↓ Archives ↓

Archive → November 24th, 2016

Order out of chaos: The defeat of the Left comes with a cost

Why would anyone want a president?As I noted in my last article World suffers from Trump shellshock — here’s what happens next, there are two primary consequences of a Trump presidency that actually serve globalists and elites in the long run.

The first is the consequence of a perfect scapegoat for the economic crisis which the elites have been gestating since 2008.  Trump enters the White House with a clear political mandate, a mandate that supposedly gives conservatives more power than at any other time in U.S. history.  This mandate might seem like a miracle, a free hand of power to sovereignty and liberty champions to defeat the collectivist  tyranny of cultural Marxists on the Left once and for all.  However, it could also backfire because under this mandate everything bad that happens under Trump’s watch can be blamed on Trump and his followers.  Conservatives have been given almost absolute influence over government; by extension, they also inherit absolute responsibility, whether they like it or not.

I examined this first consequence in detail in numerous articles leading up to the 2016 election.  In fact, it is the primary reason why I was so certain Trump would be president.  He is the perfect scapegoat, or the perfect conduit.  Under Trump, the last stage of economic collapse can finally be initiated by the financial elites and most of the world including half the population of the U.S. will immediately and without question blame conservatism, nationalism, sovereignty advocates and Trump for the disaster.  They won’t think twice about looking in the direction of global bankers.

For those that immediately scoff at such a notion, I highly recommend they research the concept of 4th Generation Warfare.  I also highly recommend study into a Department of Defense paper called From Psyop To Mindwar: The Psychology Of Victory, written by Major Michael Aquino (a self proclaimed “satanist”) and Colonel Paul Vallely (today a self proclaimed liberty champion).  I would also compel people to read The Art Of War by Sun Tzu, the same manuscript that all recruits of the CIA are required to read.

The essence of the most advanced form of warfare is the ability to defeat an opponent, or a population, without having to fight at all.  Instead, the master tactician seeks to influence his opponent to surrender without fighting, or, to influence his opponent to destroy himself.  This is accomplished primarily through propaganda, subversion, asymmetric warfare (terrorism and insurgency) and most importantly, co-option.

As I noted in my last article, if you want to be able to accurately predict future events, you must understand the minds of the people with the most influence over those events.  The financial elites, highly motivated and highly organized, are the single most important gatekeepers to geopolitical change today.  Know their mind, and you will know the general path tomorrow will take.

This is not to say that the elites are “omnipotent.”  Frankly, they don’t need to be.  With the utter lack of vigilance and awareness within our society, the elites only need to be relatively intelligent and exceedingly morally bankrupt to manipulate the masses. When skeptics argue with me that the elites would “have to be omnipotent to influence the social narrative in the manner I describe,” I have to laugh.  Any person of above-average intelligence and unlimited capital (as the financial elites have) can do considerable damage to a society, bring empires to their knees and condition the populace to think and react in a specific fashion.

If I had the same resources at my disposal as the elites have (and the same lack of conscience), I could probably do a far better job than they when manipulating geopolitical outcomes. They make numerous mistakes if you pay close attention to their actions.  I hardly consider myself the smartest person around, let alone “omnipotent.”  This is a silly notion.  The reality is, the more ignorant the population, the easier it is to control and misdirect them.  To the ignorant, the elites might seem “omnipotent.” They aren’t; they merely have more-intelligent-than-average people at their disposal and printing presses to pay for everything they want.

The smarter and more vigilant any given population, the more difficult it is to influence them through deception.  This is very simple.  To put it even more bluntly, the elites get away with subversive tyranny because there are too many willfully stupid people.

Following this line of thinking, there is a second consequence of Election 2016 that greatly concerns me — the potential for co-option of the Liberty Movement, the only existing opposing force to globalism.  Co-option requires the centralization of a group in thought and deed under the influence of a small number of hands, or a single white knight figure.  As I noted in my article Will a Trump presidency really change anything for the better?, published in March of this year:

The other ingenious aspect of the Trump campaign is really who he is running against — Hillary Clinton, a rabidly liberal candidate even more hated than Barack Obama. A candidate with a potentially serious criminal record and a penchant for an outright communistic world view far beyond that of Bernie Sanders. Those of us who have been in the writing field for a long time and have dabbled in fiction know that in order to create a fantastic hero, you must first put even more work into creating a fantastic villain. The hero is nothing without the villain.

The unmitigated horror inherent in the prospect of a Hillary Clinton presidency is like adding jet fuel to the Trump campaign. (And yes, I am assuming according to the results of the primaries so far that the final election will be between Trump and Clinton).

And, as I explained in my article Clinton versus Trump and the co-option of the liberty movement published in September:

Whenever you have a rebellion focused on the inherent ideals of freedom, totalitarian institutions struggle to intervene. The issue is, freedom is not only moral, but practical. Wherever true freedom exists, people are not only happier, but more productive and prosperous. It’s hard for a tyrant to fight a rebellion based on freedom because the idea is more powerful than any weapon or any form of treachery. No matter how advanced the tyranny is, and no matter how many rebels they imprison or kill, the idea of freedom endures.

The only way to destroy a rebellion like this, a rebellion like the liberty movement, is to make it about something other than freedom. The powers that be have to convince that movement to support policies that are destructive to their own ideals. If this can be done, then that rebellion has lost the advantage of principle — the only advantage that really matters.

The co-option of the liberty movement is not necessarily direct.  It can be achieved through what I call “absorption.” Take note that the mainstream media and elitists avoid using the label “liberty movement” at all costs because this is something we labeled ourselves many years ago.  Instead, they seek to control what we are called; labeling us “populists” of the “Alt-Right.”  The liberty movement has been fighting the globalists in the information war for a long time.  The average conservative Republican is new to this party, and yet the liberty movement is being called the “Alt-Right?”

Even Bloomberg pointed out with relative glee that the Tea Party (liberty movement), a movement which leftists despise with every fiber of their being, could be devoured by Trump’s campaign and reconstituted into something else.  Read their editorial The Tea Party Meets Its Maker, but only if you have a strong stomach.

In the battle against the Marxist left, it is important that we do not lose track of our original identity.  Also important is that we do not forsake our original principles in order to achieve “victory” over our adversaries.  This is a very difficult problem to discuss when you consider who we are fighting against.

I have always said that it was the social justice cult and their zealotry that drove the rise of Trump.  It was they that created the public firestorm with their open contempt for our right to free thought and free expression.  But keep in mind, this has all happened before, and with terrible results.

In Europe during the 1920s and early 1930s, the overall rise of Fascism was in direct response to economic crisis and the insurgency of communism.  Communism is essentially collectivism on the far left side of the political spectrum. Fascism is collectivism on the far right side of the political spectrum.  Both lead to centralization and tyranny.

Communism is tyranny in the name of destroying the strong in order to make room for the weak.  Fascism is tyranny in the name of destroying the weak to make room for the strong.

It is these two political extremes that the elites have used over the past century to dominate geopolitical outcomes.  Again, for those who are skeptical I highly recommend the extensive research and evidence presented by Antony Sutton, who outlined succinctly the fact that both the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of the Third Reich were funded and managed by Wall Street moguls and international banking interests.

The elites are notorious for playing the extreme left against the right in order to drive conservatives to the opposite extreme.  My concern is not only that through Trump the elites can easily scapegoat conservative movements for a global economic crisis, but also that through the intense vitriol of the social justice left, infuriated by their loss to Trump in the election, conservatives may be driven to abandon their constitutional ideals and become the monster they hoped to destroy.

Carroll Quigley, CRF elitist and mentor to Bill Clinton, was highly open about the plans of globalists to establish one world governance in his book “Tragedy And Hope.”  The following quote from Carroll Quigley’s Dissent: Do We Need It? could be taken as anti-right propaganda, but I take it as a warning that the elites see potential exploitation of the political right in America:

“For example, I’ve talked about the lower middle class as the backbone of fascism in the future. I think this may happen. The party members of the Nazi Party in Germany were consistently lower middle class. I think that the right-wing movements in this country are pretty generally in this group.”

Again, the liberty movement cannot be defeated by the globalists directly.  If the fight comes down to an open confrontation between freedom versus globalism, the globalists will inevitably lose.  Instead, it appears to me that the globalists are more than happy to either allow Trump into the White House, or to install him in the White House as a means to rewrite the liberty movement into a villainous character, rather than the rebellious hero of our story.

So far it would seem that the temptations to revert to fascism are many.  Set aside the threat of ISIS terrorism and think about the insanity showcased by the Left.

When I mentioned in my last article the crippling of social justice, I did not mention that this could have some negative reverberations.  With Trump and conservatives taking near-total power after the Left had assumed they would never lose again, their reaction has been to transform.  They are stepping away from the normal activities and mindset of cultural Marxism and evolving into full blown communists.  Instead of admitting that their ideology is a failure in every respect, they are doubling down.

When this evolution is complete, the Left will resort to direct violent action, and they will do so with a clear conscience because, in their minds, they are fighting fascism.  Ironically, it will be this behavior by leftists that may actually push conservatives towards a fascist model.  Conservatives might decide to fight crazy with more crazy.

The mainstream media and popular media largely controlled by leftist elements are only pouring gasoline on the fire, with major pundits and media personalities steadily hinting at “revolution” in the face of a “Trumpist” America.  But here is the thing, these people are kidding themselves.

The alternative media is eclipsing corporate media today.  Their time is coming to an end.

Leftists including groups like Black Lives Matter are also ill equipped to violently combat a conservative movement with a lifetime of experience in arms and the will to use them.  If the Left leaps into the realm of violent Marxist revolution, they will lose in America.  That said, there is a cost.

The cost could very well be the heritage of freedom that conservatives desire to protect.  The alternative media may overrun the corporate media, but will we become the corporate media in the process?

If under Trump conservatives fall to temptation and exploit the “ring of power” that is government to exert dominance in the name of stopping the Left, then they will ultimately be destroyed as well.

In this case history will not remember conservatives as freedom fighters rebelling against globalist machinations, but as evil “populists” that caused global economic collapse and the re-establishment of the institution of fascism.  The globalists can swoop in after the dust has settled and use the American collapse fable as a story to tell children for the next century.  A reminder that nationalism and sovereignty are harbingers of war and death.  Conservatism will be abhorred as “deplorable,” an ugly ideal akin to Nazism.

At this point, the globalists will have won, for no other philosophy contrary to globalism will ever exist again.  No one would want to associate themselves with historical “villains.”

As I have mentioned consistently, I have no idea whether or not Donald Trump is aware of this potential trap.  I also have no idea if he was sincere in his campaign or simply telling people what they wanted to hear.  At this time, his consideration of neo-con political elites and Goldman Sachs bankers for cabinet positions does not leave a positive impression.

My position is that the Liberty Movement must always remain the Liberty Movement if conservatives and sovereignty proponents want a chance to survive.  We have to be willing remain just as watchful and critical of Trump as we would have been with Hillary Clinton.  And, if he breaks his promises or goes against his oath to the constitution, we must be willing to go to war with him, just as we would have with Clinton.

This puts us in a tenuous position — fighting the Left is bad enough.  Going against Trump if he steps out of line is worse, because then we can be labeled leftists as well.  This is the essence of 4th Generation warfare — cornering an opponent so that each move he makes is a sacrifice.  If the opponent is not careful, he might just destroy himself.

There is a way to undermine this strategy by the elites; as conservatives we must treat Trump like a new employee.  We have to put him on probation and watch him, not give him the keys to the store on the first day.  We must also continue to educate fellow conservatives (and any on the Left that have the sense to listen) that this fight is far from over.  In fact, it has just begun.  People must understand that the real threat in all of this has been and always will be the globalists.  Instead of fighting each other in a futile theater of the absurd, we must fight and remove them from the chess board, wherever and whenever they show their faces in the daylight.

 

Source: Will County News

Lawmakers decry welfare system that punishes families

Lawmakers decry welfare system that punishes families

0 Shares

Welfare headerCongressional conservatives are hopeful that the coming Republican presidential administration will create an opportunity for lawmakers to tackle anti-family aspects of the U.S. welfare system.

Speaking at a Heritage Foundation anti-poverty event in Washington D.C., lawmakers said the current welfare system undermines key components of a successful society: strong families and opportunities for individuals to provide for their families.

“Think about what we now have–don’t get married, don’t get a job, have more kids, and we’ll give you more money,” said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). “That’s pretty ridiculous, right? It’s anti-family–the key institution in our culture.”

Beyond welfare benefits, the lawmakers noted that the nation’s tax system is also currently stacked against low income families.

“I always tell folks: The first institution the good Lord put together wasn’t the church, wasn’t the state, it was moms and dads and kids,” Jordan said. “It was family. We have an anti-family welfare system, and we have an anti-work welfare [system]. The two values that helped make America the greatest country ever. Strong families, strong commitment to the work ethic. That’s what we have to incentivize.”

Part of encouraging welfare reform with a focus on the family, according to the lawmakers, will mean walking back Obama administration policies that have isolated Americans of faith.

“We have got to resolve where we are as a nation, where we are on religious liberty,” Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) told the crowd.

The conservative legislators say they plan to advance a welfare reform bill introduced by Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Jordon in May 2016. The legislation, called the Welfare Reform and Upward Mobility Act, would build upon welfare reforms passed in 1996, including strengthening work requirements for welfare recipients.

A fact sheet about the bill explains the importance, and the need for more, of those requirements: “Work requirements establish reciprocity between the taxpayer and the individual receiving assistance. Furthermore, a work requirement serves as a gatekeeper: Assistance is available to those who need it, but individuals who can work are moved towards work. However, only four of the federal government’s means-tested welfare programs include work requirements.”

The welfare reform package would also initiate new accounting requirements to help Americans better understand the total cost of the nation’s social safety net. In addition, it would shift more of the burden for housing assistance onto states.

President-elect Donald Trump is likely to work with lawmakers on the package considering his praise for the 1996 reforms in his 2011 book, Time to Get Tough.

He wrote: “To get your check, you had to prove that you were enrolled in job-training or trying to find work. But here’s the rub: the 1996 Welfare Reform Act only dealt with one program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), not the other seventy-six welfare programs which, today, cost taxpayers more than $900 billion annually. We need to take a page from the 1996 reform and do the same for other welfare programs. Benefits should have strings attached to them. After all, if it’s our money recipients are getting, we the people should have a say in how it’s spent. The way forward is to do what we did with AFDC and attach welfare benefits to work.”

 

Source: Will County News

Interesting Facts About Gun Control

Guns and drugs; drugs and guns. There is a connection folks!
Interesting Facts About Gun Control:

There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed.   The U.S. population is 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. 
Do the math:  0.000000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year.   Statistically speaking, this is insignificant!

What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:


•    65%  of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws

•    15%  are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
•    17%  are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
•    3%  are accidental discharge deaths

So technically, “gun violence” is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100 –  Still too many?  Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
•    480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago

•    344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
•    333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
•    119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C.  (a 54% increase over prior years)

So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities.   All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.

This leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation – or about 75 deaths per state.  That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others.
For example, California had 1,169 – and Alabama had 1.

Now, which state has the strictest gun laws by far? Ans: California, of course, but understand, it is not guns causing this.  It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states.   So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.

Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific?   How about in comparison to other deaths?  All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime.  Robbery, death, rape, assault – all are done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous.  That’s why they are criminals.

But, what about other deaths each year?
• 40,000+ die from a drug overdose – THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!

• 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
• 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities (exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)

Now it gets good:
• 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors.
You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!
• 710,000 people die per year from heart disease.   It’s time to stop the double      cheeseburgers!
So what is the point?   If Obama and Hillary – the anti-gun movement – focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.).   A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides … Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!

So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns?   It’s pretty simple.  Taking away guns gives control to governments.

The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies.  It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.

Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution.  It must be preserved at all costs.

 
So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster:  “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.  The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.  A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power.”
Remember, when it comes to “gun control”, the important word is “control”, not “gun”.
Surprisingly, these are not the statistics you hear about from the media or from the Washington.

Source: Will County News