Globalism’s demise requires that we fully reorganize American Federalism to recognize that “The market may not account for the benefits our country receives from parental engagement,” that we ask not what how we can serve the market, but how the market will serve the American people. This economic platform, commonly tied to European-style ‘Christian democracy’, demands “conditions which allow single-income families to support themselves with dignity” while repealing “corporate welfare policies, for shifting the tax system to target unearned income and reckless financiers, and for changing regulations to benefit small and locally-owned businesses rather than multinational corporations.”
After 243 years, America has become a product of history separate from its founding principles inscribed within its Constitution — principles promoting ancient Judeo-Christian values which embody Western philosophy and English legalism. […]
Now in the third decade of the 21st century, the international liberal order (that is, liberal democracies) faces an existential crisis — a crisis of its own making. Its guiltiest parties are not the politicians, but rather the gullible voters who, for generations, elected individuals with utopian visions which appealed to their fantasies driven by passions not grounded in reality. For example, can we say that America still reflects its foundation? Or has that run its course and become a product of history? By knowing history better, we may project our likely future as a nation. As Winston Churchill, a noted historian in his own right, observed, “The farther backward you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.” The Globalist Left today, in unison with the European Union, is reconstructing America to resemble qualities utterly anathema to her history.
Enter in 2019 the Intellectual Dark Web (or, IDW) ―an ideologically unmoored ensemble of thinkers and individuals from all backgrounds who, while willing to disagree (and at times, do so fiercely), they nevertheless embrace the principle of civil conversation and disengagement. This list of leading figures of the IDW varies in gender, sexual orientation, race, and political affiliation, and do not form alliances based on their identities or tribal affiliation. As the organization’s website concludes on its front page, while most figures “have been more-or-less roasted by the campfire by their ‘tribe’ and the online public at large,” they nevertheless “have been able to find a wide audience that resonates with what they have to say” ―and in other words, form ‘new tribes’ in the spirit of democracy (but not at the ballot box) because “they are willing to voice what others think, but are too unwilling to say publicly.” As a result, they don’t pretend to have the answers to life’s questions (no one but God has those), but they are willing to offer suggestions for anyone willing to consider them.
So is it the president guilty of racism for accusing Congressman Cummings of using the Oversight Committee to bully border officials? That the president’s use of the term ‘infestation’ was a direct reference to people of color, as if Baltimore’s ‘other 47 percent’ do not matter? Or did he successfully call out the Left for protecting their loyal constituents at any price? In which the Democrats, the party representing the residents of Baltimore, who demand improved conditions for access to employment, housing and city-wide sanitation to prevent the spread of disease, just openly pandered to the black vote by condemning anyone daring to leave ‘the Democrat plantation’ should they, like Kimberly Klacik, fall away from their Marxist narrative?
Friday’s Rasmussen Poll revealed something else about the Democrats’ current ideological shift: voter now see most of the Democratic presidential candidates as more liberal than they are, and rate their agenda as outside the mainstream. Just 25% of Likely U.S. voters consider most of the announced candidates for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination to be about the same as they are in political terms. Fifty-four percent (54%) say most of these candidates are more liberal than they are, while only 13% say they are more conservative. They perhaps understand that, as the heartbeat of America, they would fall prey to the whip’s hand of free-loading non-citizens arriving in the U.S. at the invitation of the Democrats’, who are openly orchestrating region-wide ethnic cleansing. Their policies indeed marginalize American taxpayers to a status of second-class citizens in their own country, governed by wealthy politicians and bureaucrats who would rule by decree under a new apartheid system similar to South Africa before 1990.
In America and Europe, the practice of ‘book burning’ is being repeated, one written about extensively by science fiction author Ray Bradbury in Fahrenheit 451 (1953). It happened during the Middle Ages, and it returned throughout most of the 20th Century. Public schools and universities have adopted ‘revisionist’ curricula and censor what the authorities consider ‘offensive’ about America’s past, including the Founding Fathers and our own Constitution. But today, it is not a theocracy or global dictatorship responsible. Rather, it is the corporatist media to which the Democrats have co-opted to fulfill the tasks that they legally cannot. What you are seeing today is led by extremely wealthy, powerful men and women in the media, the popular culture, even in the realm of financing and Wall Street — many of whom you can see; others you have not, nor will you ever.
Markus Willinger, a grad student of history and political science from Schärding, Austria at the University of Stuttgart, published a manifesto in 2013 entitled Generation Identity: A Declaration of War Against the ’68ers. The term ‘68ers’ refers to the postmodern philosopher Jacques Derrida’s belief that the year 1968 was the phase of transitioning the counterculture movement into…
“To-day the deliberate increase in the chances of death,
The conscious acceptance of guilt in the necessary murder.”
— W.H. Auden, ‘Spain’
Perhaps the key to explaining who I am or who you are is to define ‘What is the Individual?’ The online Business Dictionary will define him using the most generic, two word term as the first explanation: ‘A person’. That person is effectively a soulless cog in the machine of a cold, steely world, void of warmth and possessing untapped potential. This leads to the second explanation, that an individual is “A distinct, indivisible entity, often one among many others of a similar kind” — a majority of one who possess a vote, a distinct, unique intellect with certain talents with a more undetermined potential energy as a free agent and consumer in a much broader economic strata.
Because of this slight difference between rebellious nature to destroy Christian morality under ‘the Hitler faith’ (the Jewish Jesus Christ), and the amoral, godless dogma driving the utilitarian nature of Communism, the matter that mass murder and state terrorism was not a matter for debate. The reason, the largely irrelevant position over who should die between the racially unfit or those classes (bourgeoisie) failing to justify their existence was, not if or why, given they were one-and-the-same demographics. Because of this, the difference between history’s two most genocidal ideologies, in the words of Joseph Goebbels, are slight.
As Joseph Stalin once noted, “Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.” The politically correct end likewise for Democrats and the globalist elites is to reconstruct a brave new world where “all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so,” be it through “war without bloodshed” or “politics with bloodshed”. Other prominent leftists like Russell and Margaret Sanger rejected traditional Judeo-Christian checks on human sexuality stunting the spread of scientism and secular humanism that reinforce Aryan supremacy as with National Socialism, or though those who otherwise fell under the Marxist-Leninist umbrella of “Scientific racism… an equal opportunity discriminator.” After all, anyone alive with a “defective gene pool” or resistant to ‘correct political views’ can fall prey to those profiting off ‘blood money’. After all, Planned Parenthood — as “self-consciously organized” by its founder, Sanger — was designed “in part, to promote and enforce White Supremacy” by packaging feminism as the great liberator for women oppressed by all “Marriage laws… a continuous sexual slavery and a compulsory motherhood… dictated and dominated by the Church always and ever upon the unquestionable grounds of the wisdom of the Bible”. Such a ‘somewhat unpleasant’ slippery slope acknowledged by Russell would never apply to racial and political “thoroughbreds” like Hitler, Russell and Sanger tabbed to preside over a “Population Congress” under the United Nations — for they, as “Really high minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s.” Targeted specifically would be ‘True Christianity’ — what Jean-Jacques Rousseau defined to be the Christianity of the Gospels — and Judaism, in light of the return of the Jews to the Holy Land of Israel. And the scientists perfecting ‘technique’ to attack both, according to Russell, “will be rigidly confined to the governing class.” Without such secrecy reinforcing this massive foundation of ignorance necessary for driving the left-wing globalist elite, how else could billions be brainwashed “produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable”? It is here where history, coupled with resurrecting the organic and true nature behind the development of Anglo-American semantics through lexicology that could launch a third Great Awakening of the nation’s Judeo-Christian principles in today’s godless postmodern America.
The young, disgruntled intellectual elitist Ben Shapiro, editor-in-chief and owner of the conservative online publication The Daily Wire, has got the phenomena behind the enthusiastic embrace of the reboot to Roseanne all wrong. He actually believes that America was, once upon a time, this majestic Utopia and a paragon of moral perfection, and in the process, he frequently paints American history using a separate, yet equally dangerous revisionist palette from the one the Left prefers under dialectic materialism. He appears under some delusion that perhaps his biggest fan, former porn star and now sober mother Jenna Jameson, now a devoted conservative and like Shapiro, Jewish, must be cast aside under some misguided presupposition that while all conservatives are equal, some must be more equal than others. Collectively chiding conservatives as if all are supporters of President Trump for “celebrating because they believe that Roseanne is helping to cure the culture by depicting a Trump supporter as something other than a rube or an idiot,” he channels his inner Hillary Clinton, albeit softly, by redefining all conservatives as ‘Trump supporters’ who are today “blue collar leftists rather than conservatives.” Roseanne Barr’s character was for him a rare economic capitalist outlier pounding away as an equally militant ‘pro-gay-marriage, pro-abortion, feminist, and pro-transgenderism’ militant, and that conservatives now view her, as a Trump supporter, to be “a good person because of these views.” In spite of Roseanne’s far left-wing sister Jackie reminds her and the rest of the ‘deplorable’ American Right that they instantly resort to violence in the wake of opposition, Shapiro conspicuously reinforces this narrative by defining the “real difference between Trump voters and Hillary voters,” as “economic in nature, not cultural,” and that ‘The average conservative fan of the new show’ remains, in his mind, nothing other than ‘a rube or an idiot’ that he forgets also supports free speech, the Second Amendment, the power of prayer and family bonding, while being aware that as grandparents, Roseanne and Dan were quite limited in the roles with their grandchildren.