigan against Trump. Other states are falling to Biden under equally mysterious circumstances. What more evidence do we need?

As Biden might say, “Come on, man.”

His bio says that Ben lives with his wife and three children in Los Angeles. As a result, I have to question his common sense. Get out of California, Ben. You are living in occupied territory. We are fighting to keep the rest of America free.

Ben has his place, but he was never pro-Trump. By contrast, Alex Newman is a great young journalist who was sympathetic to Trump and has now published a piece, “Massive Vote Fraud Across U.S. as Trump Decries Attempted Coup.”

The evidence cited in this column is what Ben Shapiro and his sponsors at CNSNews.com should be focusing on.

Please, CNSNews.com editor Terrence Jeffrey, stop wasting our time with limp-wristed commentary from never-Trumpers during this critical period of time. This is the time to assume that the media-declared Biden “win” is a fraud and that Trump, who is claiming victory, has been re-elected.

As another Democrat, Bill Clinton might say, that’s our story, and we’re sticking to it. In this case, however, our side of the story is buttressed by the evidence.  It’s important to operate on the assumption that Trump, as he claims, has been re-elected.

Anybody who depends on the “official” tally, which comes from those opposed to Trump, is a fool or agent of the opposition.

What we have to guard against is the unfortunate tendency of some “conservatives” to sell out, in order to curry favor with their would-be rulers.

Here’s how Alex Newman begins his column: “Reports, videos, and other evidence of rampant and brazen voter fraud from all across the country — especially in jurisdictions controlled by Democrats — continue pouring in faster than the Big Tech giants can censor it and the fake ‘fact-checking’ industry can dishonestly attempt to discredit it.”

Alex is exactly right, and I suggest reading the rest of his article here. Alex is also an expert on the Deep State and the New World Order. He contributed to one of my books exposing Barack Hussein Obama.

We are in a constitutional crisis and the election scandal is part of it.

But even this fraud cannot be viewed in isolation, as it comes after various attempts to take down this president. Vote fraud follows the fake news Russia dossier and the impeachment drive.

We know the FBI and FBI used Russian disinformation against Trump. What’s more, impeachment was designed to accuse Trump of the corruption that Biden and his son were engaged in. We know all of this. So why do we think that the Democrats would conduct an election fairly and honestly?

So please, Ben, don’t question the “outcome.” We already know who won. Don’t be a doubting Ben.

Ben is a young man, and my three sons are young, too. That’s why they have to understand what is really happening here. It is unprecedented. The corruption is more deadly than the China virus.

One of my readers said to me, “I am 72 years of age. Until the last few years, I would never have believed what I’m seeing take place in the country could take place/happen. The road we are on is a bad one indeed, and I’m glad I don’t have many years left to see what appears to be an eventual fall of the nation.”

This is really sad. I don’t agree that the nation is destined to fall.

“People are never going to give up on this country,” Rush Limbaugh just said on his radio show today. Here’s a man facing death’s door. But he has faith in God and America. We pray for his health and the health of our country.

He’s exposing the vote fraud apparatus. He’s not giving up. He’s trying to inspire conservatives to take the fight to the opposition.

Trump has a very good lawyer in his corner, the former U.S. Attorney and New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. He brought down New York’s Mafia families. He exposed the Hunter Biden laptop and is now out front on the fraud issue.

By contrast, Biden is a weak man, apparently controlled by Obama’s handlers hoping to replace him with Kamala Harris – if they get into the White House.

Standing in their way is President Trump.

As Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano Archbishop says, Americans should not lose heart. He tells us, “Do not allow yourselves to be discouraged by the deceptions of the Enemy, even more so in this terrible hour in which the impudence of lying and fraud dares to challenge Heaven.” His messages are read and sometimes Tweeted by Trump.

But perhaps these spiritual messages will now be censored by Twitter as well.

Facing the Nazis,  British Prime Minister Winston Churchill said “we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”

Trump is Churchill in the current struggle. God is on our side. But beyond faith, we have to fight for national and personal survival. Our lives are in danger. It’s that serious.

In order to prepare for the worst, I suggest reading the booklet, “Insurrection and Violence: A Citizen’s Guide,” published by the firm Unconstrained Analytics before the election fraud became so obvious in the last several days.

As Trump moves ahead to save his presidency, we have to understand how the street protests will probably accelerate. The authors warn, “The consequence of citizen inaction, at this perilous moment, is to put at risk the Constitution, our way of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

The bio for one of the firm’s top officers, Rich Higgins, notes that he “served on the National Security Council in the Trump Administration as the Director for Strategic Planning. He was removed in 2017 after warning of a deep state coup to remove the President.”

You can now be sure that Trump is taking these warnings seriously and understands the nature of the crisis.

*For updates, please use the contact form at www.usasurvival.org

10/29/20

1619: A Date for Disunity

By: Tabitha Korol

Nicole Hannah-Jones chose the year 1619 as when African slaves were first brought to this country. Many leading historians say this is a false narrative, a version of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, yet we are told to reevaluate our supposed racist past and accept the destruction of our values, history, laws, statuary, institutions, and terminology/names.  This is the cancel culture that has overtaken more than 3,500 classrooms across our country, a globalist war being waged against America to destroy America.  To paraphrase a Soviet joke, “We know the future, but it is the past that must be changed.”

***

I was pleased to be invited to a virtual meeting of the Ohio State Board of Education in early October, to give testimony about the implementation in Ohio schools of The 1619 Project, the reframing of America’s history on slavery.  I prepared the requisite five-minute speech to include the Common Core Standards because they prepared the foundation for destroying our culture and morality.  From the beginning, the children have been divided into groups or tribes, each taught to feel victimized by the others, humiliated, intimidated, and to loathe our country.  With each new idea, they are encouraged to disregard our laws, accept our disintegration, and do the bidding of our leftist enemy.  The Common Core became the propellant for any replacement narrative, and it was all intentional.

The preparation begins as early as Kindergarten, when the very young are prevented from connecting with best friends, inhibiting their natural desire to bond with their peers and, later, with spouses.  The inability to share mutual comfort and security leads to the destruction of the family and the tyrannical population control, loneliness, and isolation that evolves into a fused ideological group, a group-think mentality dominated by a principle rather than by healthy alliances.  They are made aggressive and destructive, the perfect dupes for conducting today’s riots, a militia-in-waiting to enforce tomorrow’s global socialism.

Keeping children on computers for most of the day has them bonding with “hard objects,” and indoctrinated with academia’s agenda.  Deprived of opportunities to be sociable and conversant, they are unable to think, analyze, and debate – incapable of individual thought.  Interestingly, Islamic jihadis bond with “hard objects” (weapons), rather than with people.

To further demolish our culture, students as young as age four are being sexualized with in-class lessons of masturbation and exposed to extremely pornographic information.  Syntero, Inc., a self-defined counseling group supported by our tax dollars, is described by Ohio Value Voters as “deeply disturbing, dangerous, even possibly criminal.”  They report that Syntero introduces children to perversions of homosexuality and sex changes, and appears to be “grooming children for the sex trade.”   Deborah DeGroff’s book, Between the Covers, documents the extraordinarily foul language and sexually explicit situations in children’s literature.  My own book, Confronting the Deception, reveals the manipulation and indoctrination of children for political purposes.

Academics shame boys for “toxic masculinity” and coach girls that the boys are robbing them of career opportunities, intruding into girls’ locker rooms and bathrooms, and winning their trophies on sports teams.  The boys are shamed with feelings of guilt, disgrace, and lost esteem – mind control and exploitation for outright group adherence.

Accusations of “white supremacy” contribute to willing subservience and acceptance of the 1619 narrative, their undermining, and emasculation, the hard evidence being a dramatic drop in testosterone levels.  Unable to overcome the constant barrage of denigration, they are engineered into resenting society’s alpha males and made unsuitable for military and police forces.  Confused and frustrated, they develop a penchant for property demolition and wanton theft and harming – even killing – those who think differently, whether neighbors or law enforcement.  Socialism demands disrespect for personal property.  Those who do not lash out this way but still cannot cope with society may become fearful, seek safe spaces, fail in the classroom, and escape to drugs, and more.  The suicide rate has doubled for boys, tripled for girls.

Multiculturalism is socialism repackaged – the division and victimization of everyone.  Of course, we accept differences in ethnicity, religion, and race, but our culture must be exclusively American in America, governed by American laws.  The children must have a sense of commonality and acceptance, yet white children are made to feel guilty of crimes they did not commit, and children of color are made to feel abused and stateless, a sense of not belonging anywhere. The 1619 Project divides further, the result being that our social cohesion is being ripped to shreds. 

Using race as justification, our children are deprived of reading the classics by “old white men,” which is foundational to improving language skills, reading comprehension, and imagination.

They are reading dystopian stories.  With every new opportunity to wallow in a victimized past, they are consequently robbed of future success in the adult world.  Twenty percent of high school graduates haven’t attained basic reading proficiency by graduation.  The average American reads at the 7th– to 8th– grade levels; 4% are nonliterate.

Disguised as a compassionate accommodation, academia is launching a program for children of color that will actually diminish their language skills, keep them unqualified and unsuitable for better employment and success, fulfilling the claims of systemic racism.  This will further disunite and divide them, impede communication between the races and other nationalities, isolate them further and harm them psychologically.  These are American children who must share the same culture and language.  Instead of falsely adjusting grades, teachers must improve their own skills to fulfill their obligations, perhaps through music, returning them to the classics, and inviting parents and neighbors to participate.  Already experiencing ostracism, some children of color are demanding separate dormitories – a very destructive, self-imposed apartheid.

The overall results of this education, further exacerbated by The 1619 Project, have been disappointment, anxiety, depression, increased sexual activity, anger, and violence.   They are trained to disrespect the family, their neighbors, their country, and property; they also disrespect themselves.  This is truly devastating.

Against this background, we now have Nicole Hannah-Jones, described as a Marxist-trained, rabid racist, responsible for the implementation of The 1619 Project. She alleges that she does not seek to erase the Declaration of Independence and our constitutional republic, but her followers are further along in their thinking.  The year 1619 is purported to be when the first African slaves were brought here through the Muslim slave trade, but slavery has been humanity’s established institution as far back as 3500 BCE and based primarily on armed conflicts with populations that were vulnerable because of weakness or contiguity.

A nation’s birth is not established because of mere residency or migration – not for the Paleo-Indians who arrived during the last Ice Age, not for the Vikings who came around 985, not for the Portuguese Jews who arrived in 1542, not for the Filipinos who arrived in 1587, not for the Chinese who arrived in the 1850s, and so on.  Rather, our founding fathers created this nation for the good of all, with the groundwork that allowed for advancement, and when our laws were declared, agreed, signed, and instituted.  That was 1776.

Hannah-Jones’s imaginative document, eagerly published by The New York Times, awakened the enemies of our treasured freedoms.  It built upon the already existing victimization, violated our laws, and unleashed unbridled crime that resulted in explosive behavior heretofore unseen in America.  It gave the green light to BLM (Black Lives Matter) Marxists/communists, the globalists, Antifa fascists, neo-Nazis, Islamists, and the underinformed group-thinkers, to riot against America, setting fires, causing property destruction in the billions of dollars, harming our police forces.

Instead of learning respect for and allegiance to America and their fellow Americans, children are repeatedly assaulted with negativity, and The 1619 Project belittles the white students with charges of racism while angering the students of color for what their ancestors may have endured – without explaining that slavery is human history – and based on proximity, weakness, color, religions, wealth, and the ideology of expansionism.  Contrary to the narrative, there are many paintings that verify the Arab enslavement of white women, but this aspect of slavery is not discussed.

Despite all the hardships, opposition, adjustment difficulties encountered by the many new migrant groups by an unwelcoming society, we reject the accusations of “systemic racism.”  Our laws guarantee the freedoms decreed in 1776.  Rather than dwell on the negativity that greatly harms our children, it is best to celebrate the hope and beauty that is America.  The American Dream is alive and well for 41% of Americans, and another 41% who believe they are on their way.

Project 1619 teaches disrespect and hate for America.  Our youth are not only burning flags and destroying statuary that represents American history, but they are now advocating the elimination of the Star-Spangled Banner and changing cities named for the figures we have revered historically.  They will not thrive in their adulthood with this concentration on misery.  They cannot be expected to read, learn, study, and excel in anything if their minds are riveted on victimization, false social justice issues, and the unproven climate change hoax. The emphasis on resentment emerges as violence because they are robbed of a decent education, creativity, and other means of expression.

When I completed my five-minute talk, one person asked how I would reverse the damages I cited.  I suggested that we must remove Common Core, the divisiveness and discord, and propagandist textbooks, and return to pre-Obama days when the children aligned with each other, their school, their state, their country – E Pluribus Unum.  Another member said he hoped people listened and heeded what I had to say.  Nevertheless, within a brief time, another invitee was asked to testify, and I felt as though I had not been challenged sufficiently.  Was I inadequate?  Had I not inspired more questions?

By three o’clock in the morning, I awoke with a realization that the Board members did not challenge me because they were aware and in accord with the points I had made.  These teachers and educationalists did not challenge my accusations because they knew these ills abounded, but they were doing nothing.  I concluded that academia is very aware, but that the teaching staff is obliged to comply with the leftist Board of Education.  Their job is to agree and follow their instructions.

If the parents will not rise in opposition, their children – and our country – will fall.

10/21/20

Remembering Martha Mitchell

By: Linda Goudsmit | pundicity

Does anyone remember Martha Mitchell? I do.

Martha Mitchell was the wife of John N. Mitchell, United States Attorney General under Richard Nixon. Martha had a habit of listening in on John’s phone calls and meetings and then phoning her media friends with political scoops.

John Mitchell and Richard Nixon became acquainted through their professional careers when their law firms merged and became Nixon Mudge Rose Guthrie Alexander and Mitchell. In 1968 Nixon appointed John Mitchell as his attorney general. The Mitchells moved from New York to Washington DC, and into the Watergate apartment complex.

In 1972, John Mitchell resigned as attorney general and became the director of the Committee to Reelect the President (CREEP), and Martha became an outspoken DC socialite who regularly went on talk shows and frequently talked to the press. During the campaign, Martha began telling her media contacts that CREEP had begun resorting to dirty tricks to win the election.

The dirty tricks Martha Mitchell referred to were the stealing of top-secret documents and the bugging of phones at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) offices in the Watergate complex. The wiretaps failed to work properly the first time, so on June 17, 1972, five burglars broke into the Watergate offices to finish the job. Four of the burglars, James McCord, Frank Sturgis, Eugenio Martinez, and Bernard Barker, had CIA connections. The fifth, Virgilio Gonzales, was a locksmith in Miami who fled Cuba after the Castro takeover.

A week before the break-in, the Mitchells traveled to Newport Beach, California to attend a series of fundraising events. John Mitchell was notified that his wife had made these explosive allegations. He denied Martha’s extraordinary claims at a news conference and then engineered the plan to keep her in California. Mitchell hired Steve King (former FBI agent) to isolate Martha and make sure she knew nothing about the Watergate break-in and could not contact any reporters.

In a 1973 interview with English journalist, David Frost, Martha Mitchell recounted the horror of being held captive in a California hotel for four days. Martha was a political liability and collateral damage of Nixon’s dirty tricks. She needed to be silenced and discredited. Of course, we now know that Martha was telling the truth, but her life was destroyed. She was publicly shamed, divorced, estranged from her children, and died alone from a rare bone cancer in 1976. Martha Mitchell was a warning.

John Mitchell was convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury in connection to the Watergate break-in. He spent two years in prison from 1977-1979 but was never brought to trial for having his wife kidnapped. John Mitchell died in disgrace on November 9, 1988, yet was buried with full military honors in Arlington National Cemetery. Now, back to the dirty tricks.

In August 1972, Nixon lied to the American people in a speech insisting he was not connected to the burglary in any way. The truth is that Richard Nixon was deeply involved in the dirty tricks, the coverup, and had instructed the CIA to impede the FBI investigation of the crime. Obstruction of justice and abusing presidential power are far more serious crimes than the Watergate break-in itself. Sound familiar? It should.

Like Nixon, former President Barack Obama abused his presidential powers and obstructed justice by weaponizing the FBI and CIA for political gain. Barack Obama had the FBI and CIA illegally spy on the Trump campaign through fraudulently acquired FISA warrants. Obama’s Democrat minions, and their globalist handlers, have been trying to overthrow America-first President Donald J. Trump, the duly elected sitting president of the United States, for four years. The current hypocritical Democrat jibber-jabber about a peaceful transfer of power following the outcome of the contentious 2020 presidential election would be laughable if it weren’t so serious.

The ongoing Democrat dirty tricks and multiple coup attempts against President Trump have escalated to a politicized Martha Mitchell effect. I will explain.

The Martha Mitchell effect is when a psychiatrist mistakenly or willfully identifies a patient’s true but extraordinary claims as delusions. It is an unconscionable attack on objective reality and the person’s ability to reality test. Before Martha Mitchell’s unfortunate clash with the deep state, what was done to her was called gaslighting.

Wikipedia explains that “gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or group covertly sows the seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question there own memory, perception, or judgment, often evoking in them cognitive dissonance and other changes, including low self-esteem.” The goal of gaslighting is to destabilize the individual and delegitimize the victim’s beliefs and claims.

For movie buffs, the term gaslighting is derived from the 1944 film Gaslight starring Ingrid Bergman and Joseph Cotten. In the film, the husband deliberately tries to convince his wife that she is insane. Gaslighting is a particularly sinister attack on a person’s perception of reality.

In my August 17, 2020, article “The Riddle of Animals and Small Children,” I discuss how the radical leftist Democrats and their globalist handlers are attempting to regress chronological adults back to childish thinking where they can be easily manipulated and controlled. It is malicious and intentional exploitation of the NOW thinking of childhood. It is a psychological operation, a PSYOP.

If a chronological adult can be frightened enough to regress his thinking back to that of a child, he will respond like a child. That is the foundation of the deliberate disinformation and fear campaign gripping the country today. The unconscionable lies presented in Biden’s campaign ads are approved by Joe Biden. These deliberate lies are designed to frighten seniors. The Biden political machine knows that if they can frighten seniors enough, the seniors will regress back to childish acceptance and believe Biden’s lies instead of examining President Trump’s record. It is a political PSYOP.

On October 14, 2020, the New York Post broke the explosive story of Hunter Biden’s laptop with its incriminating emails, and the entire political landscape changed. The article, “Hunter Biden emails show leveraging connections with his father [Joe Biden] to boost Burisma pay”, ignited a firestorm. Subsequent emails released from the trove expose the Biden crime family, and its deep financial involvement with communist China.

The Democrats, big tech Twitter, Facebook, and Google immediately went into overdrive to censor the story and deny its claims as “Russia disinformation” and a “false narrative.” Russia again?? Yup – the enemies of objective reality trotted out their tired, old, debunked, false Russia narrative yet again.

Epoch Times reported on October 17, 2020, “Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the House Intelligence Committee chairman and a top Democrat claimed that the Post stories on Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine and China are part of a smear campaign and comes from the Kremlin.” Director of Intelligence John Ratcliffe immediately dismissed Schiff’s claims. “It’s simply not true,” Ratcliffe continued. “And this is exactly what I said I would stop when I became the Director of National Intelligence, and that’s people using the intelligence community to leverage some political narrative.”

If it weren’t so dangerous, it would be entertaining to watch the desperate Democrats do everything they can think of to drive Americans into their world of lies and subjective reality. Big tech and the mainstream media are actually following the communist Chinese propaganda model of censoring, distorting, and falsifying the news for social control. This should frighten every American regardless of their political views. Without freedom of speech, there are no individual freedoms in society.

Today, the increasingly deranged radical leftist Democrats, and their globalist handlers are resorting to gaslighting. With the help of the colluding tech giants and mainstream media, they are trying to gaslight the American people and make them believe that the Biden crime family is innocent, and being falsely accused! This attack on objective reality is the culmination of the sinister war on America and the war on America-first President Donald J. Trump.

Russia is not interfering in the election, it is the big tech Internet companies and mainstream media that are attempting to steal the election for their candidate, Beijing Joe. Like John Mitchell, they should be charged with conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury for their part in the plot to censor the explosive story of the Biden crime family.

The evidence of staggering political malfeasance discovered on Hunter Biden’s laptop is the quintessential smoking gun. Yet, when President Trump refers to the Biden crime family, the colluding big tech companies and mainstream media politicize the Martha Mitchell effect and willfully identify the “true but extraordinary claims” as delusions.

DOJ Attorney General William Barr, John Durham, Christopher Wray (FBI), and Gina Haspel (CIA) are the gatekeepers of the deep state Washington swamp. They have slow-walked, and deliberately impeded the investigations into Democrat political malfeasance that would have exonerated President Trump; proved the truthfulness of his claims; and exposed the illegal and deeply troubling dirty tricks being used to overthrow him.

It is essential to understand that Joe Biden’s family’s financial involvement in China makes Joe Biden a serious threat to national security. The coordinated attacks on President Trump are attempts to gaslight America. If they succeed and Beijing Joe Biden becomes president, China will not just own America, China will rule America.

President Trump has endured an unprecedented four-year campaign of anti-American, pro-socialist, pro-communist, pro-globalist deep state attacks on his presidency and his America-first policies. Why?

Because President Donald Trump is the singular force standing between American freedom and tyranny. Vote for freedom. Vote for Trump!

10/21/20

Chairman Thomas Klingenstein of the Claremont Institute: America’s Choice Between Trump’s Freedom and Biden’s Revolutionary Radicalism

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Alex Brandon / Associated Press

Thomas Klingenstein is the chairman of the conservative think tank, the Claremont Institute, and he’s an accomplished businessman. In this video, he is stating his private opinion and feelings. And he does it magnificently. Recently, he gave a speech entitled: “Trump 2020 A Man vs. A Movement” on YouTube that has since gone viral with over a million views. Rush Limbaugh promoted it as well. Why? Because Klingenstein lays out the stark choice between electing President Trump, who believes in America and freedom, and Joe Biden, who is a Trojan Horse for the Left who believes in Marxism, cancel-culture, and the destruction of the American way of life as we know it.

This election is without a doubt the most important one of our lifetime. Probably the most important since 1860 and President Trump is the right man for the office at this point in time for America. He is what we need and possibly the one man who can pull us back from the brink of communism. It doesn’t matter whether you like him personally, look at what he has accomplished, and what he plans to do as well as what he stands for. Then look at Joe Biden… arguably the most corrupt vice-president we have ever had as a nation. He simply marinates in corruption daily and uses his family to accomplish his goals and enrich himself via the Ukrainians, the communist Chinese, or whoever else he can bilk.

Democrats would have you believe that this election is about Trump versus Biden. That’s not it and it is a critical point that even the Republicans seem to not grasp. It’s also not solely about race, the economy, or the Coronavirus. It is about the inherent goodness of America versus the evil of Marxism. This is the ‘change’ the Left has been trying to foist on this nation for decades and they now believe it is within their grasp. When Hillary Clinton lost in 2016 and failed to keep the Left’s plan on track, they panicked. Democrats simply could not let a loose cannon like Trump mess up their plans. So, they have unleashed the militant arm of the Democratic Party – Black Lives Matter and Antifa to bring chaos and bloodshed to our streets. This will continue whether Trump wins or not and the cold civil war the US has been mired in for several years now could very well go hot if the riots and unrest are allowed to continue. It will be aided by the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party – the media.

As Klingenstein has posited it, “the election is about America’s character: specifically, whether America is a good country or whether it should be canceled.” That is what all of this boils down to and I firmly believe that the vast majority of Americans believe in the goodness of our country. Republicans seem to be deaf, dumb, and blind when it comes to the orchestrated revolution raging in our streets. They don’t get that since a soft coup did not do the trick against Trump, that a color revolution is the next planned step for American communists. See George Soros and the Obama State Department who have conducted color revolutions across the globe. These two opposing views of America cannot coexist peacefully.

The Founding Fathers’ system of government was built on individual rights. The Left’s form of preferred government is based on groups’ rights and group-think which are based on communist principles. And as opposed to a Constitutional form of government where all rights are respected, the radical Left believes in the suppression of rights of those that disagree with them and the squelching of voices on media platforms such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube.

Just look at the stated goals put forth by Biden, Harris, and the Democrats. They want to end the family unit, erase our history as a nation, throw open our borders to all, encourage live and at-will abortions, and strip us of our right to bear arms. If you view the 45 Communist goals for America, you will find that every single one of them is what the Democrats are pushing for right now and many have already been accomplished. And the Republicans have slept through it all not wanting to rock the political boat.

Remember when Michelle Obama said this: “Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we’re going to have to change our traditions, our history; we’re going to have to move into a different place as a nation.” She meant it and it was a blatant announcement prepping Americans for what the Left had in mind for the United States. They are working hard at accomplishing it. If Americans are fearful to come out of their homes, are silenced at every turn, and fear for their jobs and families, then the Left will have succeeded at the subjugation of the freest nation this planet has ever known.

Democrats use the cry of ‘racism’ as a political bludgeoning tool to silence those who do not agree with them. But it is not racist to disagree with BLM, Antifa, or communism regardless of what they claim. Americans need to stand up and be heard no matter how hard the Left tries to silence them. Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” He was right and this is the time to speak up and act no matter the consequences or conservative Americans will surely learn what it is like to live in a totalitarian society replete with gulags and reeducation camps. The Left has already proposed this with the “Truth and Reconciliation Commission.”

Trump is a man of his time. He’s not perfect but he has the intestinal fortitude, common sense, bluntness, and willingness to fight that Americans need desperately at this moment. He loves America, the military, and our police. He believes in the rule of law and keeping our way of life good and just. Biden is a Trojan Horse for the Left that will deliver social justice, critical race theory, liberation theology, the Green New Deal, Marxism, crushing taxation, defunding of the police, and globalism… in short, communism.

Americans need to choose wisely on November 3rd because the fate of the Republic is at stake here. This is a choice between good and evil; Constitutional Conservatism or Cultural Marxism. On the one hand, you have the moral Right and on the other, you have the godless Left. It’s time to choose a side and fight for what we believe in. And President Trump is the man to lead that fight.

For full context, the transcript of the video follows:

THOMAS KLINGENSTEIN: My name is Tom Klingenstein. I am the chair of the board of the Claremont Institute which is a conservative think tank, managing partner of a New York investment firm and playwright.

I wish to make three points. First, Trump is the perfect man for these times, not all times, perhaps not most times, but these times. Second, Republicans are not doing a good job explaining the stakes in this election. They must explain, and this is my third point, that the Democratic Party, which has been taken by its radical wing, is leading a revolution. This makes the coming election the most important one since the election of 1860. Let’s begin there.

Unlike most elections, this one is much more than a contest over particular policies—like health care or taxes. Rather, like the election of 1860, this election is a contest between two competing regimes, or ways of life. Two ways of life that cannot exist peacefully together.

One way of life, I’ll call it “the traditional American way of life,” is based on individual rights, the rule of law, and a shared understanding of the common good. This way of life values hard work, self-reliance, volunteerism, patriotism, and so on.

In this way of life there are no hyphenated Americans. We are all just Americans. Colorblindness is our aspiration.

The other way of life I call multiculturalism. Others call it “identity politics” or “cultural Marxism” or “Intersectionality”.

The multicultural movement, which has taken over the Democratic party, is a revolutionary movement. I do not mean a metaphorical revolution. It is not like a revolution; it is a revolution, an attempt to overthrow the American Founding as President Trump said in his excellent Mt. Rushmore speech. Republicans should say the same thing. Republicans everywhere, at every level, and at every opportunity.

Multiculturalism conceives of society, not as a community of individuals with equal rights but as a collection of cultural identity groups—defined by race, ethnicity, gender, and so forth. According to the multiculturalists, all these identity groups are oppressed by white males.

Their goal is to have each identity group proportionally represented in all institutions of American society. As should be immediately clear, achieving this proportional representation requires a never-ending redistribution of wealth and power from some groups—and not just from whites—to other groups. Such a massive redistribution can only be achieved by a tyrannical government and like in all tyrannies, one where dissenters are silenced.

In order to achieve this proportional representation, the Democrats require not just endless affirmative action but genuine socialism, open borders, unrestricted trade, seizing guns, sanctuary cities, and much more.

The Black Lives Matter/Democrats understand (which Republicans seem not to), that if they are to achieve this policy agenda they must get Americans to change their values, their principles, and the way they understand themselves.

They must get us to believe that national borders and colorblindness are racist; that we are not one culture but many; that the most important thing in our history—the thing around which all else pivots—is slavery. More broadly, the multiculturalists must get us to believe that we are unworthy—not just that we have sinned (which of course we have)—but that we are irredeemably sinful, or, in the language of today, “systemically racist.” And sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic and all the other “ists” and phobias. Simply put, multiculturalism must get us to believe we are bad.

This suggests one way to frame the coming election: as a contest between a man, Trump, who believes America is good and a man, Biden, who is controlled by a movement that believes America is bad. I do not think it is any more complicated than that.

For the multiculturalist to change traditional values and principles they must destroy, or radically restructure, the institutions that teach those values and principles. The most important of these institutions is family, but also very important is religion, education (which they have mostly destroyed already) and community life, replacing the latter with government bureaucrats. It is here—in these value-teaching institutions—that we see the underpinnings of the Revolution. This is where the real action is. Republicans seem to be missing in action.

Republicans need to explain that BLM and their Democratic enablers wish to destroy the traditional mother-father family. To substantiate this claim, Republicans have only to point to the BLM mission statement. The mission statement, written by avowed Marxists, also lets us know that BLM holds transgenderism to be the burning issue of our time.

Republicans must also explain that religion, because it teaches American values, is also on the chopping block.

Republicans also must make American see that the taking down of statues is not about removing a few confederate generals; it’s about destroying America’s past, as is the New York Times 1619 Project. The rioters, and their BLM-Democrats enablers, are tearing down the statues even of people like Frederick Douglass who fought against slavery. This is not an accident. It is not collateral damage. Frederick Douglass was a great American. He believed that America in her soul was not racist. He believed in hard work and self-reliance. And because of his embrace of American values the BLM-Democrats have to get rid of him.

They must also get rid of Abraham Lincoln, for it is he who best explains what we should aspire to. And it is he who is the best defender of the American Founding. In one sense, this election is a referendum on the Founding. Whether America was founded in 1619, as the BLM-Democrats contend, or, in 1776 as Lincoln, and, until recently, all Americans believed.

Republicans must make more of political correctness and cancel culture, which, as we have seen so vividly of late, brutally punishes apostates.

Who does Twitter think it is, censoring an American president? Republicans simply cannot stand for that.

And Republicans must explain, as I earlier explained, that the multiculturalists are trying to get us to believe that we are systemically racist so that we will surrender to their policy agenda. This too must not be allowed to stand. The American people need to hear what they know in their hearts: they are not racists. Republicans should stand up and say, “no, America is not racist.” Period.

If Americans are systemically anything, it is a systemic commitment to freedom and equal rights for all.

Perhaps most importantly, Republicans must say over and over that America is “incredible,” to use President Trump’s adjective of choice. They must remind the American people that, as a friend of mine is fond of saying, America has brought more freedom and more prosperity to more people than any country in the history of mankind. Most Americans know this, but this too they need to hear from their leaders.

In order to make the case that the Democrats are leading a revolution, Republicans must delegitimize Black Lives Matter—the organization, of course, not the sentiment. To BLM and their Democratic enablers, Republicans must say: “Absolutely, black lives matter. They just don’t matter to you. You don’t care about Mr. Floyd, the black businesses you have destroyed, the blacks who are getting killed because you have forced the police to back off. You’re here for destruction. Not black lives, not any lives.”

After delegitimizing Black Lives Matter, the next step for Republicans is to tie BLM’s revolutionary agenda around the necks of Democrats.

The BLM wing of the Democratic party has captured the entire party. Run-of-the-mill Democrats may not agree with all of the BLM agenda but they go-along, so they might as well agree. Joe Biden is one of the go-along Democrats.

So do not expect all Democrats to sing the BLM tune; even so, most will kneel before them.

Listen to Biden. On one occasion Biden said, “Let’s be clear, transgender equality is the civil rights issue of our time.” A year ago, Biden may not have even known what transgenderism is. He does not seem to know it, but he has been radicalized.

Biden now regularly talks about “systemic” racism. On one occasion Biden said, though without evidence, there is “absolutely systemic racism in law enforcement.” “[But] it’s not just in law enforcement,” he continued, “it’s across the board. It’s in housing, it’s in education . . . It’s in everything we do.”

He is wrong on every count, but if indeed he believes that racism is in “everything we do,” that it is systemic, then he believes, whether he admits or not, that the system must be overturned. Biden does not realize it, but he is calling for the overthrow of the American way of life. I presume that is not his intent, but when the words he is reading off his BLM teleprompter get translated into policy, that will be the consequence — the destruction of the American way of life.

Biden demurs. There is nothing to fear from Biden says Biden: “Do I look like a radical socialist with a soft spot for rioters?” No, he does not, but what he does look like is a sap.

Republicans must make it clear that these are the “Biden riots.”

This brings me to my last point: Trump. I know President Trump has many faults. I myself sometimes cringe listening to him. Sometimes he is his own worst enemy. He is a braggart, often misinformed, petty, sometimes even vengeful. And more.

And yet, we are very lucky to have him. I am almost prepared to say that having him is Providential. How else to explain that we find ourselves with this most unusual, most unpresidential man who has just the attributes most needed for this moment. At any other time, he might well have been a bad president. But in these times—these revolutionary times—he is the best president we could have had.

He has the indispensable attribute of a leader: courage. As a leader must, he goes where others are afraid to go. And he has common sense, which means he generally wants to go to the right place.

Above all else, and above anyone else, Trump is committed to America. He is unreservedly, unquestionably pro-America. He feels no guilt for America’s past. He makes no apologies. He concedes nothing. These may not always be the attributes one wants in a President, but in this day of woke guilt they are the most essential things. And Trump has unlimited confidence in America. In this time of national doubt, this too is just what the doctor ordered. He thinks our culture is “incredible” and that’s the way he wants to keep it.

Trump not only thinks America is incredible, he knows we are in a fight for our lives.

And despite what one hears ad nauseum from the Democrats, Trump is perhaps among the least racist presidents we have ever had. Trump is not defending the white way of life; he is defending the American way of life, a colorblind way of life which is open to anyone who is willing to embrace it.

If we want to save our country, then we should support him—unequivocally. I am. I think this election is that important, and I think Trump is that good. I hope you agree.

Remember, Trump versus Biden is the choice between a man who believes America is good and a man who is controlled by a movement which believes America is bad.

10/12/20

What can we do to get a reasonably honest election?

By: Publius Huldah

A disaster of monumental proportions is likely to be ahead for our Country if we don’t take emergency action to get at least a reasonably honest election.  Not only the President’s seat, but also the entire US House, the Houses in the State Legislatures, one/third of the seats in the US Senate, and a proportional number of seats in the State Senates, are all at stake in the upcoming election.

We are faced with irrefutable proof that the Marxists intend to steal the election.  And they will not content themselves with stealing only the President’s seat – they seek to steal every seat on the ballots.

So we need to face up to the problem and take immediate action.

  1. What does Congress have the constitutional authority to do?

The President and Vice President are supposed to be elected using the procedures set forth in Article II, §1, cl. 2, and the 12th Amendment to our US Constitution.  But we have ignored those provisions for a great many years; and it’s too late to obey them for the upcoming election of President and Vice President.

But Congress still has constitutional authority to invoke Article II, §1, cl. 4, which invests in Congress the power to determine the time of chusing the Presidential Electors and the Day on which they vote.  That date is currently set for November 3, 2020.

Pursuant to Article I, §4, cl. 1, Congress may make laws determining the “Times, Places and Manner” of holding the federal elections to Congress.

Since we know that Trump ballots have been tossed into dumpsters, and election offices have been flooded with fake Biden ballots; the best course of action would be for Congress to make a law which reschedules the November 3 election to a later date, and cancels everything which has been done so far respecting the election (at least since the primaries).

Congress could then exercise its constitutional authority to establish common-sense procedures respecting the “Time, Place and Manner” of voting in the upcoming elections.  For example, Congress could pass a law providing that:

  • Every registered voter who wants to vote must physically appear at his officially designated place of voting and produce proof of identity.
  • Election Day should be one day – not weeks and months before & after the date set for the election.
  • Absentee voting should be restricted to those who are out of the country or out of state due to military service, service in the diplomatic corps, missionaries stationed overseas, businessmen stationed overseas, etc.

We used to do it this way.

But the Marxists came in with their hard-luck stories about how these requirements were harsh, unfair, discriminatory, and so forth; and so our side [as usual] caved in and went along with the demands which stripped us of the ability to have even reasonably honest elections.

However, because Marxists now control the House, Congress lacks the ability to act as suggested above.

  1. What does the US Supreme Court have the constitutional authority to do?

Article I, §4, cl. 1 provides that the power to set the “Times, Places and Manner” of voting in federal elections is delegated exclusively to the Legislative Branches of the State & Federal governments [LINK]. Accordingly, and consistent with the Principle of “Separation of Powers” and the “political question” doctrine [LINK], the Judicial Branches of state and the federal government have no lawful authority to substitute their views on these issues for those of the Legislative Branches.

Even so, with respect to the upcoming elections, lawless federal and state judges have been usurping power by substituting their views respecting the “Times, Places and Manner” of voting for the views of State Legislatures.  Some judges are ruling that because of COVID-19, voters shouldn’t be required to go to the polls – everyone must be allowed to vote by mail; and the time for counting ballots must be extended.

Obviously, the Supreme Court has no constitutional authority to substitute their views respecting the “Times, Places and Manner” of voting for those of the legislative bodies.  Instead, the Supreme Court’s duty is to issue orders and judgments which adhere to what the Constitution says.

So the Supreme Court should overturn the usurpations orders of state and federal judges who attempted to usurp power over this issue.  They should remind The People of our Country that only the State Legislatures and Congress may address these issues – that judges must keep their hands off.   The power isn’t given to the Judicial Branches.

But a recent case out of South Carolina indicates that the most we will get from the Supreme Court is an unprincipled “cut the baby in half” compromise.

South Carolina law provides that a witness must sign an absentee ballot for the ballot to be valid. The Marxists (or their dupes) objected to this requirement and sued.  Using COVID-19 as the excuse, the federal judge disagreed [!] with the statutory requirement for a witness, and said the State couldn’t enforce it.  South Carolina election officials applied to the US Supreme Court for a stay of the lower Court’s order. 1

On October 5, 2020, in Andino v. Middleton [LINK], the Supreme Court stayed the Order, except to the extent that any ballots cast before they granted the Stay and received within two days of their Order may not be rejected.

So the Supreme Court’s Order is nothing for us to celebrate.  The Supreme Court is allowing several days’ worth of unlawful ballots to be treated as valid; and thus are rewarding the trial judge’s usurpation of powers granted to the South Carolina Legislature, by allowing these unlawful ballots to be counted.

But our good Justices, Thomas and Alito, and Gorsuch as well, would have granted the Stay in full and disqualified all the unlawful absentee ballots.

Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion suggests that, like the majority, he doesn’t understand that the Judicial Branch has no constitutional authority to alter State election laws re the “Times, Places and Manner” of holding elections.  To the contrary, he pointed out that the actions of the lower Court violated Supreme Court precedent that (1) an unelected federal judge ordinarily shouldn’t make public health decisions which overrule State Legislatures, and (2) federal courts ordinarily shouldn’t alter state election rules in the period close to an election.  Yikes!

So while the Supreme Court might “give” us some relief from the massive cheating, it seems unlikely that they will provide a principled defense of our Constitution.

  1. What must State Governments do?

State governments may be the only way salvage, at least to some extent, the upcoming election.  Since the Judicial Branches of the State and federal governments have no constitutional authority to change the decisions of the Legislative Branches respecting the “Times, Places and Manner” of federal elections; State Governments should instruct the Election Officials for their State that they must obey & enforce the election laws passed by their state legislature and not the usurpations orders of judges.  Judges have no constitutional authority to change what the State Legislatures do on this issue!

Election officials should also be shown that judges have no power to enforce their orders & judgments – that they depend on the Executive Branches of the federal or state governments to enforce them. We are doomed if Americans remain unable to grasp this simple concept.

Endnote:

1 The better course of action would have been for South Carolina to nullify the lawless opinion of the federal judge by refusing to enforce it.  Remember! Federal judges have no army – they can’t enforce their Orders.  They must depend on the Executive Branch of the federal gov’t to enforce them.  Who thinks President Trump would send in the National Guard to force South Carolina election officials to allow cheating in the upcoming election?  If those officials had been familiar with what Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 78 (6th para), they would have known this.

10/7/20

Cultural Marxism’s Origins: How the Disciples of an Obscure Italian Linguist Subverted America

By: Sam Jacobs – Ammo.com

Cultural Marxism's Origins: How the Disciples of an Obscure Italian Linguist Subverted AmericaYou may have heard the terms “Cultural Marxism,” “Critical Theory” or “Frankfurt School” bandied about. And while you might have an intuitive approximation of what these terms mean for America in the 21st century, there’s a good chance that you don’t know much about the deep theory, where the ideology comes from, and what it has planned for America – and the world.

The underlying theory here is a variant of Marxism, pioneered by early-20th-century Italian Marxist politician and linguist Antonio Gramsci. Gramscian Marxism is a radical departure from classical Marxism. One does not need to endorse the Classical Marxism of Marx, Engels, and others to appreciate the significant differences between the two. He is easily the most influential thinker that you have never heard of.

Whereas Classical Marxism located what has been called “the revolutionary subject” (the people who will overthrow capitalism and usher in socialism) within the broad working class, primarily in what is now the First World, Gramscism takes a very different approach. This approach underpins most of the social unrest that is gripping America and the West today. In a sense, we are living through the endgame of a Gramscian revolution.

There are two important diversions that Gramscism has from more traditional Marxist thought: First, that economics was the base of culture and politics. Second, philosophical materialism in the Marxist sense where reality is effectively formed by the means of economic production.

For Gramsci, culture was more important than either economics or politics. This was what needed to be changed for there to be a revolution. As such, the weapon to be used for revolution was not the economic might of an organized working class, but a “long march through the institutions” (a phrase actually coined by German Marxist Rudi Dutschke), whereby every institution in the West would be subverted through penetration and infiltration.

Throughout this article, we will use the term “Cultural Marxism” as a catchall to refer to this phenomenon, because it is the most all-encompassing and does not limit us to discussing any one specific variation (Gramsci, the Frankfurt School or what have you). Finally, we should briefly mention that the claims of Dr. Jordan Peterson notwithstanding, Cultural Marxism is ideologically distinct from postmodernism and deconstruction, both of which are hostile toward Marxism. We will not touch on either postmodernism or deconstruction in this article, though they certainly have been influential on the international left.

The Origins of Cultural Marxism

Cultural Marxism's Origins: How the Disciples of an Obscure Italian Linguist Subverted AmericaThere is a tiny kernel of Cultural Marxism within Classical Marxism. Namely, that Marx himself was obsessed with the kinds of detailed critiques that later came to characterize Cultural Marxism – for example, The Critique of the Gotha ProgramAnti-Dühring (which is actually by Engels), Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Rightand A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. This is perhaps best exemplified by the famous remark in Theses on Feuerbach that “philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.”

Antonio Gramsci, however, seems to be the best place to locate the genesis of Cultural Marxism proper. Gramsci was the son of an Albano-Sardinian low-ranking government official. Without engaging in too much psychoanalyzing, it is probably not a coincidence that the son of a low-ranking civil servant was able to see the power that low-ranking bureaucrats would have if all of them were guided by the proper ideology.

Gramsci attended the University of Turin where he studied linguistics – not philosophy or economics. Health and financial problems led him to leave his studies prematurely, shortly after he joined the Italian Socialist Party. In this period, as well as the period immediately following the Russian Revolution, Gramsci was a fairly standard Communist, though he did occasionally have disagreements with the party line, none of which are relevant to the development of Cultural Marxism. Beginning in 1924, he was the head of the Italian Communist Party. For this, he was arrested by the Fascist government in 1926, and sentenced to 20 years in prison under newly enacted emergency laws. He died in prison on April 27, 1937, at the age of 46, due to a number of untreated health problems.

It was in prison that Gramsci began formulating the core of his theory, which would later form the core of leftist thought throughout the West. In the Prison Notebooks, he broke from Classical Marxism, formulating a new and largely distinct ideology:

  • Cultural hegemony is a more important factor in maintaining capitalism than economic or political hegemony.
  • Cultural and social education of workers must be performed to create a class of worker-intellectuals capable of combating capitalism.
  • Civil society is distinct from political society. The latter rules through domination and coercion, whereas the former rules through normalization and consent.
  • Rejection of materialism (the primacy of the material world) in favor of a semi-mystical view of history, as well as a greater degree of cultural relativism.
  • Further critiques of economic determinism (the notion that economics is the primary driver of human history and civilization) and philosophical materialism (the philosophical claim that the material world is either the only reality or the most important one).

Later theorists, including the famous Frankfurt School, which introduced elements of Freudian psychoanalysis, antipositivism (the notion that human society cannot be studied using the scientific method), and existentialism, a philosophical movement that posits that “being determines consciousness” and sees humanity as necessarily hemmed in by a variety of forces beyond their control.

There has been an attempt to smear the identification of the Frankfurt School and similar currents as Cultural Marxism as an expression of anti-Semitism and (of course) a “conspiracy theory.” While there are certainly anti-Semites who talk about Cultural Marxism, they often do so from the perspective of an obsession with the alleged “Jewish” nature of the intellectual tendency. We reject both the characterization of Cultural Marxism as somehow “Jewish” as well as the notion that its existence is a “conspiracy theory.” Nor do we propose that there is some centralized ideological cabal directing the contemporary left from a Cultural Marxist perspective. It is simply that these ideas have become fashionable among the left over the last 50 or so years.

Whatever one seeks to label the modern ideological underpinnings of the left, it is clear that it has its foundation in the ideas articulated by Gramsci, the Frankfurt School, and their intellectual descendants such as Rudi Dutschke and others.

Gramsci’s Children: The Frankfurt School

People often refer to the Frankfurt School as some kind of nebulous ideological current. In fact, it was a discrete group of scholars working together at a specific period of time. While they shared many assumptions and conclusions, they were not entirely homogeneous, mostly in terms of their focus of study.

The Frankfurt School was, in fact, the Institute for Social Research, an adjunct facility of the Goethe University Frankfurt. It was the first fully Marxist research institution at a German university and it was funded through the generosity of well-to-do scion of an Argentine grain merchant, Felix Weil. The Frankfurt School is marked by an interdisciplinary approach. Rather than studying art, culture, politics, and philosophy, they studied the interplay between them all from a Marxist perspective.

During the interwar period, the Institute was moved first to Vienna and then to New York City, where they joined Columbia University, to avoid the rise of fascism in Europe.

György Lukács and Reification

The first important figure for our purposes to come out of the Frankfurt School is György Lukács, the son of a wealthy Hungarian investment banker. He is frequently published under the name Georg Lukács. Lukács was no armchair theorist: He was a leading light in the Hungarian Revolution of 1917, as well as one of the leading theoreticians of the Hungarian Red Terror during the Hungarian Soviet Republic. After the fall of the Hungarian Soviet Republic, he had a falling out with the international leadership of Communism. He later went to the Soviet Union, where he was detained and internally exiled. He returned to Hungary in 1945. His relationship with Stalinism is ambiguous and a hotly debated topic among historians, but he was the primary instrument by which the Hungarian Writers’ Union was purged.

His primary contribution to Cultural Marxism is reification, the notion that everything becomes an object under capitalism and that people under capitalism are more like things than human beings. He also said that Marxism would still be valid if it were proved to be false because it is a methodology of social transformation above all else.

Herbert Marcuse and Repressive Tolerance

Another important figure in the development of Cultural Marxism is Herbert Marcuse. He is often referred to as “the Father of the New Left.” It is potentially worth noting that he worked for the Office of Strategic Services, which was the forerunner of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Like Lukács, Marcuse had direct experience in revolutionary movements in postwar Europe. He was a participant in the Spartacist Uprising in Germany, which was an abortive attempt at forming a Soviet-style government in that country. Curiously, some of his work in the late 1920s and early 1930s was a collaboration with Martin Heidegger, who later became the sort of unofficial philosopher of the Nazi regime in Germany. A number of radicals have cited Marcuse as a major influence, including Angela DavisAbbie Hoffman, and Rudi Dutschke.

Marcuse’s most important contribution as far as we are concerned is the notion of “repressive tolerance.” In his A Critique of Pure Tolerance, Marcuse argues for something that will be familiar to readers of this website: Tolerance should only be applied to left-wing groups and ideas, while right-wing groups and ideas should be mercilessly suppressed. Specifically, he advocated for “withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements that promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion, or that oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc.”

Marcuse is perhaps the most influential of the Frankfurt School thinkers in the United States. Anytime you hear a leftist explain why tolerance actually means intolerance, they’re channeling Marcuse.

Max Horkheimer and Critical Theory

Finally, there is Max Horkheimer. The son of a wealthy Orthodox Jewish family, Horkheimer’s father owned a series of successful textile mills in Stuttgart. He was drafted at the beginning of the First World War, but was rejected on medical grounds and then enrolled in Munich University. By 1926, he was in Frankfurt, and by 1930, he was a professor of philosophy at Frankfurt University. When the Institute for Social Research directorship became vacant, Horkheimer was elected to this position thanks to a mysterious endowment made by an anonymous wealthy businessman.

It was under Horkheimer’s watch that the Frankfurt School’s raison d’être became fusing the ideas of Karl Marx with those of Sigmund Freud. He was the father of Critical Theory, which is less a “theory” than it is a rhetorical technique of viewing everything – except, of course, Critical Theory – through a critical lens and an eye toward discrediting social institutions. Horkheimer curiously (though perhaps not surprisingly) arrived at Critical Theory while appraising his own role as the scion of a bourgeois family who was ostensibly a proponent of the proletarian revolution.

Perhaps the most didactically “Critical Theory” work of Horkheimer was Dialectic of Enlightenment. Among other things, it argues that popular, mass culture is a sort of mechanized and industrialized means by which authoritarian control is maintained over the broad mass of Westerners.

There are other figures in the Frankfurt School, however, to catalog each and every one would make for a much longer text. We present the above three as exemplars of the intellectual tendency and a solid basis for understanding it.

The Long March Through the Institutions

Cultural Marxism's Origins: How the Disciples of an Obscure Italian Linguist Subverted AmericaWhile it is often attributed to Gramsci – and in a sense, he is the godfather of the notion – the “long march through the institutions” was, as stated above, a phrase coined by Rudi Dutschke, a German Communist activist. The phrase itself is a nod to the “Long March” of the Chinese Communists.

The long march represents another significant shift in thought away from Classical Marxism. In Classical Marxist thought, the state is seen as an instrument of class oppression, which can be conquered and used by the proletariat as a weapon against the bourgeoisie. Classical Marxists did not seek to occupy the existing state and leverage it for their own purposes. Rather, the Classical Marxists believed it was necessary to destroy the instruments of the bourgeois state and construct a proletarian state in its place.

Some key concepts underlying this theory: First, the state is an instrument of class domination and, as such, is fundamentally based on economics or what Marx called the infrastructure. Everything else – culture, religion, art, politics – was superstructure or something built on top of the class-based, economic structure.

What’s more, “class” is not defined in relative terms, such as how much income one makes or even how much one owns, but rather on the relationship to production. A poor farmer was probably worse off than an urban worker but was not a proletarian because he owned the means of production, even if these means were meager.

The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was, in every meaningful sense, a Marxist revolution. A parallel state based on participatory workers’ organizations was led by a self-consciously revolutionary party to topple the existing state and erect a new one in its place. Indeed, Lenin acted on clear definitions from Marx about what constituted “the state”: “armed bodies of men,” that is to say, police, courts, prisons, and the military. The Bolsheviks did not simply take the existing “armed bodies of men” and use them for their own purposes. Nor did the Communists of Eastern Europe. They destroyed existing institutions and replaced them with their own.

The bottom line of the difference between Classical Marxism and Cultural Marxism is that the latter sees the state as effectively neutral – something that can be taken over and used for its own purposes – while the former does not. Cultural Marxism is interested not in a revolution in the classical 19th-century sense of throwing up barricades, toppling the monarchy, and setting up guillotines. Its interests lie in cultural transformations, after which other transformations (political and economic) can take place.

The long march through the institutions is in many ways exactly what it sounded like. Proponents of Cultural Marxism were expected to go out there and ingratiate themselves into every aspect of society. Once there, whether this was in bowling leagues or board rooms, they would push their ideology and attempt to transform society. It wasn’t as dramatic or sudden as the revolution espoused by Classical Marxists and their Marxist-Leninist children, but it was considered both more effective and, more to the point, necessary for the fundamental transformation of society. Once the cultural institutions had been changed, the political and economic transformation could be enacted.

A final note: The change of the “revolutionary subject” is an important topic to consider. Whereas Classical Marxists were quite dogmatic about their belief that it was only the working class who could effect a revolution, Cultural Marxists saw the revolutionary subject basically anywhere else, viewing the traditional Western working class as apathetic at best and actively reactionary, bordering on fascistic, at worst. This was not entirely limited to Cultural Marxists – the entire Trotskyist movement split after the Second World War over the question of whether or not the Eastern European states were revolutionary and whether or not peasant guerilla warfare was a path to revolution.

Cultural Marxists, however, saw the revolutionary subject virtually anywhere but the working class. Third world peasants, student radicals, the non-aligned movement, racial and ethnic minorities, homosexuals, the mentally ill and transsexuals – all of these and others have been considered the vanguard of cultural revolution around the world by the Cultural Marxists. The shift of the revolutionary subject from workers to virtually everyone else is effectively an attempt to create a political-coalition-meets-religious-cult centered around notions of victimhood.

The Weaponization of Critique

The primary weapon of the Cultural Marxists is a constant, neverending critique of Western culture and civilization. It’s not a terrible oversimplification to say that the fundamental premise of the “Critical Theory” arm of Cultural Marxism is “when you think about it, isn’t everything kind of problematic?”

Indeed, there is nothing “deep” about this theoretical tack, it is simply a case of “when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” This rhetorical technique has informed and distorted virtually every aspect of Western culture – moving far beyond academia and infecting the mass culture. Air conditioning is sexistLawns are racist and so are single-family homesNot wanting to be intimate with someone who is HIV positive contributes to homophobia and the spread of AIDSPhysical fitness is a fascist impulse and trying to lose weight is a hateful act.

All of these might sound silly and marginal, and in a sense they are. However, it is important to note how dramatically the culture in the West has shifted since the 1950s – and how dramatically it has shifted even in the last ten years when Barack Obama still opposed gay marriage and no serious person advocated that grown men who “identify as women” should be allowed to share restrooms and locker rooms with pre-pubescent girls. The other important takeaway from this is that the proponents of Cultural Marxism can find a way to tie virtually any topic to some imagined “system of oppression,” then fill in the blanks with the appropriate argument.

In the language of the Cultural Marxists, this is known as analyzing “ruling understandings” or the dominant ideology of a culture. Of course, there is a “dominant ideology” underpinning this method – the notion that every claim or stance requires careful examination from a critical perspective. Every belief held by Western civilization for the last 100, 200, 500, 2,000 years is subject to critical analysis, the goal of which is to “expose” the belief as nothing more than a weapon designed to subjugate and suppress members of the coalition of victims that Cultural Marxism seeks to assemble in its war against Western civilization.

Far from being a neutral form of analysis, Cultural Marxism starts with the assumption that every aspect of Western civilization is some kind of a conspiracy (conscious or otherwise) to keep a certain group of people in their place. This creates what Victor Davis Hansen has called a “subjective righteousness.” There is no place for individual responsibility for good or for ill. Rather, there is only the analysis of power. Those who are judged to have it, by the priests of Wokeness (effectively a Cultural Marxist framework), can do no right. Those who attack them can do no wrong.

Eternal truths, no matter how self-evident, are not truths at all, but narratives constructed by a ruling elite to perpetuate their own rule. Absolutely nothing is to be spared from the ruthless line of Cultural Marxism and Critical Theory. This leads to an inversion of traditional values, where the values that have served Western civilization for thousands of years are painted as negative features. The male desire to protect women from danger becomes “patriarchy” and “paternalism.” The drive to attain mastery over the self and the environment that almost entirely defines Western culture is repainted as an “authoritarian personality.” The normal desire for marriage and children becomes “heteronormativity,” just one option among many and a bad one at that. An appreciation for the philosophical and cultural achievements of Western civilization is “white supremacy,” an arbitrary system with no goal other than to keep other races down.

There is also this process identified by a semi-famous KGB agent, Yuri Bezmenov:

  • Demoralization: This is whereby people are made to lose faith in their own culture and their institutions. Society is made to be something that isn’t worth fighting for.
  • Destabilization: During this phase, the culture and society itself are made unstable. A situation is created whereby “anything can happen” and people simply cannot rely upon things to be the same from one day to the next.
  • Crisis: The manufacturing of a large crisis about which “something must be done.”
  • Normalization: The “new normal.” The new way of doing things is normalized through constant propaganda that this is “just how the world is now.”

All of these ideas are likely familiar to you. That is because, when considered objectively, Cultural Marxism has been a resounding success in the Western world.

Is Cultural Marxism a Real Threat?

Cultural Marxism's Origins: How the Disciples of an Obscure Italian Linguist Subverted AmericaOne of the common responses among the left, particularly those on the center-left, is that Cultural Marxism isn’t a real thing or, at the very least, that it has failed to influence culture in any meaningful sense. It’s important to point out that it isn’t necessary to prove the existence of Cultural Marxist foot soldiers self-consciously infiltrating our institutions to show that Cultural Marxism has influenced American culture and Western culture more broadly. It is simply necessary to look at what their aims are and to see if those aims have been met.

The radical transformation of society over the last 60 years and the acceleration of this transformation can be attributed to a number of factors, including Cultural Marxism, neoliberalism, the destruction of civil society, and the welfare state. It’s worth pointing out the degree to which Cultural Marxism has influenced public discourse in the country and, indeed, the broader West. In Western Europe, for example, Cultural Marxist dialogue is much more explicit and overt than it is in the United States.

To see the influence of Cultural Marxism, one need look no further than any left online publication. But it’s worth identifying the importance of Cultural Marxism in Western universities. The ideas of Cultural Marxism are hardly the purview of economic, political, and cultural elites. Indeed, they are pushed on just about any college student from the community college level all the way up to the Ivy League. What’s more, there is a strand of Cultural Marxism called critical pedagogy that is all about introducing these concepts to younger and younger children.

Cultural Marxism can be seen in the rise of grievance studies, those areas of “study” which are little more than political parties within the university. This includes ersatz academic disciplines such as women’s studies, African-American studies, “queer studies,” and even whiteness studies – the last of which, unlike the studies that precede it, is about pillorying and villainizing whites rather than a sort of narcissistic view at their own history. The degrees granted by these disciplines are, of course, totally useless, leading to a mass of young people who are woefully unprepared to enter the job market while simultaneously saddled with massive amounts of debt. Such people are naturally easy pickings for leftist movements seeking to destroy society.

The presence of Cultural Marxism in elementary education is a clear-cut example of the long march through the institutions largely being a successful enterprise. The indoctrination of college students produced generations of college graduates who went on to share these ideas with younger and younger children. Nowhere more than in public education has the long march through the institutions been more successful.

Séxual education for very young children is one particularly lurid example of Cultural Marxism. Indeed, teaching children about séx has been a significant issue for doctrinaire Cultural Marxists. But as disturbing as this drive is, it is part of a broader trend of trying to indoctrinate children in the fundamentals of Cultural Marxism and its methodology of “critiquing” Western civilization.

This process of indoctrinating children has accelerated since the beginning of the riots of summer 2020. The National Education Association, one of the most powerful teachers unions in the United States, has a handy page for teachers to get their “education justice” resources from. The NEA website approvingly links to a website that proudly declares itself globalist, “queer affirming,” “trans-affirming” and “committed to disrupting the Western prescribed nuclear family structure.”

Much of this starts from the supposition that everyone, white children, in particular, have “unconscious biases,” effectively a form of racial hypnotism whereby people are “racist” without knowing it. Indeed, even the definition of “racism” has been shifted from what is a common-sense definition shared by most people to an esoteric one whereby all whites – including babies – are “racist.” This is the philosophical basis of “white guilt” and “white privilege” theory.

Alongside the smearing of all whites as racist, there are attacks on the nuclear family, heterosexuality, and biological séx as socially constructed for the purpose of social control and suppression. This might sound like something that will only be taught in schools in California, however, it is important to note that because of the lucrative California textbook market – to say nothing of the far-left nature of the teachers’ unions in the United States – that what children in California are being taught today, children in Kansas will be taught tomorrow.

The education system is largely where the rubber meets the road in terms of Cultural Marxism moving from an esoteric academic ideology into something that influences the broader culture. It is not a mistake that a number of educators have been found among the ranks of the rioters. Nor is it a mistake that the rioters are disproportionately young and educated. They have been primed for this by 12 years of public education and another four at the university level – teaching them that Western civilization is an evil construct designed by white heterosexual men for the purpose of enslaving everyone else.

Further, there is Cultural Marxism in the mass media. After all, when one combines Gramsci’s analysis of the importance of culture and Horkheimer’s claims about the controlling nature of the mass media with the long march through the institutions’ strategy, it makes sense that Cultural Marxists, conscious or otherwise, would seek to infect mass culture with an eye toward subverting traditional Western ideas and replacing them with Cultural Marxist dogma. Much of the conservative revulsion against the values and ideology pushed by Hollywood is in fact a bristling at Cultural Marxist propaganda. Detailing each and every example of this would take an entire book, but we’re sure that you can think of some “favorite” examples of your own off the top of your head.

When this is understood, it’s easy to become discouraged and defeated with regard to the future of the West. There are literally multiple generations of Westerners who have been so thoroughly indoctrinated in the basics of Cultural Marxism through the education system, that they have the same relationship to this world view as a fish within water. There are no easy answers with regard to how to begin reversing the course and, thanks to the pervasive influence of Cultural Marxism in our education system, they have largely accomplished their aims of a “long march through the institutions.” Virtually every aspect of society – except for police and their unions – has become dominated by Cultural Marxists, witting or otherwise.

While we can’t propose any sweeping solutions here, it is worth noting that the first step toward combating this ideological and cultural menace is being able to identify it, understand it and, above all, call it out whenever it is seen in action. Much like the long march through the institutions, this might not be a sexy “one-and-done” type of solution, but it might well be the only weapon that we have against them.

An important part of combating Cultural Marxism is simply studying social history and the history of ideas. To take an example of low-hanging fruit, America, the West, and white people did not invent slavery, however, they did more to eradicate it from the face of the earth than anyone else. Mental gymnastics are often required to argue against even the most basic refutations of Cultural Marxism and such mental gymnastics often expose the proponents of Cultural Marxism as uneducated, unprincipled, or just plain wrong.

Finally, reject political guilt. Those who push guilt do so in bad faith as a form of weaponizing the Western sense of fair play. If the West is responsible for slavery and genocide – which, in limited cases it is, but it is by no means unique in this regard – it is also responsible for vaccines, sanitation, and the massive decline in child mortality rates. You are not individually responsible for either the great moral crimes of Western history nor its great technological successes. The correct answer is a nuanced picture that takes the good with the bad and sees Western civilization as a constant work in progress, rather than a static conspiracy designed to rob everyone but “old, rich, white men” of their due.

10/4/20

Civilization(s) in Decline

By: Retired General Paul Vallely | CCNS

History tells us that a civilization or an empire has six stages of evolution.

  • Age of pioneers and/or explorers
  • Age of conquests seeking new land and resources
  • An age of commerce and agriculture ( and now technology)
  • An age of influence and class diversification
  • An age of affluence, education, intellect, and healthcare
  • An age of decadence and loss of values [i]

Some civilizations reach their peak of power, then collapse and remain in decline or even disappear. Others thrive for thousands of years. What accounts for the difference and what does it matter to the U.S.?  Does our civilization have what it takes to survive? With the United States seemingly at the height of its power and at the start of a new presidential term, Americans are increasingly concerned and divided about where we are going. How long can America remain ascendant? Where will we be as a nation 10 years from now and beyond? To save America and the world, we must rebuild the traditional culture of America, return to our traditions, values, and upgrade morality.

A collapse in a society can be characterized by the loss of cultural identity. These collapses can be caused by natural disasters (floods, fires, earthquakes, etc.), pandemics, prolonged warfare, pestilence, famine with depopulation of the society. A collapsed society or culture may revert to a more primitive state, absorbed into another society, and disappear completely. [ii]

In Douglas Murray’s The Strange Death of Europe, the author offers a sobering assessment of modern Europe and raises unsettling questions about the future. “At any time, the loss of all unifying stories about our past or ideas about what to do with our present and our future would be a serious conundrum,” Murray writes. “But during a time of momentous societal change and upheaval, the results are proving fatal. The world is coming into Europe at precisely the moment that Europe has lost sight of what it is.” Most significantly, Murray questions whether Europe is still Christian. He cites the absence of any mention of Christianity in the European Union’s new constitution, written in 2000, despite the efforts of Pope John Paul II and his successor. The EU instead wraps itself in high-flown rhetoric about “human rights” without any acknowledgment of their source.

Murray traces this crisis of identity back to the late 19th century, to two seminal events. First, the textual criticism of the Bible, originating in Germany and spreading throughout the West, undermined the Biblical foundation of Western Christianity. The second seismic blow occurred simultaneously, with the development of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. Whereas it had been a foundational belief that a divine, awe-inspiring plan was behind all of civilization, it suddenly was widely held that science — not faith — held all the answers.

The challenge for Europe that it is coupled with a massive influx of immigrants and raises the more serious question as to whether European civilization and historic nations will even survive. First, the millions of immigrants who have entered Europe in the past five years have already altered these societies. When coupled with current birth rates for native and non-native populations, the impact grows quickly in future years. Second, there is little indication that these immigrants assimilate into Western civilization and European cultures and reside in ghetto “no go zones”.  Third, there is also little indication that the liberal democracies of Western Europe have the will, the leadership, or sense of purpose to require assimilation.

The death of Europe is “strange” indeed and is the result of fatal self-inflicted wounds by well-intentioned and misguided governments — governments that sadly mirrored the philosophical, spiritual floundering of their own people. You can also attribute the decline in Europe to weak and misguided leaders.

Unlike all previous civilizations, modern industrial civilization is powered by an exceptionally rich, non-renewable, and irreplaceable energy source—fossil fuels.  This unique energy base predisposes industrial civilization to a short, meteoric lifespan of unprecedented boom and drastic bust.  Megacities, globalized production, industrial agriculture, and a human population approaching 8 billion are all historically exceptional—and unsustainable—without fossil fuels for a considerable period.   And, while there are energy alternatives, there are no realistic replacements that can deliver the abundant net energy fossil fuels provide in the foreseeable future.

Unlike past civilizations, the economy of industrial and a high-tech society is capitalist in nature requiring a profitable operation and efficient organization. Production for profit is the driving force.  The unprecedented surplus energy supplied by fossil fuels has generated exceptional growth and enormous profits over the past two centuries.  But in the coming decades, these historic windfalls of abundant energy, constant growth, and rising profits may vanish.

However, unless it is abolished, capitalism will not disappear when boom turns to bust.  Instead, energy-starved, growth-less capitalism will turn catabolic.  Catabolism refers to the condition whereby a living thing devours itself.  As profitable sources of production dry up, capitalism will be compelled to turn a profit by consuming the social assets it once created.  By cannibalizing itself, the profit motive will exacerbate industrial society’s dramatic decline.

Unlike past societies and civilizations, industrial civilization is not Roman, Chinese, Egyptian, Aztec, or Mayan.    Pre-industrial civilizations depleted their soil, their forests, and polluted rivers.  But the harm was far more temporary and geographically limited. Once market incentives harnessed the colossal power of fossil fuels, the energy revolution began.

Human civilization’s collective capacity to confront its mounting crises is crippled by a fragmented political system of antagonistic nations ruled by corrupt elites who care more about power and wealth than people and the planet.  Humanity faces a perfect storm of converging global calamities.  Intersecting tribulations like climate chaos, rampant extinction, food and freshwater scarcity, poverty, extreme inequality, and the rise of global pandemics are rapidly eroding the foundations of modern life.

How people respond to the collapse of a capitalist civilization will determine how societies survive and what will replace it. The challenges are monumental.  They will force us to question our identities, our values, and our loyalties like no other experience in our history.  Who are we?  Are we, first and foremost, human beings struggling to raise our families, strengthen our communities, and coexist with the other inhabitants of Earth?  Or do our primary loyalties belong to our nation, our culture, our race, our ideology, or our religion?  Can we put the survival of our species and our planet first, or will we allow ourselves to become hopelessly divided along national, cultural, racial, religious, or party lines?

Great civilizations are not built in a day, nor do they collapse suddenly. Deterioration is gradual, therefore noticeable. In the Land of Israel, the First Temple was destroyed due to idolatry. The Second Temple was destroyed due to baseless hatred. In the 21st century, the subtler combination of irrationality with pusillanimity constitutes the fatal concoction. Our relationship to the obvious serves as an index through which the symptoms of decline are noted. Let all concerned for the commonwealth take caution, for here is how we sophisticated moderns lose civilization:

History reveals that great civilizations decline and fall due to internal erosion, not external invasion. Intrinsic corruption and corrosion invite outsiders to raid, rape, pillage, and plunder. Conquest is thus merely the coup de grace (a coup de grâce is a death blow to end the suffering of a severely wounded person or animal. It may be a mercy killing of mortally wounded civilians or soldiers, friends, or enemies, with or without the sufferer’s consent) – a finishing stroke in the aftermath of prolonged dissolution. In most cases, conquerors appear more impressive than they deserve because the conquered first methodically, albeit unwittingly, lay the groundwork for them. Any species of predatory brutes can kick in a Maginot Line, and most do.

Most historians and scientists agree that we are in the last stage of a declining civilization which is the age of decadence. All civilizations come to an end, some do it peacefully while others do it abruptly and with a lot of chaos. 2000 years ago, the Roman Empire was the most powerful and technologically advanced society in that era, yet they have fallen just like other civilizations but recovered in a new way.

Why is the US in decline? Many of the same reasons Rome declined.

  • Religion and Western culture are under constant threat and assault
  • There is an unequal application of justice in Europe and America
  • Decline and attack on the nuclear family
  • Increasing depravity in the media, art, and entertainment
  • Increase in violent crime and insurrection
  • Declining middle class
  • Moral decay with the approval of the government
  • Widespread government corruption
  • The combining of government and corporate power
  • The failure of people to act
  • Disease

The Roman Empire was the richest and most advanced civilization of its era, but this did not prevent it from falling. The decline of any civilization takes a long time and most people do not even notice it happening as all they see is that things are getting worse year by year.

Each civilization will have the same fate, it is just a matter of time. While we do see signs of a declining civilization throughout the western world there are civilizations that have just started the age of commerce and affluence and most of these countries are 3rd world countries. Eventually, 3rd world countries would rise after the western civilizations fall apart, making the western civilizations 3rd world countries.

What is different now from historical civilizations decline.

Destruction of the family core

During the past, several years there has been a war on core family values which eventually will lead to the decline of civilization as we know it. It is increasingly risky for a man to marry and have children, as around 50% of marriages end up in a divorce. Schools indoctrinate our children with liberal poisons. Socialism is presented as something positive. If any conservative child/student dares to speak out, he or she will be isolated by liberal teachers.  There is truly little or no education in history, patriotism, morality, or spiritual life. Internet almost works as a death trap, it constantly churns out poisonous programs filled with fake news, foul languages, violent /decadent programs.

Mass stupidity

We live in the most prosperous time for humanity, our technology has come so far that we no longer need to worry about basic needs such as food, water, and shelter. Nowadays most people take everything for granted, and few of them know the joy of a hard day at work. With the current culture of giving praises and celebrating people who lost in a race, what is the point of being first if you all get the same trophy and congratulations?

We live in an age where students think that communism is a viable form of government like everybody would have a good job, nice house, car, and so on. But history has taught us that communism does not work in the long run, everybody will be dirt poor except the ruling class. I have several friends from former communist countries, during that era once you got married you got a small apartment from the government, what people do not tell you is that everything was rationed like in a wartime situation.

Although Christian holidays were banned during the communist era, people still celebrated it in secret. Good old Christmas miracles during the communist era where every year somebody would snitch on a neighbor celebrating Christmas and the secret police would drag the entire family away. A couple of weeks later somebody new would move in and nobody from the neighborhood would dare to ask any questions of what happened to the family that has been dragged away.

The signs of a declining civilization are present all around us. We need to look up from our cell phones, Twitter, Facebook, and computers and take a good look at people’s and politicians’ behaviors. Every civilization will come to an end eventually. We must save America before the decline is so great that we cannot recover!