The Truth Is Out There




*For all of my blogs and posts, you can visit


The projected pathology of utopia carried by society today stems from a millenarian mindset as evidenced throughout history from altruistic coalitions and alliances embracing prophetic concerns during profound prime evolutionary processes and changes going forth.

These curious coalitions are frequently explained as merely opportunistic alliances, whereby certain groups make common cause with ideological opponents in pursuit of the shared sins of bringing down Western society. This explanation sure is only partly correct. What these various movements have in common goes much deeper: they are all utopian. Each in its own way wants to bring about the perfect society and to create a new man and world.

Each therefore thinks of itself as progressive; the supporters of each believe themselves to be warriors in the most noble of causes. The greens believe they will save the planet. The leftists believe they will create the brotherhood of man. The fascists believe they will purge mankind of corruption. And the Islamists believe they will create the Kingdom of God on earth.

What they all have in common however, is a totalitarian mindset in pursuit of the creation of their alternative realities. These are all worldviews that can accommodate no deviation and must therefore be imposed by coercion. Because their end product is a state of perfection, nothing can be allowed to stand in its way. This is itself a projected pathology. The belief that humanity can be shaped into a perfect form has long been the cause of the most vicious tyrannies on the planet from the French Revolution onwards. It draws towards a system that believes violence is necessary in order to destroy the old order so that utopia can arise from the ashes. Pretending to be attracted to “peace’ and in the name of “peace”, actually stands for the opposite. It needs to empathize with the “martyrs” and the downtrodden in order to vicariously validate the cause. The Third World, intrinsically noble since it is un-corrupted by the developed world, provides an apparently inexhaustible supply of such validation.

The mindset of the totalitarian true believer creates networks between groups that might be thought to have little in common. Anti capitalists, Islamists, greens and neo-fascists all build common ground between ostensible political opposites from the “far left” and “and right”. Both which are thus to reveal having deep similarities.

Indeed it is, and this left-wing character has roots in the history of fascism, which originally derived from the left. Not for nothing were the Nazis called the National Socialist Party.

Fascism was made possibly by way of thinking. It swept across Europe at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the first outcome of which was communism. Fascism was not some aberration; it was in keeping with the avant-garde and revolutionary trends in the wider European culture. Not only did it compete with Marxism for the allegiance of the masses, but its origins lay in a revision of Marxism. Whereas Marxism has opposed liberalism, which was in turn a revolt against clerical absolutism, fascism rejected both liberalism and Marxism to create a communal, anti-individualistic and antinationalist culture. Fascism wanted to rectify what it saw as the disastrous consequences of modernization: the atomization of society and alienation of the individual in a free market economy. Although it was eager to retain the benefits of technological progress, it rebelled against modernity insofar as modernity was associated with rationalism and the optimistic humanism of the eighteenth century. Fascism disdained both universalism and individualism, as well as human rights and equality.

The French Revolution held that society was made up of a collection of individuals. Fascism replaced this idea with a theory of the organic unity of the nation, which was perceived as an organism comparable to a sentient being. Absolute moral norms such as truth, justice and law existed only to serve the collective. Subconscious instinct, intuitive and irrational sentiment, emotion and enthusiasm were considered superior to rationality, which was said to deaden sensitivity. Just like communism, pre 1914 fascism attacked the existing system and aimed to destroy bourgeois culture and to reform the world by transforming the individual, it had fascination for a lot of idealistic young people. In addition to a political revolution, fascism sought to bring about a moral revolution, a profound transformation of the human spirit. A desire to create a new type of man.

The association of fascism with anti-Semitism also found echoes in communism. Despite being born into a Jewish family, Marx, who was raised as a Lutheran, was committed to hating his own race and wanted to create a new world order through society’s renunciation of Judaism altogether through the creation of a “new man”.. His letters contain dozens of derogatory references to that effect.

The progression from communism to fascism in the creation of this new world order was bridged by thinkers whose impact on our modern age cannot be overestimated. Mussolini understood both the importance of communism and the significance as indicated by how Marx’s belief that society had to be destroyed in order to build a new one. Indeed, Mussolini described socialism as “the greatest act of negation and destruction. His own followers were the new barbarians as he declared, and like all barbarians, they were the harbingers of a new civilization. Mussolini believed that while the proletariat would not bring about Marx’s socialist utopia, the revolt by the a “superman” would destroy bourgeois institutions. Thus fascism was born.

Since both fascism and communism ere joined at the hip, as it were, in seeking to create utopia, both gathered a significant following among the Western avant-garde of the early twentieth century, who thought themselves as progressive thinkers.

In the nineteenth century, the progressive intelligentsia had bestowed the “enlightened” label on a body of thought that was to feed directly into communism and later into the obscenity of the Nazi killing machine. Indeed, after reading Darwin’s Origin of Species, Marx called it “the book that contains the foundation in natural history” for his views. The thinking that led Darwin to formulate this theory of evolution contributed not only to Marxism, but also to fascism, by way of “social Darwinism” and its offshoot in eugenics, which were the orthodoxy among progressive thinkers.

These roots of social Darwinism and eugenics lay in the ideas of eighteenth century economist thinkers who had argued that the world’s human population would increase faster than the food supply unless checked by restraints such as war, famine or disease. The resulting thought was that most people should die without reproducing. Darwin admitted that his own ideas were an extension of such thought to the natural world; in turn, intellectuals developed the thinking of this Darwinian thought process into social Darwinism.  (Darwinism & Freud – The two most despicable ‘rubber stamps’ ever perpetuated upon mankind.)  PERIOD!  *and I am NOT speaking of Scientology either.

Applying this theory of evolution to the organization of human society, social Darwinism represented progress as a kind of ladder on which humanity could climb towards perfection. This meant that the “unfit” or lesser breeds of humanity had to be discarded on the way up. Thus eugenics, the “science of selective breeding, came into being. In Victorian and Edwardian Britain, the main targets of eugenic thinking were the poor, whom the intelligentsia regarded as over breeding throwbacks to an earlier stage of evolution. There was a fear that those higher up the evolutionary ladder would be overwhelmed by lesser forms of human life. The concept of the inherent value of every individual life was therefore seen as a sentimental block to the progress of humanity.  Eugenics was therefore seen as a vital tool of social progress.  Early socialists were imbued with eugenic thinking.

It would not be until the full horror of Nazism became apparent, with its extermination programs against mental defectives and other issues, that both eugenics and fascism finally became discredited. Before then however, fascism did not just appeal to convinced masses, but garnered and imbued a large following among intellectuals in the humanities from a variety of political positions. Eugenics was seen as a vital tool of social progress among early socialists This change of thinking from one major train of thought and mainstream to a complete other line of thinking was however, would eventually come to an end.

This shift in thought process is to be duly noted too. For it is this very thought process that has fooled many. It is also this thought process that has many in the masses, if not the complete masses themselves, in a belief of complete and utter truth that for a time, was self evident, only to be toppled like a house of cards with the forthcoming of the real truth. A fine example is when the world truth was that the world was flat and with an edge to it, only to be discovered that it was round. The greatest political, religious and scientific minds of the time professed flatness as the absolute truth and all went along with it, just because these great minds of the time said it was so. Until that is, it was proven incorrect. This, as it is called, is a paradigm shift, and it happens throughout history and will continue to happen in the future, regardless of who wishes to believe in it.

Now here begins the bite. Perhaps the most striking continuation of fascist ideas under the guise of left wing progressive thinking lies in the modern environmental movement, with its desire to call a halt to dehumanizing modernity and return to an organic harmony with the natural world. While all this is fine and dandy, it’s not what it outwardly appears at first.

Veneration of nature and the corresponding belief that civilization corrupts man’s innate capacity for happiness and freedom go back to the eighteenth century. That world of enlightenment and reason led to movements of the left and right. The idealizing of nature, along with the theory of human evolution through survival of the fittest which predated Darwin by a hundred years, became the galvanizing force in that century among some of the most progressive thinkers of the time. And one of the principal routes taken was through the natural world.

In the mid nineteenth century, Darwinism was sowing the seeds of environmentalism, and in so doing, fed into fascism. During the interwar period, most ecological thinkers subscribed to this way of thinking. There was a particularly close association between ecologists and German nationalists, among whom a number subsequently became part of the Nazis organization. Their thinking was that nature was the life force from which Germany had been cut off, ever since the days of the Roman Empire, by the alien Christian-Judaic civilization, the source of all the anti life manifestations of urbanism.

Such ecological fixations were further developed in German Nazism. They fixated on organic food, personal health and animal welfare. Heinrich Himmler was a certified animal rights activist and an aggressive promoter of “natural healing”. Rudolf Hess, Hitler’s deputy, championed homeopathy and herbal remedies; Hitler wanted to turn the entire nation vegetarian as a response to the unhealthiness promoted by capitalism. There was top level Nazi support for ecological ideas at both ministerial and administrative levels. Even those in power within the regime professed embedding motorways organically into the landscape. They professed against land reclamation and drainage; said that classical scientific farming was a nineteenth century practice unsuited to the new era and that artificial fertilizers, fodder and insecticides were poisonous, while calling for an agricultural revolution towards a more peasant like, natural, simple method of farming independent of capital. Himmler himself established experimental organic farms including one at Dachau that grew herbs for SS medicines; a complete list of homeopathic doctors in Germany was compiled for him; and antivivisection laws were passed on his insistence. SS training included a respect for animal life of near Buddhist proportions. They did not however, show such respect of course, for the human race.

Neither does the ecological movement, for which, echoing the planet’s biggest problem is the people living on it. Even though our contemporary era has been forged in a determination that fascism must never rise again, certain sums of these ideas that were central to fascism, about the organic harmony of the earth, the elevation of animal rights and the denigration of humans as enemies of nature, are today very much present and heralded as the acme of progressive thinking, but under the guise of progressive thought and much to the bewilderment and unknowingness of current society.

An astonishing repackaging of this ideal was accomplished during the 1970’s. While Western politicians were committed to growth and a consumer society was taking off, the dread of overpopulation also grew. It is probably no coincidence that the fear of global immiseration coincided with the end of empire and the West’s loss of control over the developing world. Reports from the UN World Conference on Human Environment in 1972 preached imminent doom as a result of rising technological capacity and argued that man had to replace family or national loyalties with allegiance to the planet. The Club of Rome, which was founded also in 1972, prophesized imminent global catastrophe unless resource use was curbed, a view that the oil shock of 1973 served to further validate and embed in Western consciousness.

If ecology was to take off however, it had to shed altogether its unhappy links with fascism, racial extermination and ultra nationalism. It took a number of different opportunities to do so. During the 1960’s in both Europe and North America, it identified itself with radical left wing causes, latching on ‘alternative’ politics such as feminism and, in Britain, Celtic nationalism. In the 1970’s, it was the “small is beautiful” idea of the anti Nazi émigré that took hold.

In 1971, the president of the Soil Association in Britain, which was critical in both promoting deeply antirational ecological ideas and laundering them as fashionably progressive, which eschewed artificial fertilizers and promoted self sufficient farms as preserving the spirit of the soil. When the Soil Association was created in 1946, it embodied this ‘organic farming’ ideal. But this president of the association was also the founder of a movement called anthroposophy, which was based on the development of a non sensory or so called super sensory consciousness. It held that early stages of human evolution possessed an intuitive perception of reality, including the power of clairvoyance, which had been lost under the increasing reliance on intellect. It promoted the belief that the human being passed between stages of existence, incarnating into an earthly body, living on earth, leaving the body and entering into the spiritual domain before returning to be born again into a new life.

These essentially pagan and irrational ideas were, as we shall see later, intrinsic to ecological thinking. But they were also to surface in a remarkable new alliance between neo-Nazi doctrines and radical left wing, anti capitalist and New Age ideas. Toward the end of the 1960’s, finding itself criticized for espousing reactionary views, the Soil Association turned sharply leftwards and developed an egalitarian socio economic perspective instead. It published articles admiring Mao’s communes in China and suggested that plots of land a few acres in size should be distributed similarly among the British population.

In Germany, the green movement that emerged from the student protests of 1968 bitterly attacked the biodynamic organic farmers for their perceived authoritarianism and social Darwinist beliefs. Thus, German Greens of the 1970’s, with a considerable communist element, had less to do with ecology than with participatory democracy, egalitarianism and women’s rights.

Among radicals in America, there was a split after 1968 between those favoring organized terrorism and alternative groups. Young radicals in the latter camp, galvanized by outside inspiration, claimed that multinational capitalism was responsible for pollution. Environmental concerns offered up a radicalism for the middle classes.

The result of all this ferment was that the green movement became not just radical but radically incoherent. It became the umbrella for a range of alternative, anti Western causes and lifestyles. But its constant factor was a strongly primitive, pagan and irrational element. This new paganism, often based on Atlantean theories of a lost golden age and theories of cultural diffusion via a vanished super race, is open to all and especially attractive to the semi educated, semi rational product of today’s de naturing educational process, stripped of religion, reason, tradition and even true history.

Despite a veneer of fashionable progressivism, the fact is that environmentalism’s fundamental opposition to modernity propels it straight into the arms of neo fascism. For just like their precursors in the twenties and thirties, today’s ultranationalist and neo Nazi groups chime with many of the ideas that also foster and march under the green banner. In France, Italy and Belgium, the Nouvelle Droite combined Hellenic paganism with support for the dissolution of national boundaries; it was anti capitalist and anti American, adopting socio biological arguments to stress the uniqueness of each race and culture within national boundaries and to oppose colonization and empire. In Germany, the radical right journal was pacifist and ecological. Such groups met the left on the common ground of New Age paganism, expressed in particular through the religions and cultures of the East.

From the 1970’s onwards, neo fascist extremists began to repackage the old ideology of Aryan racism, elitism and force in new cultic guises involving esotericism and Eastern religions. Some groups mixed racism with Nordic pagan religions, celebrating magical signs of ancestral heritage and mystical blood loyalty. In the United States, Britain, Germany and Scandinavia, racial pagan groups today ponder runes, magic and the sinister mythology of the Norse gods. Like the Nazis, these groups resort to the pagan world to express their antipathy to any extraneous organisms that disturb their idea of racial or national purity. The very fact that the racial interpretation of these esoteric ideas, cosmologies and prophecies betrays them overwhelmingly, causing great anxiety about the future of specific identities in multiracial societies.

To those accustomed to thinking of New Agers as vegetarian, pacifist tree huggers, such connections may come as something of a surprise. Nature worship, paganism and organic mysticism were all closely associated with Nazism and anti Semitism through prewar German thinking. This will help to explain how New Age turned from a left liberal movement to a fascist style of paganism.

The apocalyptic revivalism of neo fascism corresponds precisely to the agenda of radical Islamism. Because Islamism is a form of revolutionary utopianism, it marches along side the left. But as a revolt against liberalism and modernity, it is closely allied with both communism and fascism. That is because just like these two secular Western movements which also led to fanaticism, terror and mass murder, Islamism repudiates modernity and reason in the interests of creating a perfect world. And so, ironically, considering it believes itself to be a hermetically sealed thought system owing its influence only to God, Islamism has drawn heavily upon and formed alliances with communism and fascism, both represent=ting a heretical world it despises and aims to destroy.

The common interest with communism was first made evident when the Muslims of the Russian Empire were conscripted into the Red Army. During the first session, the president of the International called in his speech five times for holy war against the British and French, colonialists and the rich in general. Thus the Bolshevik jihad was launched against the common enemy, the materialist West, in the mountains of Afghanistan and elsewhere that the Russians faced the forces of imperialism.

The Muslims found much in common with communism. Not only did they have a common enemy, but they shared a utopian vision for transforming the world by negating all distinctions between peoples. Like Communism, Islam rejects narrow nationalism. Islam is international and recognizes only the brotherhood and unity of nations under the unity of Islam only.

There is a eerie similarity between the Marxist-Leninist and Islamic outlooks in both their Orwellian inversion of aggression and self defense it needs to duly be noted here. For Communism, aggression was specific to class society while the Soviet Union was by definition peaceful. Likewise, Islamic thinkers hold that Islam represents peace on earth and so anything un Islamic must trouble the peace by its very existence. As a corollary, since neither the Soviet Union nor the Islamic world could be guilty of aggression, any terror committed by either was by definition self defense, while self defense by the outside world was considered an act of aggression.

Like Nazism, Islam promotes a subordination of the individual to the collective, celebration of the leadership principle, hostility to liberal democracy and to capitalism, male supremacy, sexual repression and glorification of death in the war with unbelievers. It was therefore not surprising that Arab nationalism in Palestine, Syria and Iraq during the 1930’s modeled itself on Italian and German fascism.

There is even more striking correspondences between fascism and Islamism. The idea of using suicide pilots to destroy the skyscrapers of Manhattan originated in Nazi Germany. Nazis planned to fly explosive crammed light aircraft without landing gear into Manhattan skyscrapers. Hitler was in a delirium of rapture at this thought of seeing New York going down in towers of flame. He described the skyscrapers turning into huge burning torches and falling, reflecting a disintegration of the city in the dark sky. Hitler wanted to kill in order to liberate mankind, or more precisely, Wall Street. From there, his insidious threads radiated across the entire world.

To this day, Western Islamists continue to draw upon neo fascism. Since 2000, the Muslim Association of Britain and the General Union of Palestinian Students have both published the so called Franklin Prophecy, which is an anti-Semitic hoax manufactured by the American Nazi movement and first published in full publication February 1934. The Muslim Public Affairs Committee has used its website to reproduce material taken from these sites while the pro Hamas Palestine Times has promoted work by an author who is a revisionist historian and whose website has links to Holocaust denial material.

As can not be emphasized too strongly, the reason for these otherwise bewildering alliances between groups that appear to be mortal enemies ideologically, left wingers and fascists, Islamists and greens all harbor a utopian vision of perfecting the world.

Prominent Islamist Abul ala Maududi wrote that Islam is not the name of a mere religion, nor is Muslim the title of a nation. The truth is that Islam is a revolutionary ideology which seeks to alter the social order of the entire world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals.

The unsettling fact is that it is both plausible and possible for bad deeds to be done for the highest of ideals. That is a very frightening thought. Those wanting to bring about the perfect society see no higher ideal than that. Ever since the French Revolution, all such impossible agendas have led straight to persecution, tyranny and totalitarianism. To the French Terror, or the gulags of Russia, to Auschwitz and to the use of children as human bombs; yet the true believers in each case believed they acted from the highest of motives.

The Islamists committing mass murder in New York’s Twin Towers or a Jerusalem café really do believe they are fighting for justice and to bring about the Kingdom of God on earth.; The communists and the fascists really did think they were ending, respectively, the oppression and corruption of mankind. The environmentalists really do think they are saving the planet from extinction. The radical left really do think they will erase prejudice from the human heart and suffering from the world. And those who want Israel no longer to exist as a Jewish state really do believe that as a result, they will turn suicide bomb belts into cucumber farmers and that they are moving in the way that history intended.; All very frightening thoughts indeed.

That is why those who promulgate hatred are generally to be found among the high minded, since they are devoted to the most lofty and admirable of ideals. That is why lies about global warming or irrationality about the defense of the West against Islamism are associated with the intelligentsia. That is why those with the most highly developed faculty of reason so often end up promoting the most diabolical of agendas.

But there is yet another factor linking these various ideologies of Islamism, environmentalism, Darwinism, ant capitalism and anti Zionism. In their very different ways and in very different contexts, they all attempt to address a spiritual emptiness in the human condition, and that gives them a further common characteristic that moves them away from the sphere of reason altogether, and into the province of self belief.

This may come as a surprise to some, but we are currently living through a millenarian age in the West.

Millenarianism is a religious belief in the perfectibility of mankind and life on earth. It is a doctrine of collective and total salvation that derives from the belief of some Christians in the ‘end times’ or ‘last days’ based on the Book of Revelation (20:4-6) According to these verses, after the Second Coming, Christ will establish a messianic kingdom on earth and reign for a thousand years before the Last Judgment. This belief in turn is rooted in Wrath, followed by the resurrection of the righteous in Israel. Millenarianism came to mean any belief that the struggle between the forces of good and evil would climax in a triumph of the good, when injustice and oppression would end and its perpetrators be punished.

Historically, millenarianism became a way of coping with large scale disasters, and it surfaced in highly charged periods of change and stress. In the Middle Ages, it flourished among marginalized people against the background of natural disasters such as famine or plague, particularly the Black Death, when millenarian exaltation and unrest were whipped up by would be prophets and false messiahs. The desire of the poor to improve their lives was transfused with fantasies of a world reborn into innocence through a final apocalyptic massacre. Extermination of certain groups was to be inevitable after which the righteous would prevail, establishing a world without suffering or sin.

In our present era, we are enduring the effects of the paradigmatic millenarian creed of Islam. Its central precept is the need to establish Islam as God’s kingdom on earth. Only when Islam rules everywhere, will the world be brought into a state of perfect justice and peace. This millenarian myth accepted by pious Muslims in every epoch is that an Expected Delivered call the Mahdi will make his appearance at the end of time, followed at the Day of Judgment by the Antichrist, who will then be killed, and thus the Kingdom of God will arrive on earth. Among Shia Muslims, the Mahdi is an even more central figure known as the Hidden Iman, whose expected return is to be the backbone of faith. His reappearance will be preceded by a long period of chaos and degeneracy, accelerating until evil, falsehood and wickedness dominate earth. The disintegration iis to be complete and universal and will be characterized by political unrest, immorality, falsehood and a total disregard for the principles of religion.

Islam in its radical manifestations is also apocalyptic, holding that this disintegration describes precisely the condition of the world today, and that the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth is imminent.

At the heart of Islam is the belief that it embodies the absolute and unchallengeable (note the word unchallengeable here) truth. Unlike Judaism and Christianity, which teach that divine intentions are revealed through a historical process of interrogation and discovery, Islam holds that sacred doctrines were fixed in time by Mohammed, with no further development possible. Ever since Islamic advocates of reason were defeated in a seminal battle in the thirteenth century, the belief in a fixed and unchallengeable truth has made the dominant strains of Islamic theology inimical to rationality and to freedom. It has also made inescapable the view that everything else is unreasonable and tyrannical.
Building on the belief that Islam is perfection, radical Islamists are the ‘elect’, a small core of the righteous whose superior knowledge of this perfection is absolute and cannot be challenged. Hence the Islamist ideologue of, We must create out of nothing a minority of pure upright and educated men. There must exist an upright community, devoted to the principle of truth, and whose sole goal in this world is to establish, safeguard and realize correctly the system of Truth. Very, very scary indeed.

In an Orwellian inversion, the tyrannical imposition of Islam upon the world is viewed as its liberation. Just as Lenin believed, whatever fosters the revolution is good; whatever hinders it is bad. In the millenarian and totalitarian mindset, there is never any middle ground; and truth and reason are turned upside down to fit their mannerisms of thinking.

Now on to the bitter pill to swallow.

There is an assumption that Western society since the Enlightenment has embodied a belief in the power of reason, which acts as a kind of inoculation against the virus of religious obscurantism that characterized life in medieval Europe and is so obviously on display in the Islamic world today. But in fact, the Enlightenment served in part to secularize millenarian fantasies. A key idea of certain Enlightenment thinkers was that reason would bring about perfection on earth and that ‘progress’ was the process by which utopia would be attained. A view satirized by Voltaire and held by Alexander Pope and Jonathan Swift.

According to the editor of Encyclopedic, the bible of Enlightenment humanism, No bounds have been fixed to the improvement of the human race. The perfectibility of man is absolutely infinite. This idea was further developed in the nineteenth century and espoused by the apostle of social Darwinism, Herbert Spencer, who believed that life would get better all the time. “Progress is not an accident but a necessity” he wrote. “Surely must evil and immorality disappear; surely must man become perfect.”

It was reason that would redeem religious superstition and bring about the Kingdom of Man on earth. This idea infused the three great secular tyrannical movements that were spun out of Enlightenment thinking: the French Revolution, communism and fascism. For the French Revolutionaries, the millennial hope lay not in scripture, but in theories of freedom and the general will as expressed by the liberated voice of the people. The Committee of Public Safety abolished the worship of God on November 10, 1793 and substituted for it the Cult of Reason. At its core and at the same time, this committee of twelve men summarily executed thousands of people, from aristocrats, no matter how innocent, to internal dissenters, no matter how loyal. Terrors which ended only after the two masterminds were finally executed.

What I am trying to point out here is that many things spoon fed to us, especially in this day of technology being able to disseminate communications, from the news media to the government, to big business to the plethora of ‘ism’ movements on the march today, we as individuals HAVE to THINK for ourselves rather than letting these other entities do that for us. That doesn’t mean being psychotic, but it doesn’t mean being manipulated and told what to think, what is truth and so forth. We are quickly loosing our ability to truly be free, and to truly be free is to truly be mentally un manipulative and be able to stand on our own feet and think independent of outside influences, especially those with power and money over the many of us.

And so with that said, I press on with these thoughts.

Secular millenarian impulses did not stop at communism and fascism, but today infuse the progressive mind. From multiculturalism to environmentalism to post nationalism, Western progressives have fixated on unattainable abstractions from the venerable realization of utopia. The world of every day reality is rejected. All that matters is the theoretical future that is perfect and just, without war or want or prejudice. A future where fallen humanity has returned to Eden. And since that future is perfect, the idea of it may not be changed or challenged in any way. Which is why the progressive mind, in pursuit of the utopia where reason and liberty rule, is very firmly closed.

In that respect, an intriguing and immerging comparison can be made between sexual libertarians of today and the fourteenth century European sect known as the Heresy of the Free Spirit. Thye were Gnostics, believing they possessed perfect knowledge. Strictly speaking, Gnostics are not true millenarians since they anticipate a state of perfection beyond this world but rather than within it. Nevertheless, as the Free Sprits, intent on their own individual salvation, played a significant part in the revolutionary millenarian ferment of the Middle Ages. And the similarities with today’s ‘free spirits’ are striking.
Adherents of the fourteenth century sect believed they had attained a perfection so absolute that they were incapable of sin. Thus they repudiated moral norms, particularly with those pertaining to sexual behavior.

Indeed, since these adoptions were permissible of what was previously forbidden has progressed way beyond free love into such formerly transgressive areas as illegitimacy, homosexuality and sadomasochism. This trend has been driven by the ‘elect’ of the intelligentsia who, like the Free Spirits of the Middle Ages, regard themselves as the embodiment of absolute virtue. It is a delicious irony that such peop0le, who consider themselves to be at the cutting edge of modernity, reflect in certain respects such a widely irrational, obscurantist medieval Christian sect.

The very condition of the modern world provides emotional rocket fuel for the belief that it can and must be transformed. Anomie, the state of radical footlessness caused by the snapping of attachments in a post religious age that leaves people without meaning or purpose in their lives, can find its antidote in apocalyptic beliefs that galvanize people and make them feel alive. Passionate hatred can give meaning and purpose to an empty life. Thus people haunted by the purposelessness of their lives try to find a new content not only by dedicating themselves to a holy cause but also by nursing a fanatical grievance. A mass movement offers them unlimited opportunities for both.

The mass movements of today are not so much political as cultural: anti imperialism and anti Americanism, anti Zionism, environmentalism, scientism, egalitarianism, libertinism and multiculturalism. These are not merely quasi religious movements, evangelical, dogmatic and fanatical, with enforcement mechanisms ranging from demonization through ostracism to expulsion of heretics. They are also millenarian and even apocalyptic in their visions of the perfect society and what needs to be swept aside in order to attain it. Even if, while embodying certain characteristics of medieval heretics, they simultaneously embody the authoritarianism of the persecutors of those heretics in the medieval church.

Their view of the human condition is essentially one of sin and redemption. They name the crimes committed by humanity. Oppression of Third World peoples, despoliation of nature, bigotry, war, and offer redemption and salvation by a returning to the true faith and path. Dissenters are heretics forming diabolical conspiracies against the one reveled truth. It is believed that the decision to invade Iraq, Israel’s military operations, manmade global warming and the persistence of religious faith cannot possibly have any reasonable basis because they deny the unchallengeable truths of anti imperialism, environmentalism and scientific materialism, and so the explanations must lie in conspiracies by the neocons, Big Oil or creationists, whose various hidden hands and agenda are detected everywhere.

The left wing intelligentsia, the environmentalists and the Darwinists are today’s Gnostics; their knowledge of a higher truth puts them on a plane above the rest of humanity, who have to be exhorted to change their ways in order to be saved from themselves.

The environmentalists, through their scientific credentials, possess exclusive access to the truth that the planet is being destroyed. They preach that the earth has been sinned against by capitalism, consumerism, the West, science, technology, mankind itself. Only when these are purged and economic materialism is rejected will the earth be saved and the innate harmony of the world be restored; otherwise we will descend into the hell of a drowned and parched planet where the remains of the human race battle it out for the few remaining resources.

The language and imagery conjure up a secular witch hunt. In a similar vein, the atheist evangelists assert that all must comply with their pronouncements on pain of excommunication from the realm of rationality.

The crucial element in all millenarian movements is the reaction that sets in when the prophecy of utopia fails, which of course it has done every time throughout human history. The inevitable outcome is that the disappointment turns ugly. Adherents of the cult create scapegoats upon whom they turn with a ferocity fueled by disorientation, anger and shame, in an attempt to bring about by coercion the state of purity that the designated culprits have purportedly thwarted.

When the classless utopia failed to materialize in the Soviet Union, Stalin murdered dissidents and sent them to the gulag. When Germany failed to achieve its apparently rightful place as the paradigm country in Europe, Hitler committed genocide. When Mao failed to bring about universal justice and the Confucian ideal of harmony, he killed, jailed or otherwise terrorized millions of Chinese.

In current times, the failure of the environmental vision of spiritual oneness between man and nature has seen mankind blamed for despoiling the planet and imperiling the survival of life on earth. The failure to arrive at a perfect state of reason in which all injustice and suffering are ended has been blamed on religious believers. The failure of the apparatus of international law and human rights to prevent war and tyranny has been blamed on America. And the failure of the existence of Israel to bring about the end of the Jewish problem has been blamed on the Jews themselves.

Having identified scapegoats upon whom they can project their anger and shame, disappointed millenarians have tried to carve out their perfect agenda and society through coercive measures against the people they hold responsible for the failure of their vision(s).

In our own time, the left forces people to be free in a myriad of different ways. In Britain, left wing totalitarianism wears the pained smile of ‘good conscience’ as it sends in the police to enforce ‘hate crime’ laws, drags children from their grandparents to place them for adoption with gay couples, or sacks a Christian nurse for offering to pray for her patient. In America, school textbooks are censored by ‘bias and sensitivity’ reviewers who remove a reference to patchwork quilting by women on the western frontier in the mid nineteenth century (stereotyping of females as soft and submissive), an account of a heroic young blind mountain climber (bias in favor of those living in hiking and mountain climbing areas but against the blind), and a tale about growing up in ancient Egypt (elitist references to wealthy families)

Some would call this a form of tyranny; but to the progressive mind, tyranny occurs only when their utopia is denied. Virtue thus has to be coerced for the good of the people at the receiving end. There can be no doubt that it is virtue, because progressivism is all about creating the perfect society and is therefore inherently and incontestably and inexorably virtuous; and so, like the Committee of Public Safety, like Stalinism, like Islam, it is all incapable of doing anything bad. Unlike everyone else, of course, who it follows can do nothing but bad.

Progressives feel justified in trying to instill and stifle any disagreement with their agenda on the grounds that the people they are trying to stifle are ‘fascists’, a term employed without irony. A sense of humor is not known to be a millenarian trait. Never engaging with the actual arguments of their opponents, they demonize them instead through gratuitous insults designed to turn them into pariahs while they themselves characterize all reasoned arguments against them as outrageous insults. Dissent is labeled as pathological, homophobic, xenophobic, Islam phobic, with phobia, or irrational fear, used as a synonym for prejudice. There are even outright accusations of insanity, a weapon used by totalitarian movements from the medieval Catholic Church to the Jacobins to Stalin’s secret police.

Calling today’s conservatives ‘fascists’ is particularly absurd since such people tend to believe in limiting state power and giving more freedom to the individual, a position that shades off into libertarianism. Nevertheless, leftists see the alternative to themselves as ‘fascist’ by definition. So the more that conservatives believe government should be limited and the more freedom they want for individuals, the more ‘fascist’ they become in the eyes of the left.

Even more fundamental is the trap that is sprung over the issue of truth. Any fact that challenges the world view of the left is ignored, denied or placated or explained away, because to admit even a scintilla of such truth would bring the entire utopian house of cards crashing down and with it the left winger’s whole moral and political identity. That’s why progressives refused to acknowledge the French Error, Stalin’s gulags or the millions dead under Mao; that’s why today they refuse to acknowledge black racism, Arab rejectionism of Israel or the fact that the climate was warmer a thousand years ago. But here’s what follows from this denial: Anyone who objects to the falsehoods of the left and points out the truth must be right winged, and thus ‘fascist’. In this way, truth itself is demonized and the bigger the truth that is told, the more demonized the teller becomes.

These ideals are held in the belief that at the heart of the ideological true believer invariably lay a deep self contempt, which was transmuted into hatred of others, since mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a god, but never without belief in a devil. In other words, it is essential for the true believer to have someone or something to hate. The believer is defined in large measure by what he or she is not. Positions are then taken not necessarily because they are so believable, but principally because the alternative is so unthinkable.

This particularly evidence among scientific materialists, who are driven to take manifestly ridiculous positions simply because the alternative, belief in God, is unacceptable. Scientists sometimes put forward absurd theories purely to prevent the ‘Divine Foot in the door’. They cannot tolerate the slightest possibility of a metaphysical explanation. Such an approach betrays the most basic principle of scientific inquiry; that you always go where the evidence leads. Instead, it makes evidence dependent on a prior idea, in the manner of dogmatic ideology.

Surely this betrayal of science has occurred because scientism, or scientific materialism, is an ideology whose goal is not to gain knowledge and truth, but to suppress knowledge and truth if these threaten its governing idea(s). The priority is to safeguard the materialist world view in the teeth of any evidence to the contrary and thus maintain with it the prestige of science as the source of all the knowledge in the world. Defenders of this idea must preclude opposing points of view, for materialism is a closed thought system which cannot be challenged. Anything outside it is deemed non science and relegated to the status of fantasy. Any true scientific challenge to materialism is labeled ‘bad’ science, and therefore skeptics can be dismissed as not understanding ‘how science works’.

Gnostics take it a step further. They don’t only dismiss opponents’ arguments; they maintain that such opponents could not possibly have meant what was said. Their own Gnostic infallibility apparently means that he alone knows what was really in someone’s mind. Confronted by the fact that many scientists are religious believers, they dismiss most of the beliefs as not really religious except in terms of Einstein’s professed religious sensibilities, which says weren’t really religious belief at all, but rather claims of having to scrape the barrel in order to find genuinely distinguished modern scientists were truly religious. Really? Well then, how about Francis Collins, who heads the Human Gehome Project; or the botanist and former director of Kew Gardens, Sir Ghillean Prance; or the physicist Allan Sandage, considered to be the father of modern astronomy; or the Nobel Prize winning physicists William Phillips and Arno Penzias, all of whom are fervent religious believers?

Materialists set up an absolute dichotomy between science and religion, which are presented as engaged in a battle unto death; reason versus faith, good versus evil. Any scientist who accepts the integrity of religious arguments or any religious believer who accepts evolution is therefore deemed not to be telling the truth. So when the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote in his book Rocks of Ages that Darwinism was compatible with both religion and atheism because science and religion were non overlapping magisterial, dealing respectively with empiricism and questions of ultimate meaning. Gnostics have decried that Gould could possibly have meant much of what he wrote in Rocks of Ages. And after Pope John Paul II said in 1996 that he supported the general idea of biological evolution while entering reservations about certain interpretations of it, it was said that the pope’s response was simply that he was a hypocrite and that he could not be genuine about science.

A Gnostic knows that reprehensible behavior can by definition be practiced only by others, but never him or herself.

For the millenarian, the high minded belief in creating a perfect world requires the imperfect world to be purified by the true believers. From the Committee of Public Safety to Iran’s morals police, from Stalin’s purges of dissidents to British and American hate crime laws, utopians of every stripe have instigated coercive or tyrannical regimes to save the world by riddling it of its perceived corruption. Again, saving the ignorant from themselves.

The symmetry today is as obvious as the paradox. At a time when radical Islam is attempting to purify the world by conquering it for Islam and thus creating the Kingdom of God on earth, the West is also trying to purify the world in order to create a secular utopia in which war will become a thing of the past, hatred and selfishness will be eradicated from the human heart, reason will replace superstition, humanity will live in harmony with the earth and all division will yield to the brotherhood of mankind. The paradox here however is that, while it might be thought that the liberal West is trying to eradicate the kind of hatred and killing that radical Islam brings in its wake, the drive to purify inevitable results not in harmony but in strife.

But there is a further curiosity. That in doing so, the secular West is not merely adopting a quasi religious posture, but a specifically Christian one. The governing story of Islam is the imposition of its doctrines through conquest and submission. Accordingly, it is today attempting to fashion its utopia through conquest and submission. The governing story of Christianity by contrast, is of sin, guilt and redemption. And remarkably, that is precisely the pattern lying behind the Utopian agendas of Western secular progressives, even though by severing these concepts from their transcendent Christian context, they have perverted their meaning and turned them from the engines of truth and justice into their own antithesis.

For the left, the West is guilty of exploiting the poor, the marginalized and the oppressed. Britain has to do penance for the sins of imperialism and racism. Israel has to do penance for the sins of colonialism and racism. America has to do penance for the sins of imperialism, slavery and racism.

For the environmentalists, the West is guilty of the sins of consumerism and greed, which have given rise to far more than it needs. So these things must be taken away and the West must return to a simpler, austere, pre-industrial way of life.

Because of its sins, the West is being punished through the wars and terrorism against it. The West ‘had it coming’ on account of its manifold iniquities. America is responsible for Islamic terrorism. Israel is responsible for Palestinian terrorism. And Britain is responsible for the radicalization of British Muslims and the 7/7 attacks on the London transit system because it has backed America and Israel and ‘lied’ about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein.

As a result of all this sin, guilt and punishment, the Western progressive soul yearns for expiation and redemption. By electing Barack Obama as president of the United States, Americans wanted to redeem their country’s original sins of slavery and racism. Through its strictures against Israel, post Christian Europe wants to redeem its original sin of anti-Semitism. By campaigning against carbon dioxide emissions, environmentalists want to redeem the original sin of human existence. As for the scientific materialists, the sin to be redeemed is not by man against God, but rather by God against man. Their governing story is that un-corrupted man fell from the Garden of Reason when he partook of the forbidden fruit of religion, which now has to be purged from the world to create the Kingdom of Man on earth.

For all these millenarians and apocalypticists and Utopians, both religious and secular, the target is the West. The West is seen as an enemy not because it offers an alternative system of values, but because its promises of material comfort, individual freedom and dignity of unexceptional lives deflate all Utopian pretensions. The anti heroic, anti Utopian nature of western liberalism is the greatest enemy of religious radicals, priest, kings and collective seekers after purity and heroic salvation.

That is why the West is squarely in the sights of all who want to create utopia and are determined to remove all the obstacles it places in the way. For environmentalists, that obstacle is industrialization. For scientific materialists, it’s religion. For transnational progressives, it’s the nation. For anti imperialists, it’s American exceptionalism. For the Western intelligentsia, it’s Israel. For Islamists, it’s all the above and the entire un-Islamic world. And meantime, in all their fervor and desire for redemption and their suppression of dissent from the one revealed truth, Western progressives and radical Islamists are closer than either would like to think……

Intriguing confirmations about Twitter. Elon estimating the bot activity is 20% or higher, and his $44 billion bid was assuming that the bot activity was at the 5% or lower Twitter formally reported.

He is forcing them to prove their actual bot activity, causing them to expose themselves. While pissing off all of their advertisers and shareholders in the process, for falsifying numbers and therefore significantly lowering the value of Twitter. Elon baited them with $44 billion, knowing full well the bot activity was not what they reported, knowing he could get a better deal, while simultaneously exposing them.

But the most genius aspect of this plan, is as a CITIZEN, he’s exposing Twitter at warp speed, on the world stage. As opposed to a government intervention and a years long investigation with a snail’s pace Justice System. Elon got them on the hook with too much money to refuse, then made them admit all their deepest darkest secrets within a month. The government could never do what Elon is doing at the speed he is doing it.

Most importantly, it appears to be organic. If the US MIL directly intervened, it would be bad optics and the left-wing media would cause mass turmoil and claim it’s a military coup, so on and so forth. So maybe the US MIL and white hats found a workaround? A path of least resistance.

I cant assume it’s a coincidence that the US MIL’s highest paid contractor is flawlessly carrying out a highly calculated plan, with militaristic precision, that just so happens to dismantle an enemy of the US MIL, at lightning speed, in the middle of a propaganda/information war.

Yes, I’m suggesting the US MIL is utilizing Elon as a proxy/asset to conduct operations as a citizen that the US MIL would not be unable to do from their government position.

The civilian route was exponentially faster, highly effective, appears organic, easy for the public to digest, and the mission is accomplished with relative ease and little resistance.

Military tactics are like unto water; for water in its natural course runs away from high places and hastens downwards. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak. Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it flows; the soldier works out his victory in relation to the foe whom he is facing. Therefore, just as water retains no constant shape, so in warfare there are no constant conditions.”

President Joe Biden arrives to speak in the Rose Garden of the White House on Friday in Washington, D.C.

Last June, the Biden administration unveiled its “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism.” Despite its anodyne-sounding name, the “National Strategy” was anything but anodyne.

The pamphlet represented the logical culmination of the left’s cynical use of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot as a means of ginning up large-scale anti-Republican voter sentiment.

The result, evinced by Attorney General Merrick Garland’s disgraceful October 2021 memo directing the FBI to intrude on local school board meetings and crack down on anti-critical race theory parental revolts, has been a roiling cold war waged by the ruling class against us deplorables and our political wrongthink.

Now, seven months after Garland’s infamous Oct. 4 memo, the better question to ask is not whether President Joe Biden is engaged in a cold war merely against the deplorables. We know the answer to that: yes.

Instead, the more relevant question is whether the Biden administration is now engaged in a cold war against a broader target: the entire American citizenry. The answer to that question, based on all relevant data and metrics, seems to be the same: yes.

Most obvious and perhaps most important, inflation — which the Federal Reserve finally recently conceded is not “transitory” but here to stay for a while — is now the highest it has been in four decades. The consumer price index increased 8.3 percent in April on an annualized basis — slightly lower than March’s 8.5 percent clip, but still painfully above the Fed’s 2 percent target.

Biden recently declared fighting inflation to be his top domestic priority, but he shows no appetite for curbing the mass deficit spending that has characterized his presidency. Nor has Biden communicated to Fed Chair Jerome Powell that he is prepared to accommodate the drastic interest rate hikes that are now necessary to bring inflation back under control.

Biden is also looking to “fight” inflation — a de facto regressive tax that eats away at everyone’s savings, but hits lower- and middle-class earners the hardest — in all the wrong places.

The traditional economic definition of inflation is too much money chasing too few goods, but Democrats seem wholly uninterested in working with Republicans on the sort of industrial policy measures needed to immediately revamp domestic production. On the contrary, Biden’s priorities are completely backward.

Is the Biden administration making inflation worse?Yes No

Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Amidst unprecedented — and potentially lethal — shortages of baby formula, he has not acted swiftly to either invoke the Defense Production Act to ramp up domestic production (after his own FDA shut down a baby formula production facility) or temporarily lift the import tariffs that have helped cartelize the domestic baby formula market. At the same time, Biden has openly mused about ending the Trump administration’s signature tariffs on China. But all that would accomplish would be to make the American consumer even more dependent on our geopolitical arch-foe.

Fed-driven monetary policy aside, the way to fight inflation on the fiscal side is to accelerate production — not to fortify China’s cheap labor sword of Damocles that dangles over the American economy.

Perhaps most revealing, Republican Rep. Kat Cammack of Florida tweeted photos appearing to show “shelves and pallets packed with baby formula” at holding facilities for illegal aliens. This, of course, while U.S. citizen parents are frantically scrambling from store to store to ensure their babies don’t starve.

But it’s not just the pro-illegal alien lobby that plays our ruling class like a fiddle; it’s also the zealots in the environmentalist movement.

During the same week that nearly 30 states reported all-time highs for average gas price at the pump, the Biden administration canceled offshore oil and natural gas leases in both Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. But Biden has simultaneously admitted that energy accounts for a whopping 60 percent of the inflation Americans are now experiencing. Higher fuel prices for trucks and tractors, after all, trickle down and affect all goods and foodstuffs farmed and shipped.

Amidst this carnage, it is unfathomable for the administration to further restrict domestic energy production. The only effect of such restrictions, intended to appease the greenie and Malthusian radicals who increasingly dominate the Democratic donor base, is to make Americans even more energy-dependent on such human rights bastions as Venezuela and Saudi Arabia.

Our ruling class, full of virtue-signaling electric car owners, no doubt sleeps well at night as normal gasoline-dependent Americans get annihilated at the pump.

Meanwhile, Congress is racing to pass an emergency $40 billion appropriation in aid to Ukraine, hardly a pressing domestic concern. Ukraine is a well-known playground for venal slush funds and parochial NGO interests, but that apparently did not give the U.S. House any pause; it rapidly passed the legislation by a lopsided tally of 368-57.

The situation in Ukraine is tragic — but so is the situation at the porous U.S.-Mexico border, which has been completely overrun in recent months by drug cartel-trafficked illegal migrants. Those migrants and cartels are incentivized to make and orchestrate the hazardous journey north due to the Biden administration’s various amnesty magnets, such as the return of the Obama-era “catch-and-release” policy for illegal aliens in the U.S. interior.

Translation: Ukraine’s border with Russia matters more than America’s border with Mexico.

It is difficult to recall the last time a U.S. president persistently acted in a manner so contrary to the interests of the average citizen to whom that president took a constitutional oath to protect and defend.

Fortunately, Biden’s historically low approval ratings hint at a ballot box remedy for our national woes: A red wave beckons this fall.

Well folks, you don’t have to believe me, you heard it from Nunes’ mouth that Trump encouraged Elon to buy Twitter. Trump and his camp support Elon and his mission.

Just as I suspected and laid out for you all over the past few weeks, the entire timeline reeks of white hat involvement. It was calculated, methodical, strategical, well timed to maximize damage and enemy exposure, and captivated a massive global audience. Moves and countermoves were flawlessly projected and executed and the enemy not only lost control of one of their most powerful brainwashing assets, but also exposed their own corruption whilst under the world spotlight.

Notice how Trump and his team waited until AFTER Twitter was fully secure, before going public that they were involved.

Now does it make more sense why the left-wing media complex went scorched earth on Elon and declared this as the greatest threat to democracy? Why the Biden admin went full blown authoritarian dictator and created the Ministry of Truth? Because they knew Trump was involved in this move. They knew Elon was working with Trump to some extent. They knew this path leads to the end of their reign.

All the while, Trump is off screen, in the shadows. Just quietly working on TruthSocial, saying he’s not coming back to Twitter, etc. Giving off the OPTICS that he is distant from the entire situation. When in reality, he was advising it. And in all likelihood, based on the success and the Modus Operandi, it’s clear to me that Elon had significant operational help from Trump and military assets.

Now, why did Elon and Trump ensure that Trump seemed distant from the operation? TO TARGET THE NORMIES.

If Trump would have been linked to this deal before it was finalized, the centrists and leftists would have immediately discredited it and be less likely to pay attention. Because they are, quite literally, programmed to despise anything associated with Trump. By Trump appearing uninvolved, the story was followed by centrists and leftists as well, and allowed for this operation to result in a broader range of normies waking up to the reality of censorship online and the war on truth.

Conservatives are already all too aware of this reality, so there was no need to try and target that base. This was designed to penetrate centrist/left-wing echo chambers.

You’re welcome to believe all of this happened on accident and just so happened to be massively beneficial to Trump and his political campaign. I’m more inclined to believe that this was a meticulously calculated normie-waking operation, specifically designed to target centrists and leftists. Coordinated and advised by Trump and white hats.

Keep in mind Elon is the US MIL’s highest paid contractor… and the US MIL supports Trump.

Get the picture?


Man, what a terrible day to have eyes.

I can’t do anything without seeing outrageously asinine takes on this situation. I can’t even consume sports or entertainment related media without being bombarded with Roe v Wade nonsense. As much as it is painful to watch, I think it’s going to wake up normies to some extent.

The left are fumbling over themselves trying to articulate how this is now the greatest threat to our democracy, after foaming at the mouth for the past month over Elon and Free Speech. It’s the perfect maelstrom of conflicting narratives they cannot support simultaneously. This will break the minds of many of the sheep.

After spending the last 2 years claiming that they know what’s best for our bodies and everyone should be vaccinated regardless of religious or personal beliefs; now they must contradict themselves to say “my body my choice” so they can justify slaughtering their unborn children. Just as during the Kavanaugh smear campaign, they cried “believe all women”. Now they can’t even define what a “woman” is.

And when you think big picture, by imagining how future generations look back on what we went through in today’s world, they will look back in horror at the leftist ideology. Future generations will associate liberalism with:

-forced harmful injections

-forced mask wearing

-election fraud


-supporting actual nazis in Ukraine

-grooming children

-anti-free speech

-slaughtering unborn children

And this was just the crazy shit they defended over the past month.

So if you ask me what I think is happening with the SCOTUS leak? No idea. But what is the overalll effect of the happenings? Normies waking up because the left are fucking insane and the more they talk, the more the sane people start to realize just how far the left has gone off the deep end.

And I don’t know if you all feel it, but the rate of these “happenings” seems to be escalating incrementally. The sheep are being forced to change their identities rapidly. The narrative they are being fed directly contradicts the previous narratives, and I believe more and more of them will recognize it.

When the enemy is under duress, they become sloppy and more prone to mistakes.


“If a thing is free to be good it is also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having.”

C.S. Lewis

An antiviral COVID-19 pill that’s known as Paxlovid exists. It’s been a hard-to-find item – and in some instances, the Biden administration pulled its availability in some states.

For the most part, the pill is reserved for those who are “at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19, according to the FDA.

The office for Kamala Harris identified that she began taking the antiviral pill after she tested positive for COVID. It is now causing quite the stir – why?

Why would the VP, a healthy 57-year-old who has been vaccinated and boosted against COVID, need to take the antiviral pill?

Harris, according to her office, has been completely asymptomatic. So, there would be no reason to put her on this medication. Meanwhile, people who DO need the pill are being denied.

Does the VP have any underlying health conditions that we don’t know about? That’s where things start to get a bit interesting. Her office won’t comment. This means that there may be something else going on with Harris. And considering that Biden is the only thing standing between her and the head title in the U.S., we should probably know if her health is an issue.

Jonathan Reiner, the professor of medicine and surgery at George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Sciences asked “Why would you give Paxlovid to someone without symptoms?

Others have been asking the same question. Jerome Adams, who served as Surgeon General under Trump, was quick to point out that Paxlovid isn’t supposed to be used for those who are asymptomatic and with no medical issues.

An infectious disease expert, Celine Gounder, addresses it by using another approach. “We know that the way that presidents, or in this case vice presidents, are treated is not necessarily the way the average person is treated.” Gounder said that it’s not always about what might be right for Harris but what might be best for the nation.

So, perhaps she was given Paxlovid as a way to guarantee that she wouldn’t fall victim to COVID. After all, if Biden does get taken out by the 25th amendment, we need to have Harris standing. She’s not ideal, but she’d most certainly be better than Nancy Pelosi. Until the midterms shake things up, we have to be cautious of who the line of succession would bring to the Oval Office.

While Gounder may want to make excuses for Harris since she’s the VP, there are others who take a more pragmatic approach. It’s not a fair system – and medical ethicists, in particular, are concerned that the moral rationalization for Harris to take the antiviral pill is simply because of her position.

Harris was able to get the antiviral pill the same day that she tested positive. Meanwhile, many people struggle to get a prescription.

The only people who can provide a prescription are physicians, physician assistants, and registered nurses. Patients have to get tested, visit a doctor’s office, and then, find a participating pharmacy that will fill the prescription.

We’ve seen the way in which Harris has been able to work around the COVID protocols. Unfortunately, her gaining access to Paxlovid even though she doesn’t need it isn’t the first time she’s been able to use her position to her benefit. Her communications director tested positive in April, and she showed up maskless. And when she’s been maskless around others who have tested positive, her office was quick to say that she was “practicing social distancing – with limited and brief interactions from her chair.”

This is yet another example of rules for thee but not for me. Harris will get the COVID antiviral medication while others get sicker because of their inability to get it. Fair? Hardly.

You’ve surely heard that a Supreme Court decision overturning Roe vs. Wade has been leaked to the public.

Let me say from the outset: nothing is more certain than a stream of outraged emails about this issue presently being submitted. But I still feel it necessary to speak up about something I believe in and not avoid it just because I thought it’s what people simply wanted or didn’t want to hear.

The leaked decision has Samuel Alito declaring that the legal reasoning in Roe was “exceptionally weak.” Of course, the “trust the science”/”15 days to stop the spread”/”here’s my Ukrainian flag even though I haven’t given a rat’s behind about any other war for the past 20 years” people are predictably registering their outrage over such a statement.

But Alito’s statement isn’t even debatable. In fact, legal scholars at the time and over the years, despite generally favoring abortion themselves, have been known to admit that the legal reasoning in Roe was flimsy to nonexistent.

Thus in 1973, the very year of that fateful decision, John Hart Ely, himself sympathetic to abortion, attacked the Court’s legal reasoning in the Yale Law Review, arguing that the legal rationale for the decision was simply made up. Roe, he wrote, is “bad because it is bad constitutional law, or rather because it is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.”

Geoffrey R. Stone, who was a law clerk to Justice William Brennan at the time, later admitted: “Everyone in the Supreme Court, all the justices, all the law clerks knew it was ‘legislative’ or ‘arbitrary.'”

According to Edward Lazarus, who clerked for Roe‘s author, Justice Harry Blackmun:

As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible. I say this as someone utterly committed to the right to choose, as someone who believes such a right has grounding elsewhere in the Constitution instead of where Roe placed it, and as someone who loved Roe‘s author like a grandfather. . . . .

What, exactly, is the problem with 
Roe? The problem, I believe, is that it has little connection to the Constitutional right it purportedly interpreted. A constitutional right to privacy broad enough to include abortion has no meaningful foundation in constitutional text, history, or precedent. …

The proof of 
Roe‘s failings comes not from the writings of those unsympathetic to women’s rights, but from the decision itself and the friends who have tried to sustain it. Justice Blackmun’s opinion provides essentially no reasoning in support of its holding. And in the almost 30 years since Roe‘s announcement, no one has produced a convincing defense of Roe on its own terms.

Even Yale’s Harold Koh, who clerked for Blackmun, was reduced to saying: “I’d rather have Blackmun, who uses the wrong reasoning in Roe to get to the right results, and let other people figure out the right reasoning.”

In other words: Blackmun was full of it, but since I like the results, I guess the law — which I’m supposed to have devoted my life to — really doesn’t matter.

The United States has a federal system in which the central government has a few enumerated powers, with the rest reserved to the states. No authority to regulate abortion was ever delegated to the central government, so it remains with the states. All the convoluted legal reasoning in the world cannot evade this simple and exceptionally obvious fact.

But as Robert Barnes said in his interview on the Tom Woods Show that comes out this week, the law schools are churning out judges who pretend the law says whatever they need it to say in order to get the outcomes they want.

Is that really the society you want?

An analysis was created on the Oversight and Judiciary Committees’ memo to the US Dept of Health back in January 2022, pertaining to the highly disturbing revelations found in the released NIH emails via the FOIA. Representatives Jim Jordan and James Comer had some serious questions for Collins and Fauci at the NIH, as it pertains to the true origin of covid, and why the NIH chose to hide all of this information from us.

These emails are DAMNING, and confirm that many of the world’s top virologists and biologists believed, based on many factors, that C19 was created in a lab. As well as how Fauci and Collins covered up this reality from the public. Given what we know now via allegations from Russia and China, ie the US DoD funded biolabs in Ukraine, and the supplementary action taken by the Russian military; this piece of the puzzle makes all the more sense.

You seriously need to read this entire memo. It’s only 2.5 pages and a few emails, but I will outline the main snippets and translate the political/corporate speak.

Jordan and Comer’s thesis for the memo is as follows:

“Dr. Fauci was warned of two things: (1) the potential that COVID-19 leaked from the Wuhan Institute Virology (WIV) and (2) the possibility that the virus was intentionally genetically manipulated.”

They go on to speak on the dangerous Gain of Function (biological weapon) research, as well as the NIH attempts to circumvent oversight and failed to report what they were doing. Requesting a written interview from Fauci and Collins to explain why their emails directly contradict their public statements and why they ignored and silenced the world’s most qualified scientists. Fauci claims he is the sole representation of “science”, yet chooses to ignore the global subject matter experts. Sacrificing the safety of every single human being on Earth for his own political agenda.

See the following emails with statements from the world’s  top scientists, reporting to the NIH on their analysis on the origin of covid.

Michael Farzan, Ph.D.

Chair & Professor Of Department Of Immunology And Microbiology. University of Florida. Discoverer of the SARS Receptor.

He states that he is “bothered by furin site, and has a hard time explaining that as an event outside the lab (though there are possible ways in nature but highly unlikely)”.

-Bob Garry, Ph.D.

Professor of Microbiology and Immunology.

Tulane School of Medicine.

He states that “I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario where you get from the bat virus or one very similar to it to nCoV where you insert exactly 4 amino acids 12 nucleotide that all have to be added at the exact same time to gain this function – that and you don’t change any other amino acid in S2? I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature.”

So two ofthe world’s top virologists told the US NIH, all the back in February 2020, it’s borderline molecularly impossible for C19 to occur naturally. And how did Collins at the NIH respond to the top virologists claiming C19 is man made?

Collinsstates ”a swift convening of experts in a confidence inspiring framework (WHO seems really the only option) is needed, or the voices of conspiracy will quickly dominate, doing great potential harm to science and international harmony…”

Yupyou read that right. The former director of the NIH, said that we need to ignore the top virologists, and the incontrovertible evidence that C19 came from an NIH funded lab. Otherwise, the public might think that NIH are conducting a nefarious conspiracy and that might damage public trust in science… in short, Collins is covering his ass because his agency created C19. They followed this up with a narrative setting teleconference to the world’s top scientists, pushing medical propaganda to ignore the fact that the virus was clearly man made in a lab.

Despite the repeated attempts from the NIH to establish that the lab leak reality was a “conspiracy theory”, the top virologists still pushed back.

Jeremy Farrar, Ph.D.

Former Professor of Tropical Medicine.

Oxford University.


Ed Holmes, Ph.D.

Professor of Medicine.

University of California.

“(Ed Holmes) 60-40 Lab. I’m (Jeremey Farrar) 50-50.”

So despite the gaslighting seminar, top scientists worldwide are still saying the lab leak possibility is more likely than not. The NIH chose to keep all of these conversations hidden from us, declaring that the science confirmed it was naturally occurring, and anyone suggesting otherwise is spreading disinformation. They took it further and used their collusion with big tech to censor anyone on the Internet who suggested that the virus was man made. Despite the science clearly confirming the mathematical certainty it was man made.

Think about how this correlates with the battle for control of Twitter. Think about why the Biden admin is so desperate to maintain control of what is considered “disinformation”. When the public finds out that Fauci, and the Dems created covid and lied about it… the jig is up. C19 affected nearly every person on the planet.

So two months go by, and in April of 2020, Collins reaches out to the rest of the NIH leadership and asks how they can combat this “destructive conspiracy”, in reference to a Fox News article citing that there is increasingly significant evidence that C19 came from the NIH funded lab in Wuhan.

Fauci responds in a private message just to Collins: “I would not do anything about this right now. It is a shiny object that will go away in times.”

So thepublic are catching on to the fact that the NIH lied about the origin of C19 the entire time, and the NIH respond with doubling down and continuing to cover up their involvement in the creation of a bioweapon that they used to shut down the world and implement a medical police state. And Fauci infers that the public is stupid and we will forget about it after the next “shiny object” presents itself.

In conclusion, the US NIH created C19 in a lab, via Gain of Function research in nations abroad, intentionally to avoid congressional oversight. One of their experiments either got out or was released. The NIH knew it was man-made, but told the public it was naturally occurring, in order to cover their asses. They got caught, and began censoring scientists that dared to point this out. As well as censored any dissent on the internet, despite the fact that all of this was true.  Seems they have a common MO of censoring the truths that are inconvenient for their plot to take over the world.

So when normies claim that C19 wasn’t man-made and you’re a conspiracy theorist, show them the emails and congressional memo, confirming the virus is man-made, and confirming the NIH covered it up. Keep in mind Collins “stepped down” shortly after this memo was sent out, and Fauci has largely disappeared since then as well.

Now, with all of this prerequisite knowledge, does it make more sense as to why Russia is destroying/occupying US DoD funded biolabs near their border in Ukraine? Now does it make sense why the other two world superpowers formally accused the US of creating biological weapons? Now does it make sense why the US government and big tech really want me off the internet?

The US NIH is responsible for creating the bioweapon known as C19 and this is the secret they can’t let their normies find out about. Now that they can’t control free speech on Twitter, they are going all on with the “Disinformation Governance Board” to attempt to keep this secret under wraps. Because once the greater public is exposed to this reality, the normies will be right along side us calling for military tribunals and Fauci’s head on a spike.


Image: BlackRock and Vanguard are taking over centralized food production technologies and will have near-total control over the future food supply in America
  • (Natural News) Many people are still blissfully unaware of what has happened, but the global food supply has been largely taken over by the oligarchs, including financial giants BlackRock and Vanguard.

It turns out that BlackRock and Vanguard have been gradually gobbling up ownership of the means of production, and now intend to lord it over the masses by centralizing all food production technologies in the United States and enslaving everyone under their control.

The top three shareholders of CD Industries Holdings, the world’s largest fertilizer company, include both BlackRock and Vanguard. BlackRock and Vanguard are also the top shareholders in Union Pacific, the railroad giant that moves fertilizer and other agriculture inputs all across the country.

The world’s top 10 food companies are also largely owned by both BlackRock and Vanguard. These include Nestlé, PepsiCo, General Mills, Kellogg’s, Associated British Foods, Mondel?z, Mars, Danone, Unilever, and Coca-Cola.

“What happens when they control all of the seeds, produce, and meat too?” asks Corey’s Digs.

“What happens when produce and meat are all grown inside secured facilities after a gene splice or inside a petri dish, and farmland becomes dormant due to overreaching regulations, lack of supplies, and manufactured inflation?”

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink says “it’s time to force people’s behavior to change”

BlackRock and Vanguard’s influence over CF Industries Holdings and T. Rowe Price Associates is having a major and direct impact on farming in the Midwest. It is also important to note that Union Pacific recently began mandating railroad shipping reductions of 20 percent, further impacting American agriculture.

“This will directly impact key agricultural areas such as Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, Texas, and California,” Corey’s Digs adds. “This will ultimately affect food supply and pricing. CF Industries is only one of 30 companies dealing with these restrictions.”

Another major transporter of agricultural goods, the Canadian National Railway (CN), is reportedly trying to help the fertilizer market grow. But its largest owner is none other than billionaire eugenicist Bill Gates, whom was reported is buying up as much American farmland as he can get his grubby little demonic hands on.

Back to BlackRock and Vanguard, the finance giants are also top shareholders in AppHarvest, a Kentucky-based agriculture company that boasts one of the biggest greenhouses in the world at 2.76 million square feet on 60 acres. The facility grows only tomatoes, which are sold at Kroger, Meijer, and Walmart.

Then there is Hydrofarm Holdings, based in Pennsylvania. This company also grows crops in a controlled environment with vertical farming technology. BlackRock and Vanguard are top shareholders in this company as well.

BlackRock currently boasts more than $20 trillion in investments, all of which follow the ESG and “socially responsible” guidelines required by its CEO Larry Fink. Fink infamously stated that “it’s time to force people’s behavior to change,” and he is apparently doing that by seizing control of American agriculture.

“Despite the LED lighting, robotics, computer data analysis, and ventilation systems required to power vertical growing facilities of this magnitude, since water is being saved and less of Bill Gates’ landmass is being used, investments are flowing into these alleged sustainable and environmentally friendly facilities, as well as massive greenhouses,” Corey’s Digs further explains.

Meanwhile, the World Health Organization (WHO) is capturing medicine and health care by moving swiftly to pass a new “pandemic treaty” that will give the United Nations total control over public health. This one-two punch of seizing both food and medicine spells a grim future of totalitarian fascism in the entire world.


Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: