Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Marxist’

Paul McGuire: Marxist and Communist Revolutionaries Are Bankrolled by International Banking Families

Posted by M. C. on June 25, 2022

“Ownership is the enemy of communism. Communism preaches and teaches that you should own nothing, that you should not have any private property. So Klaus Schwab and the Great Reset, are secretly financing communism. And so when they spread the lies and propaganda that state ‘you will own absolutely nothing,’ that is totally full-blown Marxist and communist revolutionary talk,” he said.

By Kevin Hughes
Natural News

The Marxist and communist revolutionaries are bankrolled by international banking families, according to author and speaker Paul McGuire.

“The Marxist and communist revolutionaries are totally financed by the super capitalist class. They’re totally financed by the globalist elite. They’re totally bankrolled by the wealthiest and richest international banking families in the world,” McGuire said during the June 20 episode of “The Paul McGuire Report.”

“So when the day is done, you can go to any communist revolution and you will discover that the people that are really behind these violent communist revolutions are the wealthiest and richest international banking families in the world.” (Related: Planet Lockdown Director James Patrick: COVID-19 pandemic is being run by central bankers.)

The internationally recognized prophecy expert added that the super-elite international banking families, or super capitalists, have been financing capitalism, which he said is the secret agent of super-capitalism.

McGuire also said this is a way of seizing all the money, assets, labor and property and disguising it as a communist revolution, which in reality is really a bloodthirsty heist by the globalists using their Marxist and communist armies to steal all the wealth of the middle class and working class of every nation in the world.

“The wealthiest families in the world like the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds have been bankrolling communism and Marxism since the beginning and they are ruthless,” McGuire said. He pointed out that all the communist revolutions and Marxist revolutions have been financed by the super-wealthy capitalists for the purpose of increasing their wealth and power further.

The Bible prophecy professor cited that this is what happened in Russia, China, Cuba and Venezuela. He said the masses of people there don’t have a middle class – people are either starving and or very wealthy.

“Only the very ignorant will actually believe that communism or socialism is about wealth redistribution and utopia for the worker or the common man,” he said. “Communists and Marxists are like the members of a bizarre religious cult who believe that communism or socialism is a means to help the common man. That is a big lie.”

Read the Whole Article

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

On Slavery @ 9:30 to 11:00

Posted by M. C. on May 26, 2022

~You can’t say slavery is wrong unless you also believe in individual sovereignty and individual intrinsic value~. Marxist/progressive rants on slavery can’t make sense other than to score political points.

This episode was recorded on April 4, 2022. I discussed gratitude, faith, and suffering in this conversation at the Franciscan University of Steubenville. How can we be sure that pain is a solid guiding principle as we navigate the world? What is the underlying structure of pain, and what does it point at? We also touched on a myriad of topics around those central themes, such as sin and the symbol of the snake, giving advice, resurrection, the relationship between faith and suffering, evil, the effect we have on others, and sunsets.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

How Erosion of Social Cohesion Makes the World a More Dangerous Place — Strategic Culture

Posted by M. C. on February 2, 2022

The main characters of the global game are dealing mostly unprepared with the contradictions of the future world, Claudio Gallo writes.

Claudio Gallo

As the old joke says: capitalism’s centuries are numbered. Everybody knows that Marx’s millenarian predictions went wrong: the New Man didn’t come, and we are still here in a world divided between the haves and have nots, as Hemingway titled his most social novel. But the Western economy’s contradictions are indeed stronger than ever. Take the recent World Economic Forum Global Risks Report. It draws on the views of over 12000 country-level leaders: after two years of the pandemic, the most perceived medium-term risk for societies are “social cohesion erosion“, “livelihood crisis”, and “mental health deterioration”.

Notably, “Social cohesion erosion is a top short-term threat in 31 countries — including Argentina, France, Germany, Mexico and South Africa from the G20”. In the long term, the threat of “involuntary migration” lurks. The majority of the people interviewed judge the efforts to contain or regulate migration and refugee waves as absolutely inconsistent.

You can argue that Davos is “about rich men arriving on private planes to discuss climate change, sexism and inequality” and “most of its predictions are worthless”, as Simon Kuper wrote in the Financial Times. But the reality that our societies are crumbling away before of our eyes is difficult to deny. Instead, the Davos paradox is whether the very elites that create these problems are able or only willing to solve them.

WEF report says that by 2030, 51 more million people are projected to live in extreme poverty compared to the pre-pandemic trend. “Income disparities exacerbated by an uneven economic recovery risk increasing polarisation and resentment within societies”. In the U.S., these divisions are taking a unique and disruptive form. A recent poll in the United States found “division in the country” to be voters’ top concern: they expected it to worsen in 2022. The attack on the U.S. Capitol in January 2021 was one clear sign of the instability that political polarisation risks may create.

You can call it a democracy’s crisis. The Western system, largely symbolic and confined to the theatrical moment of the ballots, seems no more capable of answering the people’s fears. The impact of migration on Western countries is fated to grow dramatically. Davos’ gurus are not reassuring. In the following years: “A bifurcated recovery is likely to prompt an upsurge in economic migration. At the same time, worsening extreme weather and rise in political instability, state fragility and civil conflict, are likely to further swell refugees numbers”.

While in the West, ordinary people were receiving the vaccine booster against COVID-19, the super-rich’s richness was boosted by the circumstances created by the same virus. It is the conclusion of the recent Oxfam report “Inequality Kills: the unparalleled action needed to combat unprecedented inequality in the wake of COVID-19”. “A new billionaire has been created every 26 hours since the pandemic began — the document says — The world’s 10 richest men have doubled their fortunes, while over 160 million people are projected to have been pushed into poverty. Meanwhile, an estimated 17 million people have died from COVID-19—a scale of loss not seen since the Second World War. These issues are all part of the same, deeper malaise. It is that inequality is tearing our societies apart”.

Everywhere the same sad music. The perception of social decay is faced with mild desperation or the neoliberal choir’s same old song: “there is no alternative”. But, as Noam Chomsky said, in a 2021 interview on Jacobin Magazine, the corporate sector is “running scared”. “They’re concerned with what they call “reputational risks,” meaning “the peasants are coming with their pitchforks.” All across the corporate world — at Davos, and at the Business Roundtable — there are discussions of how “We have to confess to the public that we’ve done the wrong things. We haven’t paid enough attention to stakeholders, workforce, and community, but now we realise our errors. Now we’re becoming what, in the 1950s, was called ’soulful corporations,’ really dedicated to the common good.”

Indeed, the corporate world needs a new mammoth global PR campaign. The Green Economy is ready to be just another example of commodification of every life’s aspect and not the beginning of a more human business’ era. The electric automotive big new frontier rush is not bound to really reduce the global pollution but only to open a new market with many environmental unsolved questions. A ridiculous result of this neoliberal “Greenwashing” wave is the European plans to allow gas and nuclear to be labelled as “green” investments. You can see here Western democracies’ crisis in action: instead of confronting the challenges, they change the meaning of the words.

It is not a surprise that the Edelman Trust Barometer 2022 found a world “ensnared in a vicious cycle of distrust, fuelled by a growing lack of faith in media and government. Through disinformation and division, these two institutions are feeding the cycle and exploiting it for commercial and political gain”.

The Edelman’s Barometer has been polling the world’s nations for years on trust in their governments, media, business and NGO. Today it says that “anger wins the clicks”, creating a “government-media distrust spiral”.

“The public has become widely aware that the media does not play it straight”. “We really have a collapse of trust in democracies,” said Reuters Richard Edelman, whose communications group published the survey of over 36,000 respondents in 28 countries interviewed between Nov. 1-24 of last year. The biggest losers of trust over the previous year were institutions in Germany, down 7 points to 46, Australia at 53 (-6), the Netherlands at 57 (-6), South Korea at 42 (-5) and the United States at 43 (-5). Russia wins the palm of the more sceptical nation. The very fact that countries not famous for their democracy, like China, United Arab Emirates and Thailand, are at the top of the trust’s index may show that their citizens do not share so much the faith in Western’s democratic ideals. They value more a “sense of predictability about policy” a “coherence” among the national leaders that the Western public seems to lack at all. China shows a staggering 83% public trust in institutions. Definitely, optimism about the future lies more in the East than in the West.

The Davos report rightly stresses that our world needs more than ever a “global governance and a more effective international risk mitigation” not only for the Covid’s threat but also to cope with “geo-economic confrontation”. Unfortunately, the numbers are telling a different story. The main characters of the global game are dealing mostly unprepared with the contradictions of the future world. Weak governments of divided European countries face geopolitical crises, as the Ukrainian one, trapped in the old American imperial scheme, entirely against their national interest. The West needs a “colour” revolution, not the East.

© 2010 – 2022 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Real Reason Dems Suddenly Want Cuomo Gone – Issues & Insights

Posted by M. C. on August 6, 2021

The party and its leader are in big political trouble, and this is their cynical attempt to show they stand for something, anything, other than the incompetence and political extremism they’ve shown so far.

I & I Editorial Board

To anyone even remotely acquainted with events of the last year and a half, it should be no surprise that New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo is being asked now even by his own party to resign. What’s disturbing is that Democrats didn’t do it sooner.

After being the media’s most coddled, falsely praised politician in America, nearly impervious to any and all criticisms, a new report alleges that Cuomo engaged in serial criminal behavior while governor.

“The independent investigation has concluded that Gov. Andrew Cuomo sexually harassed multiple women and in doing so violated federal and state law,” New York Attorney General Letitia James announced Tuesday.

Is anyone really surprised about Cuomo’s conduct, which has been well covered outside of the mainstream media in recent years? Despite repeated claims of harassment by Cuomo’s victims – 11 of them total – Dems now profess to be “shocked, SHOCKED!” to discover their fellow party member committed acts that could end his political career.

Cuomo, once routinely lavished with extravagant praise despite his awful performance as New York governor, has overnight become a pariah. It doesn’t help that he also committed fraud by letting an aide falsely sign a document attesting that he took required sexual harassment training in 2019.

We ask, where were these self-righteous Democrats when Cuomo and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, his Marxist frenemy, were wrecking New York’s economy while imposing devastating COVID-19 lockdown rules on an unsuspecting populace?

See the rest here

— Written by the I&I Editorial Board

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Whodathunkit Wally?

Posted by M. C. on December 5, 2020

A Marxist election victory stopped Russian “meddling” faster than COVID cured influenza last Spring.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Erie Times E-Edition Article-Harris victory is a win for America

Posted by M. C. on November 17, 2020

The Erie newspaper has no qualms about calling this a Harris administration.

How can the person who pulled 2% popularity in the primary polls and was dumped for the old white guy be called a winner?

The deep state is pulling Harris’ strings who in turn pulls Biden’s until he can no longer be allowed out of the basement.

Brace yourself for the lady who was indoctrinated by the Berkley economics professor father hired in the name of diversity because of his Marxist philosophy.

A Winner!

The issue: Harris victory makes history Our view: U.S. makes good on promise

The president and his enablers in the GOP have cast such an ugly, unworthy pall over what should have been a shining moment in American history.

Voters in this country turned out in historic numbers amid a deadly pandemic to make their voices heard. They chose between stark, contrasting options, the hopeful, inclusive direction for our country championed by former Vice President Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, California’s former top prosecutor and now a sitting U.S. senator.

Rather than honor the peaceful transition of power that makes our democracy possible by ceding the race and letting President- elect Biden’s team begin planning for the future with the federal resources set aside for that purpose, President Donald Trump levels baseless attacks on the integrity of the election, blocks the transition process, and suggests he intends to ignore the clear outcome. Biden bested Trump soundly in the both the Electoral College and popular vote. Trump’s own administration said the election was the most secure in American history, yet his failed legal assaults continue.

Trump’s corrosive endgame deserves to go down in American history as the scandal it is. It seems destined to suffer in contrast to Biden’s and Harris’ win, which represents another overdue and welcome expansion America’s promise of liberty and justice for all — something all Americans can celebrate.

Harris, the daughter of immigrants, is the first woman and the first woman of color to win the second-highest office in the land. Her ascent offers tangible witness to America as the land of “possibilities,” as Biden so often terms it.

Her victory makes real promises delayed to women who fought long years to win the right to vote with the ratification of the 19th Amendment 100 years ago, a right that took even longer to be realized for women of color.

“It’s a wonderful opportunity for other women and little girls to see her and know that they, too, can become great leaders,” as Erie’s first Black City Councilwoman, Rubye Jenkins-Husband, told reporter Jennie Geisler.

The victory carries freight not just with respect to the past, but the present, as the nation still struggles to come to terms with the damaging legacy of white supremacy.

And it shines a welcoming beacon forward after four years in which a foundational aspect of our national identity — America as a nation of immigrants — was drawn into question by the White House. Harris is the daughter of a Jamaican economist and an Indian scientist.

Vice president-elect Harris, in her breakthrough win, helps reaffirm our standing as a nation of freedom, equality and opportunity. As Sharmin Khundker, 51, of Erie, an immigrant from Bangladesh, said to Geisler, women hold high positions of power elsewhere.

“Why not in America? They are supposed to be the leaders,” she said.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Interview: Learn How Marxist Revolutionaries Massacred Ethiopia’s Christian Monarchy | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on October 25, 2020

Media elites act as if they care about vulnerable lives. They act as if they only care about facts and fairness. But the record of history shows they cover up the voices that get in the way of their religious devotion to socialism. Just like Jesus was sacrificed by a leader named Caiaphas who proclaimed “it is better that one man die than the whole nation perish,” socialist revolutionaries and their would-be myth-makers in the press believe it is better that Emperor Haile Selassie die, and the truth of his impact with him, than the whole global project of socialism perish.

by David Gornoski

“What happened was a catastrophic revolution that really ate its own bright people. The very people who were behind the revolution were the ones who were its victims,” Prince Ermias Sahle Selassie has said on the 1974 Marxist revolution that overthrew his grandfather, Ethiopia’s Emperor Haile Selassie.

I had the rare opportunity to interview Prince Ermias Sahle Selassie, president of the Crown Council of Ethiopia, and the grandson of Ras Tafari, Emperor Haile Selassie. In my discussion, I heard a first-hand account of the mortal dangers of populations adopting a socialist revolution that we should carefully consider in our own country.

Watch my exclusive interview with Prince Ermias Sahle Selassie here:

Emperor Haile Selassie was a pivotal figure for Ethiopia and the whole of Africa. He implemented several reforms such as a written constitution and land reform to accelerate agricultural development. He was world renown for his defense of his people from Italian fascist imperialism. In 1963, his creation of the Organization of African Unity sowed the seeds for solidarity and liberation of African nations from colonial rule.

In a time in which corporate media look to act as self-appointed gatekeepers of African history, it is telling that so few young Americans are informed of Emperor Haile Selassie’s out-sized role in defeating fascism and colonialism in Africa. The answer lies in the fact that Emperor Selassie was a staunch defender of Christianity, a symbol of patriarchy, and was murdered by socialists promising democracy.

As a devout Christian emperor, Emperor Haile Selassie was a symbol of fatherhood in Africa. Just like all radical groups driven by envy and a hatred for boundaries, the Marxists who tortured and murdered an elderly Emperor Selassie in 1974 were simply living up to their global creed: kill strong fathers first, loot the rest of the people next.

This was nothing new. The Soviets who backed the overthrow of anti-colonialist Emperor Haile Selassie were operating under the same twisted religious playbook they used to gain power in their own country. Financed by western corporatists that benefited from preventing market competition at home and abroad, the Bolsheviks used the disaster of World War I as the animus to murder Tsar Nicholas II’s family—not sparing a single young child—and take over Russia. Everything the revolutionaries complained about under the monarch—lack of food, stolen land, violent prisons, police abuse—they did tenfold in their never-ending transition to utopia.

In my interview with Prince Ermias Selassie, he recounts a similar formula for the revolutionaries in Ethiopia:

They closed all the churches, executions were very rampant, and it didn’t fare well for the Marxists. I mean, they never got the support of the people.

Today, Western corporatists and their press organs continue to sell a whitewashed view of African history that diminishes the voices of African heroes like Emperor Haile Selassie. Outlets like The New York Times live up to their legacy of covering up the crimes of Marxists like the ghastly 1930s Holdomor genocide in Ukraine, resulting in 12 million deaths. They amplify voices that celebrate the same anti-market, anti-freedom, anti-family sentiments that fueled the murder of Emperor Selassie.

The coprorate press does all this under the guise of social justice. Yet the only slavery The New York Times crowd will condemn are instances that took place 200 years ago. Meanwhile, they openly campaign for a candidate like Vice President Joe Biden, who led the butchering of another independent African country, Libya, and yawn at the unleashing of a modern slave trade in that country. Indeed, The New York Times used its pages to push the public for war in Libya. As they did in Syria. Millions of people of color have been displaced, dismembered, and killed as a result.

Wherever we go in history, the problem with the corporate press and their violent revolutionary foot soldiers is that they suffer the same delusion that Jesus confronted in his own time from self-proclaimed authorities:

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the monuments of the righteous. And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets. So you testify against yourselves that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets.

Media elites act as if they care about vulnerable lives. They act as if they only care about facts and fairness. But the record of history shows they cover up the voices that get in the way of their religious devotion to socialism. Just like Jesus was sacrificed by a leader named Caiaphas who proclaimed “it is better that one man die than the whole nation perish,” socialist revolutionaries and their would-be myth-makers in the press believe it is better that Emperor Haile Selassie die, and the truth of his impact with him, than the whole global project of socialism perish. They truly believe it is okay to sacrifice some, including millions in the poor and middle class, who stand in the way of their god—the all encompassing, all seeing, all knowing, all caring, cradle-to-grave state.

In a now deleted statement of beliefs page on, the corporate press-lauded organization declared:

We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

To the young adults who have been drawn into America’s acute bout with revolutionary anger, I will leave them with Prince Ermias Selassie’s warning about Marxism:

I would say to them that it’s very interesting to read and understand concepts but when you live and experience it you realize how complex it is and it’s not such a black and white issue. Idealism, I think, leads to a lot of fanaticism; it’s your way or the highway. That has led to a lot of problems: a lot of blind hatred, a lot of blind murders. All about…being the sacrificial lamb to justify your right and that man is God and is in charge of his own destiny, which I don’t believe in.

The Marxists who killed Emperor Selassie failed. Ethiopia’s churches and markets are open again and healing is underway. The revolutionaries attempting to overthrow family and faith in America will fail too. The question is, will we learn from the lessons of the past and reject sacrificial revolution at its infancy or take the long, sad path of ignorant repetition?

About David Gornoski

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

What the Father of Kamala Harris Thinks About Marxism

Posted by M. C. on October 21, 2020

The father of Kamala Harris is Donald Harris, an immigrant from Jamaica, who taught economics at Stanford University.

He received a Bachelor of Arts degree from London University in 1960. Six years later he received a Doctor of Philosophy degree from the University of California- Berkeley. He retired from Stanford as a professor emeritus of economics in 1998.

He joined the Stanford faculty in 1972 and his focus according to the University was “exploring the analytical conception of the process of capital accumulation and its implications for a theory of growth of the economy, with the aim of providing thereby an explanation of the intrinsic character of growth as a process of uneven development.”

In other words, there is nothing to indicate in his Stanford profile that he is a Marxist. The words Marx, Marxist, Marxism are nowhere to be found on his profile.

Indeed, when I first looked at his profile when Kamala was in the primaries, I passed him off as an unimpressive affirmative action hire.

He was a special hire all right but the fact that he is Jamaican was a bonus, there is no question he was viewed as an “alternative economist” Marxist hire.

This was the headline from The Stanford Daily when Harris was offered his post.:

The newspaper clip reads:

Marxist Offered Economics Post

Don Harris, a prominent Marxist Professor, has been offered a full professorship in the Economics Department here, Department Chairman James Rosse confirmed yesterday. Rosse said Harris has not yet accepted the offer, but he “expects to hear from him this week.”

Harris who still holds a tenured position at the University of Wisconsin, has served as a visiting Professor here, and is currently teaching at the University of the West Indies in Kingston, Jamaica.

The appointment is the direct result of student pressure in recent years to hire more faculty who favor an “alternative approach” to economics, said Economics Prof. John Gurley, who now teaches the only undergraduate course in Marxist economics. 

Gurley said the appointment of Harris was the culmination of the six-month “round-the-world” search for the most qualified Marxist professor available

Exceptionally good

Gurley called Harris “an exceptionally good teacher, outstanding researcher and one of the leading young people in Marxist economics.”

One knowledgeable source told the Daily that some senior faculty members were very hesitant hiring Harris, but they gradually yielded tp student pressure.

A conservative economics faculty member, who wished to remain anonymous said he was “not part of the decision and it would not be fair to say anything. “

He also added that “as far as I’m concerned Harris is not in the same field I’m in.”


The department, Gurley said, looked for economists who espoused not only Marxists viewpoints, but other alternative perspectives as well.

Libertarian economists, who advocated untrammeled laissez-faire capitalism,for exa

mple, were considered in the selection, he claimed

Gurley said the search included those knowledgeable about socialist economies even if they didn’t sympathize with a Marxist system.

At Stanford, Harris was one of the key faculty members behind a then-new program, “Alternative Approaches to Economic Analysis” as a field of graduate study at Stanford University.

This is what he wrote about Marxism in his book, Capital Accumulation and Income Distribution (my highlights):

Marx was the theorist of economic growth par excellence. He concieved of the capitalist economy as an inherently expansionary system having an inner logic of its own. It was his purpose to discover the abstract and general principles underlying the operation of this form of society and the contradictions it entailed, so as to account for its process of change and supersession. Out of this scientific endeavor, Marx developed an integrated system of analysis with a distinctive method and quite specific formulation of the laws of motion of the capitalist economy. Others, after Marx, have attempted to elaborate upon and develop further this system of analysis, recognizing the changing conditions of capitalism as it develops. Specific elements of Marx’s own formulation as concerns, for instance, the law of the falling tendency of the rate of profit and a tendency of the organic composition of capital to rise, are subject to an ongoing debate within the Marxian tradition. The system of analysis is also incomplete in some of its essentials. Nevertheless, the Marxian system remains today as a powerful basis upon which to construct a theory of growth of the capitalist economy appropriate to modern conditions. Accordingly, an attempt is made below (see Chapters 3 and 10) to develop some elements of the Marxian theoretical system that are relevant to this purpose.

And that is how the daddy of Kamala rolls.

Kamala received a Bachelor’s degree from Howard University where she double-majored in political science and (ahem) economics and chaired Howard’s economics society.


Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

My Corner by Boyd Cathey – The Philosophy of Progress is Killing Us

Posted by M. C. on October 7, 2020

The progressivist Left goes much further. Indeed, the same demands for equality, and expanded and newly-discovered “rights,” in the slogans and proposals of Leftists often become props in an overpowering effort, not as much for desired “social justice,” but more for the acquisition of power: a means to an end, the control of society and its structures.


Over the past few years I have written about what I term a “triumph of lunacy” in our society—most significantly on our college campuses and in our schools, in our entertainment, in the media, but also in our culture generally. The post-Marxist progressivist Left, after the apparent political set-back of the 2016 elections, has redoubled its efforts with a frenzied fanaticism unknown in our history, at least since a few years before the War Between the States.

What distinguishes our revolutionary period from previous upheavals is that today’s revolutionaries have, in effect, created a “counter-reality” in which they base their thought and actions. That reality they have manufactured out of a critical misapprehension of the nature of creation and the nature of mankind. That counter-reality is totally subjective, anchored in fractured internal thinking processes which have been infected and warped from their inception. That counter-reality is the inverse of the two-millennia of Western civilization; it possesses its own language, its own precepts, its own rules of conduct, its own goals and objectives, undeterred by the inexorable laws of nature or the historic teachings of the Christian faith. Indeed, it is the contrary of historic Christianity.

In a very substantial sense the raging post-Marxist Left and its nostrums are grounded in the “idea of progress,” a broad conceptual movement in history that dates back several centuries, at least to the Enlightenment of the 18th century, but which achieved a large degree of intellectual triumph in society in the 19th, most especially with the social theories of Auguste Comte, Herbert Spencer, and others. The late conservative philosopher, Robert Nisbet, wrote comprehensively about it in his volume, The History of the Idea of Progress. It posits that history is a process materially leading to the improvement and refinement of our technological and scientific environment, and, philosophically, leading to more “individual freedom” and the abolition of what are considered hindrances to that expanding freedom and what are perceived to be any obstacles to the irreversible expansion of “rights” and “equality”—which become over time almost inexhaustible and unlimited. Nothing can stand against the ideas that proponents of progress propound. If you do, you are a hopeless reactionary, a bigot, old-fashioned, and probably a racist and a misogynist.

Of course, material progress is observable, constant, and measurable, and is to be welcomed generally. Going from oil lamps to electric lights, or from horse-and-buggies to automobiles is seen positively by most everyone. There are, certainly, a few negatives in such progress (e.g., damage to the environment, altered living patterns, etc.), but most of those negatives are outweighed by the positives and the material enhancement of civilization.

The real problem comes when the “idea of progress” is made the benchmark for intellectual thought and how political and social goals are presented and achieved under its banner. For it then becomes, depending on how it is defined, the vehicle for ideologies that use it to shape and push their agendas—whether the liberals of the 19th century, or the Marxists and Communists of the 20th. To be “on the side of progress,” to be part of the irresistible “forces of history,” is to grant to one’s beliefs a kind of inescapable inevitability: you can’t oppose what I am saying and doing, because it’s simply going to happen, and you can’t stop it!

In our society, and in Western society generally, the inevitability and positive nature of intellectual progress is more or less taken for granted. Most conservatives, including those opposed supposedly to the current revolution on our campuses and in our streets, accept it as a given. They may demur and disagree about what the goals should or ought to be, but the essential premise, the template idea, remains fixed and unassailable.

Thus, on Fox News most pundits applaud greater “rights” for minorities, both racial and sexual. They just don’t agree with some of the more vigorous applications coming from the Left. For “establishment conservatives” increasingly same sex marriage must be a full constitutional right—full transgender normalization and acceptance in society is desirable—women must have equal access to every position or role that men have (e.g., no more male-only academies, no more “Boy” Scouts, etc.)—absolute racial equity, even if that means special advantages, must be pursued—and “American democratic values” are in all parts of the globe demanded (even at the point of an M-16 rifle).

The progressivist Left goes much further. Indeed, the same demands for equality, and expanded and newly-discovered “rights,” in the slogans and proposals of Leftists often become props in an overpowering effort, not as much for desired “social justice,” but more for the acquisition of power: a means to an end, the control of society and its structures.

Right after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis and the first violent riots here in North Carolina, a couple of black college students videotaped a group of exclusively-white “millennials” demonstrating in a frenzy in Raleigh, North Carolina. The black videotapers noticed and commented that all the demonstrators were white, probably the sons and daughters of wealthy white (liberal) parents, and graduates of prestigious universities like Duke or UNC. The irony wasn’t lost on the two blacks, who wondered: “What do those privileged whites know about black issues?” Indeed, what they know is undergirded by and laden with the intellectual progressivism and post-Marxist ideology they’ve learned in classrooms at those very same prestigious universities.

In effect, these protesters demonstrate against “white supremacy” and “institutional racism” in a not-so-hidden effort to expiate their own sin of “whiteness,” inculcated into them by “woke” professors and an ideologized educational system.

But they are also out in the streets attempting to create a “new world order” in which the real objective is power, and that power recurs to global elites. “Systemic racism” may be a target but actually and more significantly, opposition to it is a means of advancing the overall goal of completely restructuring and recasting society—and the destruction of two millennia of civilization and its culture, annealed by the Christian faith—on behalf of those elites.

Until conservatives understand the fundamental dangers in embracing the “idea of progress” philosophically and in praxis—until they learn that beginning with the same premises on “equality” and “rights” as their purported opponents will inevitably conduct them to giving way to those opponents…and to denying implicitly, if not finally explicitly God-given creation and its natural and Divine Positive Laws–until they recognize this, they will remain prisoners of a dialectic that leads them always to eventual surrender to the Left.

The post-War Between the States Southern divine and essayist Robert Lewis Dabney summed up this type of conservatism succinctly and presciently 150 years ago. That quotation is apt and applies to far too many members of today’s “conservative loyal opposition”:

“This is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is to-day one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will to-morrow be forced upon its timidity, and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn.

“American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it he salted? Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious, for the sake of the truth, and has no idea of being guilty of the folly of martyrdom. It always—when about to enter a protest—very blandly informs the wild beast whose path it essays to stop, that its ‘bark is worse than its bite,’ and that it only means to save its manners by enacting its decent rôle of resistance.

“The only practical purpose which it now subserves in American politics is to give enough exercise to Radicalism to keep it ‘in wind,’ and to prevent its becoming pursy and lazy from having nothing to whip. No doubt, after a few years, when women’s suffrage shall have become an accomplished fact, conservatism will tacitly admit it into its creed, and thenceforward plume itself upon its wise firmness in opposing with similar weapons the extreme of baby suffrage; and when that too shall have been won, it will be heard declaring that the integrity of the American Constitution requires at least the refusal of suffrage to asses. There it will assume, with great dignity, its final position.”  [From Womens’ Rights Women,” Discussions, vol. IV, Secular Discussions.]

Will they learn before it is too late? Or will they—far more likely—give way like previous temporizers in the face of the lunacy? 

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

With Ginsburg’s Death Cue the Last Stand of American Marxists — Strategic Culture

Posted by M. C. on September 25, 2020

Blumenthal knows that Ginsburg’s replacement will be the end of their power, the apotheosis of a four-generation long march through the institutions in the U.S. that has undermined basic societal structures. He knows re-electing Trump will ensure the Supreme Court will be made up of judges that tilt towards a constructionist view of the Constitution as a limited set of powers rather than an expansive one.

So is John Roberts. So was Antonin Scalia, Oliver Wendell Holmes and every other Supreme Court just that followed him. These are people, regardless of how they see themselves, their motivations or records as jurists, who wield the kind of power over the lives of billions that no person should possibly have.

By definition, that makes them tyrants. Some better than others on certain issues, but never forget they are tyrants, but who are, magically, supposed to be above politics.

 Tom Luongo

For all of the bad things that have happened in 2020 don’t for a second believe that 2021 won’t be infinitely worse. It has been clear to me for months that the fight for the White House is one for the ages.

While every election is ‘the most important one ever’ in the minds of the politicos who see the other side for what it is, an existential threat to their power, this election is, I feel, finally one worth that moniker. But, that said, nearly every election truly is one where voters are presented a Hobson’s Choice where there is no real difference between the standard bearers of both major parties.

And the animating principle of these people is the accumulation of raw power, nothing more. Power, as a concept in modern political theory, is purely an outgrowth of Marxian thinking, defining everything that happens in our lives in terms of it. There are no win/wins in this worldview, only those who benefit and those who are exploited.

Basic concepts of comparative advantage and individual talents as expressed in free trade between sovereign actors are not only nullified by this doctrine but actively disparaged and denigrated through the language of envy and the rhetoric of victimization.

With the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg the day has come for the existent power structure where they have to reveal the final truth of their naked need to maintain their power.

Because replacing Ginsburg has been the most pressing concern for Democrats, Regime Republicans and their globalist backers in The Davos Crowd since the day Donald Trump was elected.

Now that she is dead a knock-down, drag-out, war without end commences in Washington D.C.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi is already talking about impeaching Trump if he dares to try and push through a replacement for Ginsburg. She’s already famously termed Congressional Republicans, “enemies of the state.”

Senator Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut has all but threatened the American people with open-ended violence if they re-elect Trump.


Scott Adams is not wrong here for calling Blumenthal to the carpet on this. Blumenthal is just saying what the Democrats have actually been doing for four years, trying to hang Trump for just being President. Blumenthal, like so many in Washington, are suffused with a Marxian lust for power and an abject and debilitating fear of losing it.

Fear of the loss of power, of all kinds, is the most powerful motivator of terrible, if not outright, tyrannical behavior. We’re all capable of it. You, me, a Senator, the cable guy or, yes, a Supreme Court justice.

Blumenthal knows that Ginsburg’s replacement will be the end of their power, the apotheosis of a four-generation long march through the institutions in the U.S. that has undermined basic societal structures. He knows re-electing Trump will ensure the Supreme Court will be made up of judges that tilt towards a constructionist view of the Constitution as a limited set of powers rather than an expansive one.

Every election, the Democrats have, quite cynically, pushed women farther and farther into insanity over an issue which the Supreme Court should have never ruled on in the first place, abortion. And fear over this right to murder your unborn child has corrupted women to the point that now it’s an irrational fear of a loss of control over something that would just devolve to the states or local communities, as it should.

All of this said and I don’t mean to speak ill of the dead when I say this but Ginsburg was a tyrant.

So is John Roberts. So was Antonin Scalia, Oliver Wendell Holmes and every other Supreme Court just that followed him. These are people, regardless of how they see themselves, their motivations or records as jurists, who wield the kind of power over the lives of billions that no person should possibly have.

By definition, that makes them tyrants. Some better than others on certain issues, but never forget they are tyrants, but who are, magically, supposed to be above politics.

And yet, the political calculus of who controls the Supreme Court of the world’s most powerful nation is always on the table. The elevation of the Supreme Court to the final arbiter of law in the U.S. is itself a power it was never intended to have with state Supreme Courts having as much, if not more, power than the SCOTUS.

But, again, in the long march through all the institutions by those in thrall to the siren’s song of power and its ruthless application, that issued has de facto been settled since Lee surrendered his army at Appomattox.

In their minds, the wrong person cannot control the access to the court, in this case Trump. They know he’s in line to make more appointments to the court should he win a second term.

The fear that a little bit of liberty or respect for the dignity of human sovereignty would make its way into the Supreme Court leaves the leadership of both parties saturated with fear.

Because, ultimately, these philosopher tyrants who occupy the Supreme Court are there to give the illusion of impartiality and justice, not to actually defend those high-minded concepts which have no real place in practical politics and the struggle sessions for power.

What is clear now that Ginsburg is gone is that if these power mad lose their fight over this seat and the direction of the court for the next two generations then they will dilute the court’s power just like they are actively diluting the legitimacy of local law enforcement through the subversion of local governments.

The openly Marxist rhetoric to justify the looting and burning by BLM/antifa activists while harassing their victims in and around their homes was done to lay the groundwork for a larger protest in the event of Trump winning.

And now the stage has been set for their last stand. Trump will be blocked from restoring order to the court by arm-twisting the three fake Republicans in the Senate – Mitt Romney (RINO-UT), Lisa Murkowski (RINO-AK) and Susan Collins (RINO-ME) – into voting down any appointment.

If there was ever to call in the markers on these three folks it is now. A presumably divided court will uphold ballot harvesting decisions by state Supreme Courts in Pennsylvania and Michigan, presumably to grant even more power to those who count the votes there to make sure the final tally comports with their desired reality.

They were supremely successful with this in 2018, flipping a number of seats after election night, to ensure not only a strong Democratic majority but that the most important allies of President Trump were removed.

Washington always collapses to protect itself from threats of the people having a real say over their future. And, like it or not and for all his faults (which are legion), Donald Trump is the people’s standard bearer against them.

They have gone all-in on this strategy. Men like George Soros have spent billions in support of this push for the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset. They aren’t going to allow such a little thing like the passing of a supreme court justice at the wrong time deter them from their goal.

You don’t need to have a dog’s keen nose to smell the fear and desperation that clings to these people, however. It is palpable in their behavior, their rhetoric and their over-reaction to everything Trump does or might do.

And their act is tiresome. The American people have fear porn fatigue. It’s showing up in the polls and its showing up in their hysterics. Regardless of how the election turns out, there will be no rest from the violence unleashed and the violence yet to come when millions of Americans come to the uncomfortable conclusion that they will never hold power again in their lifetimes.

© 2010 – 2020 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal

Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »