The atomized individual, with no lineage, no heritage and no rootedness in his past is the perfect clay to mold into the cosmopolitan “citizen of the world.”
The counterfeit America that bequeathed to the country a fraudulent concept of citizenship divorced both from the consent of the governed and actual American history also will not allow us to distinguish between men and women. Counterfeit America offers us counterfeit maleness, counterfeit femaleness, counterfeit sexuality, and a counterfeit version of the family. At heart, it comes from a kind of nominalism: pretending we can call fundamentally different things the same thing.
Let us start with men and women: individuals born with a pair of XX or XY chromosomes.
Counterfeit America tells us there is no substantive difference between the two.
Since there is no natural difference between man and woman, likewise there can be no moral difference between them, either.
Instead, we are told that the male virtues: physical strength and endurance, coolness under pressure, inner composure, stoicism, and aggression are not really male virtues at all. The feminine virtues: honesty and fidelity, nurturing and compassion, physical beauty and charm aren’t female virtues either.
Rather, counterfeit America tells us that they are to be melded into whatever each disordered individual wants them to be; that might be the genderless, neutered individual with no sex at all; it might be men “choosing” to call themselves women and taking female names; it might be women “choosing” to call themselves men while taking male names—as if humans can even pretend to have such power. In counterfeit America, rather than receiving his or her sex from God Almighty, each atomized individual “chooses” to make it whatever he wants.
If only each atomized individual could choose to copy and print legal tender in the way they select their sexes these days! For some reason, I don’t imagine that will be happening any time soon.
Still, it’s an interesting thought.
I buy my own copier, print a few thousand fraudulent copies of some Benjamins and demand that the bank or vendor accepts it as legal tender. If they say “no,” I scream “discrimination” and hire the SPLC to sue them. How is that any different from a male who dresses up as a woman and demands that I call “her” by the fraudulent made up female name he has chosen? God only knows.
But the Supreme Court, seemingly controlled by counterfeit America, has nothing to say about the fact that the former (printing my own counterfeit copies of United States dollars) willland me in prison. At the same time, the Court says if I refuse to play along with the latter (going along with the “transgender” charade) I can be fired by my employer for “discrimination.” Strange world indeed.
This gendered masquerade rests on still more nominalism. Men have always been physically stronger and more aggressive than women. This is why, despite a century of feminism, men still run faster than women in every distance at track and still lift far more weight at the deadlift, the bench press, and the power clean. How big is the difference? Despite the fact that the nominalist tells us there is no real difference between men and women, for example, a woman who is stronger than 99 percent of other women is still weaker than 90 percent of men when it comes to the bench press.
Despite a century of cultural emasculation and conditioning meant to turn them into copies of the fairer sex, American men as a group still commit far more violent crime in the United States than American women: four times more to be precise. On death row, the disparity is even greater: there are over 2,500 men on death row and just over 50 women. That’s 48 men for every 1 female inmate on death row.
Still, counterfeit America tells us to pretend there is no difference, really. And if you say there is, good luck keeping your job or evading a “discrimination” lawsuit for saying the obvious.
Despite these lies, children still recognize the difference.
Finally, nominalism leads counterfeit America to say that the sacramental marriage between one man and one woman is somehow the equivalent of the “blended family” and fornicators cohabitating; that it is the equivalent of sterile homosexuals who cannot beget children without a test tube; and it demands we pretend that there is no substantive impact on children raised by these counterfeit families which aim to supplant the real, God-ordained family. The fabrication doesn’t hold up under examination. Bastard children reared by cohabitating parents out of wedlock, test-tube children created for homosexual couples or career-minded heterosexual geriatrics, and those adopted by the childless have worse life outcomes across every demographic than do children raised by their biological mothers and fathers.
Counterfeit America wants to shame us for pointing this out.
Yet, look at the results of this blurring of the lines. Since I was born, the American fertility rate hasn’t been above replacement for a single year. All American population growth since has been due to increases in life expectancy among already living Americans or through immigration. If we break down America’s fertility rate by political orientation, we would see that the differences are even greater. The fertility rate of counterfeit America is pitiful: very liberal women have barely more than 1 child per lifetime. And it is dropping. Studies tell us that perhaps 1 in 4 women (and men) among the millennials, will never have children.
Here’s a thought experiment. If we could isolate counterfeit Americans on a large island cut off from mass migration and push them out of the driver’s seat in those cultural institutions which brainwash conservative children to join them (the liberal media, education, entertainment and tech industries), just based on the results of their own worldviews, personal “choices” and resulting fertility rate, what would happen?
They would go extinct.
Why, therefore, should we take any advice from people who—all things being equal—have no future? To use their own scientific parlance, counterfeit America—as a whole—represents a worldview which is little more than anevolutionary dead-end?
Perhaps severing the ties between mother, father, and biological children is deliberate? A child in this situation has no lineage; and with no lineage, one’s connection to one’s heritage is made more tenuous. The atomized individual, with no lineage, no heritage and no rootedness in his past is the perfect clay to mold into the cosmopolitan “citizen of the world,” who sees borders, culture, and tradition as the enemy. Such an individual, sundered from all of these social ties, is the perfect clay for the almighty State to mold into whatever form it wishes.
There has always been evil in this world since the Fall. There’s always been evil in America (like slavery) and hard times, but now it is evil all the way through. Feminism, the Internet, and Hollywood have corrupted deeply. Even many of the churches have grown lukewarm. They are afraid to teach the truth, hence, worldliness has taken over the churches.
Sodom and Gomorrah didn’t just start out as evil. No, the evil grew until the cities were destroyed, and all great nations are eventually destroyed from within. Please, read Romans 1. It explains clearly how evil begins and what the end result is. Men “hold the truth in unrighteousness” and God eventually turns them over to a reprobate mind.
Here is a comment from a man from this post in response to a woman trying to say that the past was just as bad as these days.
The past definitely was a glorious time. You only need to read “Little House on the Prairie,” “Little Women,” Dickens, Tolstoy, or any other period literature which was largely representative of life back then.
Unlike the corrupt and foolish generation of today, they weren’t wasting 78,000 hours watching television, as the average American is today. They didn’t have over 20 percent of the population on psychotropic drugs, and not only did they not have the military disinformation weapon of the internet, they also didn’t have 70 percent of the clicks for porn. They also were far better educated on wisdom, virtue, the Bible, and history for a fraction of the price.
The out of wedlock birth rate in 1947 was three percent. Today it’s 40 percent. Not to mention 110 million Americans have an STD. They had no welfare, income tax, or gun regulations in 1910, and the fertility rate in 1957 was 3.7. Today it’s 1.7. Replacement fertility rate is 2.1. Millions of babies have been slaughtered in their mothers’ wombs and with divorce and fornication completely acceptable, single motherhood has skyrocketed.
As for children, even the poor ones were taught morality, which is why poor children like Carnegie and Rockefeller had a chance to work their way up to become anything. Unfortunately, their power corrupted them. Now, most children spend their childhoods in daycare and then in the Marxist school system.
Twenty five percent of women today are on psychotropic drugs, and women are exploited, enslaved, abused, and harassed at higher rates today than ever before in American history. The Left will lie and say this stuff always happened. It wasn’t reported before, but that’s completely false. Simply look at what Weinstein got away with doing to some of the most powerful and wealthy women on earth today, and consider, if he got away with doing that to those women, what is happening to the common woman who isn’t as wealthy or famous?
Children raised without money, but with the love of both parents, a mother at home, and virtue, are vastly superior to children raised without love and virtue but with money. Marriage used to be only between a man and his wife as God has ordained, divorce was rare, and this brought a lot of security to children. When the family falls apart, the nations fall apart.
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.
Romans 1:21,22
About two years ago I was permanently blocked on Facebook. This was a result of their policy to stifle opinions they don’t like.
This is a blatant crime, and they do it to millions of conservatives, while publicly lying and saying they have no bias and do not censor. Section 230 gives them the privileges, which are vast, of being an open platform. This specified that they must not censor, which they do anyways. The Facebook “Community Standards” is based on no recognizable moral code in human history, and has some of the most hypocritical and corrupt standards imaginable. Profanity and pornography are all over Facebook, but mention uncomfortable conservative truths and you are blocked. Why is it social media companies have armies of pawns to regulate speech, but no one to answer a phone and address customer complaints? Because it’s not designed for customers, it’s designed to steal from us, spy on us, and shape our thinking, as secretly as possible. Can’t let the Goyim know they are being duped, that’s bad for business.
In reality the social media companies are publishers. Once that is cleared up they can be sued into oblivion.
Anyhow, some Facebook censor must have fallen asleep earlier this morning, because after banning my phone number for two years, inexplicably, I was allowed on.
It was a rip-roaring good time. For about eight glorious hours, until about 9 AM, I went to the usual political gathering homes, dominated by deceived Democrat partisans, and raised an uproar, as the truth always tends to do among those who are living a lie.
Its astonishing that liberal pawns, who never attend city council meetings, get on Facebook and become the bravest and most courageous individuals you ever did see. Had one woman who begins began with the typical “Rayciss” and “sexist” Cultural Marxist nonsense, then proceeded to inform me she and her friends were all laughing at me, as if their absurd ridicule was supposed to deter me. When none of that worked, she tried cute memes. And when that didn’t work, amidst frantically reporting me to Facebook censors, she began stuttering about how I needed to take my meds, and how I had an elevator that didn’t reach the top floor. When I politely informed her I never used drugs, what was her drug use like, the expected brush off happened, accompanied with more flurries of recommendations to look into my mental wellness. It’s gaslighting at its best, done by trained professionals.
I then visited our corrupt Democrat Congressman Mike Thompson’s page, where I posted the correct information on the corona virus hoax. He actually, or a staffer, personally responded to me and others telling us, without any proof, that our information was incorrect, and to please stop. I responded by informing him he was a corrupt Communist Fraud.
One of his supporters was a Ruth Bader Ginsburg worshiper, and when I informed her that her idol, by the Bible’s standards. did not go to heaven, she went ballistic, and frantically reported me to censors. The poor censors, no doubt getting hundreds of requests to censor me from terrified Democrats, who have massive allergies to the truth, finally complied. I’m likely to never be allowed on Facebook again.
This tech censorship needs to end. Their Lying and censorship is not harmless at all, it is designed to indoctrinate America and to prepare us for our impending slavery.
Since February, the U.S. media has been pounding Americans with non-stop reporting about COVID-19 coronavirus.
Eight months later, the data shows everything the media said about the virus was false. Yet, those posing as “journalists” continue to repeat the lies from February and March as if they are facts rooted in their quest to “follow the science.”
Every one of the BIG THREE lies seems designed to promote panic and an irrational response to the actual threat.
Anyone who even suggests that maybe the governments of the world have been overreacting to a virus that kills at about the same rate as the flu has been immediately shot down as stupid and not worth listening to.
Slowly but surely, however, everything we “conspiracy theorists” said back in March about COVID has since been borne out as not a conspiracy theory at all. It was 100 percent true.
So let’s look at the three biggest lies that are still being used to spread fear of COVID-19, keeping in mind that the media used these same lies to castigate President Trump when he was released from the hospital Oct. 5 and implored Americans in a tweet “Don’t let COVID-19 dominate your life.”
This virus is “not like the flu,” we are scolded. It’s much scarier than the flu because:
1.COVID carries a very high, 3.4 percent, death rate [compared to a flu death rate of 0.10 percent].
This has now been debunked by none other than the United Nations World Health Organization, which the leftist globalists believe is the gold standard for information about COVID. The WHO came out with updated mortality rates this week showing that only 0.13 percent of those infected will die. That’s 26 times lower than WHO’s previously purported death rate of 3.4 percent. We already know that in the U.S. the average age of those who succumb to the virus is 78 and they have an average of 2.6 comorbidities. This 0.13 percent death rate is almost exactly the death rate for the common flu.
2. COVID is spread by asymptomatic ‘super spreaders‘
The scares people to death every time they hear it, because it suggests that every human being you come in contact with can potentially infect you. This is absolute hogwash. Asymptomatic have a very low viral load in their system, making it virtually impossible to pass the virus on to another person. Even in the rare cases that they might be able to pass it on, it is highly unlikely if they don’t have symptoms, meaning they are not coughing, sneezing or wheezing.
3.COVID is untreatable.
Now that truly is scary! This lie provided the pretext for Bill Gates and Big Pharma to rush to market an unsafe and unproven vaccine, which could end up being mandated by various state governments and corporations. But this “no treatment” lie has been exposed over and over by the facts, most recently seen in the way President Trump was so effectively treated with a cocktail of supplements and drugs. Trump was treated with Rendesivir in combination with zinc, Vitamin D and melatonin. Another option available in some states is hydroxychloroquine.
These three lies were cleverly crafted to refute anyone who brings facts to the table to argue that the government has no business closing down churches, businesses or generally violating the civil liberties of any American.
The authorities say this coronavirus has killed 204,000 Americans but those numbers don’t reflect the fact that hospitals were directed by the CDC to be liberal in filling out death certificates. Some doctors were so liberal that they actually notched deaths from accidents, heart attacks and strokes as COVID related and therefore COVID caused. CDC estimates that only 6 percent of these 204,000 deaths have been caused by COVID alone.
While these are the three biggest lies, they are not the only lies the media has told and continues to tell. What about the risk to young people? A look at the data shows incontrovertible evidence that college-age students have virtually no risk of dying from COVID. The media knows this. That’s why they focus their hysteria on the number of “cases” on campuses, not the number of deaths.
According to a survey by the New York Times, published Sept. 25, at least 130,000 people on more than 1,600 campuses contracted COVID and 70 died, but “most” of those 70 deaths, the Times admits, were not students but rather college employees, who were likely much older. But even if we factor in those older employees, the rate of death on college campuses according to the Times’ own study is a paltry 0.00054 percent. Stunning!
One would think that once these scurrilous lies were exposed, the media would be shouting from the housetops that the CDC, WHO, Drs. Fauci and Birks, Gates and the rest of the “experts” who they relied on for their information, and whose misinformation formed the basis for politicians to implement the economy-killing lockdowns, were completely wrong! Isn’t that what good, honest journalists do when they find out they’ve been played? Yes, they go back and correct the record.
But instead we see no corrections of their previous false reporting. No, they double down on the lies.
This is not news. This is the hallmark of a propaganda operation. Another name for that is information warfare.
If they corrected their false reports and began to prominently report the truth about COVID, this would put pressure on political leaders to end the destructive restrictions on human activity. Those leaders could then turn their focus to protecting the vulnerable, which are people over 65 with multiple serious pre-existing health issues.
But that would require an honest press – something that no longer exists in America. They will continue to repeat the same old lies, that COVID is a killer disease unlike any other faced by mankind; we must “not let our foot off the pedal” of containing it, people of all ages and conditions must stay masked up at all times, indoors or out, and we must stay separated and isolated from our loved ones.
The ‘Great Reset‘
Meanwhile, the real reason for locking people down, telling them they must stop traveling for non-essential trips, shuttering small businesses or bogging them down with irrational and arbitrary rules, goes unreported by the mainstream media. But it’s hiding in plain view for anyone with an ounce of curiosity.
The global power brokers at the United Nations, World Economic Forum, the British royal family, the International Monetary Fund and the Vatican have told us why COVID must be kept front and center in the human psyche for the foreseeable future: They’ve all identified it as the key to launching a “Great Reset“ of the global economic and social order. See video below:
They want to do away with the post-World War II free-market capitalist system and replace it with a global technocratic surveillance state likely to include a new digital currency and digital IDsystem. This new system will be much more authoritarian than what Americans would choose to live under if we remained in normal times, so the technocrats had to create a “new normal” that grips people in fear. People are known to defer to their leaders in times of crisis and panic. They can be convinced to go along with almost anything in such times, when fear brings its twin cousins of chaos and confusion.
The new age pope
Pope Francis and the Vatican are also fully on board with the new socio-economic world order being prepared for us – just read his latest encyclical issued on Oct. 3 entitledFratelli Tutti [translated as Brothers All]. In it, he blames capitalism for the world’s most pressing problems, derides the concept of private property, holds up collectivism as superior to the rights of the individual, and seems to call for open borders and a termination of national sovereignty.
The pope cites COVID-19 as the triggering event that will usher in a new age of man-based utopian groupthink.
“The Covid-19 pandemic momentarily revived the sense that we are a global community, all in the same boat, where one person’s problems are the problems of all. Once more we realize that no one is saved alone; we can only be saved together.”
COVID was simply a prop, a triggering mechanism, for what global elites refer to as the Great Reset, the New Economy, the Green Economy and Sustainable Development. Whatever they call it, those with discernment will recognize this as the end-times beast system, global in nature, which will seek to dominate every human life on the planet.
The re-election of Donald Trump can forestall the world’s march into this new Dark Age, where freedom of movement, assembly, speech and religion are all tightly monitored and controlled. Joe Biden will welcome it, as this was the path his former boss Barack Obama had set us on. Obama signed the UN 2030 Agenda in September 2015 and the UN’s New Urban Agenda for global cities, as well as the Strong Cities Network, which is the UN’s effort to globalize city and county police forces. He also signed on to the UN’s Paris Climate accords.
Global government will materialize. It’s only a matter of when. The Bible says the end times will be marked by the rise of an anti-Christ system that bullies and bludgeons its way to power over all humanity. The United Nations arrogantly affirms the biblical prophecies with its admonition that “no person will be left behind” by its 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
As Christians, we must prepare both physically and spiritually for persecution that will only grow more intense in the weeks, months and years ahead. We must resist ungodly government edicts that seek to silence our voice, shut down our religious practice and deprive us of our humanity.
Leo Hohmann is an independent journalist not beholden to advertisers or corporate sponsors. He relies on donations from readers to continue reporting the truth based on a biblical worldview and his experience of 30-plus years covering geopolitics, education and religion.
Leftists are using attacking Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett for having a view of marriage entirely in keeping with a proper reading of scripture.
Now that Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court is official, leftists everywhere are casting aspersions at the wall to see what sticks. A few early favorites include condemning her for adopting children or expressing outrage that Republicans would push for a nomination when Democrats don’t control the outcome.
The most interesting smear, however, regards feminine submission — an apparent teaching of Barrett’s faith group, People of Praise. It’s silly to suggest that submission holds back women when your example is being considered for one of the highest offices in the United States. But silly or not, it does reveal the need for a broader conversation on the subject.
I’d like to say it’s just those darned pagan liberals who hate the biblical teaching that wives are to submit to their husbands. But the fact is, feminism has finished its long march through the institutions, and most conservatives have been indoctrinated to hate this teaching as well.
No matter where one falls on the political spectrum if your cultural roots are shallow, “handmaid” is going to make you think of “Handmaid’s Tale” becoming a reality rather than the Blessed Virgin Mary submissively identifying herself as the handmaiden of the Lord at the Annunciation.
Getting to the Heart of the Matter
This controversy is about something bigger than the People of Praise or Barrett . Rather, it requires us to defend the most hated Bible verses in America — the very ones that trigger so many of us who grew up indoctrinated with an irrational fear of masculine authority:
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. (Eph. 5:22-24)
Contrary to the way some Christians try to dissemble, these verses mean exactlywhat they say. They are not controversial because they are difficult to understand, but because they are simple. The key is Paul’s comparison to the church’s submission to Christ — a comparison so important that he makes it three distinct times in three sentences.
How then do Christians submit to Christ? Not as mindless automatons, but as people with agency and intellect who align ourselves with our Lord’s purpose. We do not bury our talents, but creatively devote them to his Kingdom, according to his instruction, and with the gifts with which God has equipped us. That is precisely how wives are to submit to husbands.
That profoundly transgresses America’s feminist inclinations, but it’s nothing to be afraid of. These words from God — repeated by Paul in his letter to the Colossians and by Peter in his first epistle— are meant for the good of women and men alike. Controversial or not, the common objections against submission are less compelling than we might think — at least once we pause to consider them instead of reflexively protesting.
Fulfilling Our God-designed Purpose
The specter of domestic abuse is frequently raised in response to these verses, which, indeed, is a real issue with real victims. Nevertheless, complaining that biblical submission primes women for abuse makes about as much sense as complaining that “honor thy father and thy mother” primes children for abuse.
The possibility that authority may be abused does not negate that authority. Rather than dismantling authorities like these that are inherent in human nature, we need to teach the responsibilities for which they were ordained (and hold accountable those who reject them).
Going back to the Bible, the responsibilities of a husband immediately follow the previous verses that establish his authority:
Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her… In the same way, husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the Church. (Eph 5:25, 28-29)
The husband has a responsibility to patiently care for his wife’s needs and to help her to grow into what God ordained her to be. Some men may do a poor job of it, but nobody bats an eye when the Bible tells men to die for their wives. Tellingly, it is only when it instructs women to submit to their husbands that everyone loses their minds.
Created Equally in God’s Image
We react that way because it is not male sacrifice, but female submission that offends one of America’s most prominent idols: equality. But the truth is, most of our appeals to equality are empty platitudes that fail to point us to anything meaningful. After all, we seldom ask ourselves “equal in what sense” or “equal according to what measurements?”
Biblically speaking, we can say that men and women alike are equally made in the image of God and that both are equally forgiven on account of Christ. But we don’t say that both have equal authority in the household or in the church, any more than we say that both are equally tall or equally equipped to nurse children. Neither should we expect rigid across-the-board equality in those social institutions that are meant to support and protect families. When appealing to equality, context matters.
When we do seriously consider context, we find that equality is a useful tool that has served humanity well in some respects. Nevertheless, treating it as a moral absolute and forcing it into areas of life where it doesn’t belong transforms that servant into a brutal master.
Blessings of Following Scripture
Whereas demands for equality destroy the spirit of love and good-will upon which a loving marriage depends, submission primes the pump of loving-kindness. Let us then consider two of the many blessings submission provides to a couple.
The first such blessing is romance. It may not be the foundation of marriage as some are tempted to think, but it certainly makes marriage more joyful. Consider the classic romantic metaphors: “Falling in love.” “Swept off your feet.” “Head-over-heels in love.” “Under his spell.” They all have one thing in common, and it certainly isn’t equality. On the contrary, all of these metaphors imply a considerable measure of submission.
These metaphors are not coincidental, for romance and equality are antithetical to each other. As C.S. Lewis observed in “That Hideous Strength”: “Courtship knows nothing of [equality]; nor does fruition… Obedience — humility — is an erotic necessity. You are putting equality just where it ought not be.”
Submission isn’t an erotic necessity because of the evil patriarchy. It’s an erotic necessity because male submission is fundamentally ugly to women. Women are typically attracted to a man’s confidence and initiative in the face of risk — and therefore not to a man she can lead by the nose because he fears causing a fuss.
The woman who desires romance is therefore left with two options. She can hook up with a series of bad boys who confidently take the initiative because they don’t care about her. Or she can submit to a good man who is willing and able to commit to confidently leading her in sacrificial love. Considering how hookup culture has proven to be the death of romance for those who remain in it, the choice there should be clear.
Submission also brings the blessing of peace into marriage by uniting a couple in common purpose. There are innumerable times a husband and wife must act as one: choosing how to raise their children, where to live, how to divide the household labor, and so forth.
Good husbands and good wives listen to one another and appreciate the other’s unique talents and insights in every situation. Nevertheless, even the happiest couples have times when they disagree — when they want to go in different directions.
Mutual Love and Respect
During such times, equality introduces more conflict than it resolves, for it cannot be implemented in a marriage. In the political realm, our commitment to equality leads us to adopt democracy. But voting is of no value in a two-person system, for in the event of a conflict, there is never a majority. So how can each spouse receive equal say?
Although it is sometimes wise to wait for a consensus, it’s not always possible. Many decisions are required in the context of a particular time and place. Waiting until the choice has passed only means that the most obstinate spouse always gets his or her way.
How can they take turns on important decisions without already agreeing on how important each decision is? How can they simply turn it over to the most qualified individual unless they already agree on who is most qualified in each case? Even if one could create a complex logical flowchart in which importance and qualifications are given values that are kept in constant balance, that would describe the relationship between two computers rather than a husband and wife. Nobody wants that.
Equality simply does not exist in marital decision making. Mutual love and respect need to exist, but equality cannot create these things. What demanding incoherent equality does create is a strong sense of entitlement. If equality is simultaneously expected and impossible, it leads only to meaningless blame games. Demanding marital equality merely stokes the fires of resentment. And as the Book of Proverbs also warns men and women alike, “It is better to live in a corner of the housetop than in a house shared with a quarrelsome wife.”
Even in marriage, the buck must stop with someone. Considering how much contempt women tend to have for men they dominate, there’s very little genuine desire for the buck to stop with the wife.
Matthew’s writing may be found at The 96th Thesis. You can also follow him on Twitter @matt_e_cochran or subscribe to his YouTube Channel, Lutheran in a Strange Land
Within a year of seizing power in Russia in 1917, the Bolsheviks, Lenin established the Cheka, the “political police” of the new communist government. The Cheka was in charge of administering The Red Terror–the unbelievably brutal policy of state-sanctioned murder–terror as a policy goal–by which tens of millions of innocent Russians lost their lives. Here are a baker’s dozen verifiable facts to give you an idea of what it was like in Russia while the Bolsheviks held power:
A dozen facts about the Bolsheviks everyone should know, but no one does
1. Under Bolshevik law, anyone caught putting up a flyer was executed on the spot.
2. One of the Bolsheviks’ first laws made anti-Semitism a capital offense.
3. The Bolsheviks were explicitly dysgenic, selecting entire professions–the ones deemed to comprise the most intelligent Russians–for liquidation. Russian engineers, Russian university professors, Russian college students, Russian writers, Russian artists, Russian engineers, Russian doctors, Russian lawyers, and, especially, the Christian clergy, were all targeted.
Their children were executed, too. Sometimes, the Bolsheviks executed the children in front of the parents before executing the parents, and sometimes the parents in front of the children before executing the children.
4. Thousands of churches were razed, thousands more turned into workshops or livestock enclosures. Synagogues, however, were left alone and even began receiving state funding under the Bolsheviks for Yiddish language schools.
5. The Bolsheviks relied on non-Russians to commit their genocide on the Russian people. Chinese, Koreans, and Latvian Jews carried out the mass executions, administered intra-military punishments, provided the personal security for top-level Bolsheviks, and staffed the Cheka’s torture and execution chambers.
6. When the Bolsheviks seized power in October 1917, the Number 2 Bolshevik, Leon Trotsky, was living in New York and writing for a Yiddish-language newspaper on the Lower East Side. Upon news of the revolution, he immediately booked passage on a ship bound for Russia. With him were hundreds of Lower East Side revolutionaries. When they arrived in Russia, they immediately took the levers of the state as mid- to upper-level government functionaries in positions that had already been decided.
7. Ethnically, the Russian nobility was heavily Germanic and Gentiles comprised the Russian bourgeoisie.
Ethnically, the Bolsheviks were heavily Jewish and Jews comprised the Bolshevik power center
8. The nobility and bourgeoisie were targeted explicitly for extermination. The media, which was completely controlled by the Bolsheviks, called for “rivers of blood”, advocating the immediate extermination of these “enemies of the people” wherever they could be found.
9. All the land and property of the executed victims became the property of the state, and during the 1920s, street peddlers hawking the wedding rings of Russian housewives were a common sight on the Lower East Side. Armand Hammer, the famous Jewish oil tycoon named for the arm and hammer symbol of the American Communist Party, carried confiscated royal treasures from Russia to the United States.
10. In the wee hours of July 17, 1918, in the basement of a farmhouse and on the orders of a young Jew named Yakov Sverdlov, Chairman of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, Jewish assassins murdered the entire royal family–emperor, empress, four young daughters, and a ten-year-old boy–ending three centuries of Romanov Dynasty. Written on the wall in the blood of the emperor were taunting words referencing the regicide story of the “handwriting on the wall” from the Old Testament book of Daniel.
11. During the 1920s, the Bolsheviks were aggressively fomenting a Bolshevik revolution in Germany. While a young Hitler campaigned against “Jewish communism,” his Brown Shirts fought in the streets against the Bolshevik allies, Antifa. By the time Hitler became chancellor in 1933, the Bolshevik terror in next-door Russia had already been raging for fifteen years.
12. In the United States, the history of the Bolsheviks and their horrific crimes has always been suppressed and would have remained hidden if the Internet had never happened. There is now a vigorous effort to reign in the free-wheeling, anti-censorship nature with which the inventors of the Internet originally imbued it. Thus, the window of opportunity is fast closing during which people can learn the truth about the Bolsheviks. It should be self-evident why the Bolshevik history must be exposed.
It is up to you to make this information known and to fight political censorship always.
———————–
COVID is Communism in sheep’s dress.
“The goyim are a flock of sheep, and we are their wolves.
And you know what happens when the wolves get hold of the flock?”
It was October of 1859 when the fateful event of John Brown’s raid of Harpers Ferry took place, turning a politically tense nation into one of mutual distrust, fear, and misunderstanding. The attack on federal property with the intention to create an armed, violent insurrection alarmed the nation.
Since its founding, the country had often engaged in heated, intense, and even personal political feuds. Citizens need only think of the battles between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, or that of Andrew Jackson and central banker Nicholas Biddle, for reminders of how pressurized these contests of wills and intellects could be. However, at the end of the day, despite who “won or lost,” Americans viewed it as a natural, healthy part of the political discourse and an organic process of national growth.
Brown’s raid, however, was far from that — it was an avocation of violence, of blood, and an assault on the peaceful institutions of their Founders they so revered. A tumultuous election followed by a bloody civil war ensued, hundreds of thousands of lives were lost, cities were razed to the ground, and citizens of all regions of the country were faced with the question of whether such catastrophe could have been avoided. Regardless, post-1865 America was reunified, the ancient evil of slavery had been rectified, and Americans could be American — not Unionist or Confederates — once again. This reunification lasted for nearly a century and a half — until the country seemed to witness another outbreak of John Brown–style rage across its cities beginning in the summer of 2020.
In his gripping biography of legendary Virginian general Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, author S.C. Gwynne ponders how Jackson, a West Point graduate, a noted veteran of the Mexican-American War, a deeply devout Christian man who opposed secession and war, and a man who personally provided time and resources to help educate blacks in his community, came to become one of the Civil War’s most accomplished Confederate commanders. His conclusion may be surprising: he posits that it was the North’s reaction to John Brown’s bloody raid on Harpers Ferry that ultimately determined the divided nation’s fate. Virginians believed that the North’s “presses, pulpits, public meetings and conversations, disclosed such a hatred of the South and its institutions as to lead them to justify the crime” and that it was “wealthy Northern benefactors who had helped Brown finance his enterprise” (Gwynne, p.26). The result, Gwynne argues, was that Virginians felt that, more than anything, they had to repel hostile, violent invaders from their lands; it was, they believed, the North’s “maligned intent” that drove them to war (31). For the average man, it was not politics that motivated him to fight, but fear of unchecked civil unrest and violence spreading to his towns and cities. These people feared, at the root, the destruction of principles that they believed the country was founded upon. For the average man today, the recent events in cities Portland, Seattle, and numerous other places may not seem so different from what the 19th-century man saw in Harper’s Ferry.
In a recent speech at Hillsdale College, prominent historian Victor Davis Hansen made the case that the “2020 election is about civilization vs. anarchy.” It’s no accident that he discusses heavily how media, academic, and political institutions have sided with, funded, or simply attempted to justify the looting, violence, and the suppression of competing ideas is effecting not just the election, but the culture. The goal, he states, is to transform “the structure of America so that it can’t revert back to America.” He clarifies the statement by predicting that should the radical left take control of the presidency and Senate, the abolishment of the Electoral College, the packing of the Supreme Court, removal of the filibuster in the Senate, and perhaps even altering senators to be redistributed via population instead of two per state would soon follow.
Unlike previous political epochs in the last half-century or longer, this one is effectively driven by raw, unabashed ideology. When an individual, or a well funded group, becomes so possessed with his ideology that he believes that their pursuit of power with the subsequent use of that power justifies any action they are taking, they create the situations that, if not checked, lead to political upheaval, civil violence, and destruction.
The situation seems strikingly similar today; most Americans actively want to live among each other peacefully and prosperously and be able to work out their differences in a politically non-destructive, non-venomous manner. Yet divisiveness has reached a fever pitch, and continuing violence looms over the nation. The crux of the issue, both for the observers of Harpers Ferry and for the modern rioting, therefore centers on two central concepts: fear of being hurt, punished, or ostracized for political philosophy and, secondly, the inability to adequately articulate one’s political and moral philosophy to combat the possessed ideologues’ hostile approach due to incomplete education. Both can be remedied.
Philosopher Edmund Burke famously opined that “the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” Truly being effective in overcoming the aforementioned fears faced by the American citizenry has to begin with learning about virtues — from Marcus Aurelius and the Romans from Benjamin Franklin and Washington, from ethical philosophers ranging from Aristotle to Ayn Rand. Only from the foundation of ethics can we properly teach our people about its history and the political systems that logically derive from the code of ethics a people holds. If men are properly trained in virtues and ethics, they cannot so easily be deceived by events like Harpers Ferry or the 2020 urban destruction. On the contrary, they will be able to utilize their education of ethics, history, and politics to prevent the fear of violence and ostracism and will be able to articulate a defense of virtuous living within the framework that the Founders devised, all the while being able to acknowledge its faults and limitations.
If one is to battle the ideologically possessed, then he cannot cede them any ground in the arena of virtue. In Gibbon’s epic Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, he warns that the end of the empire was marked by “minds corrupted by education, luxury, and despotic power” that depended on one or two virtuous people for their survival, oblivious to their internal and external dangers, and mostly notably ignorant of the virtuous nobility of their ancestors (Gibbon, p. 527). For the Romans, the result was corruption and decay, with inevitable subjugation and humiliation. To avoid such an end, the United States would be wise to avoid losing touch with its virtuous roots.
References
Gibbon, Edward. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Edited by D.M Low. 1960
Gwynne, S.C. Rebel Yell: The Violence, Passion, and Redemption of Stonewall Jackson. Simon & Schuster, Inc. 2014.
The violence and rioting in the US result from far more than just dissatisfaction with the police. Extreme ideological social justice movements today are more likely to carry firearms than items for a food pantry. We currently face nothing less than the early stages of a socialist insurgency.
Insurgency is an organized rebellion to overthrow a constituted government by undermining its legitimacy through protest and disinformation, and ultimately through armed conflict. This may sound dramatic, but consider the steps already completed by BLM/ANTIFA in the Insurgency Pyramid used by the US Army Special Forces community to characterize an insurrection (Figure 1).
Initially, when the insurgents are still weak, they organize around a group that is actively dissatisfied with political and social conditions and desires ideological or other changes. In America, who better to target than the poorest and least educated black Americans, for they already believe they have a legitimate grievance?
Insurgents use propaganda and political efforts to exploit this atmosphere, creating more significant discontent that discredits the government. BLM and ANTIFA have made it abundantly clear that they believe the existing government and socio-economic system are unjust and exclude them.
It’s well known that leftists intimidate people, so they refrain from presenting counter-factual arguments. Then, by spinning the narrative for high-profile events, they build credibility and feed the general sense of public dissatisfaction.
Leftists are adept at vilifying anyone who defends the current system, even if they acknowledge its flaws and signal a willingness to improve it. After all, who wouldn’t support racial justice? Nonetheless, if you are not absolutely for the cause as presented, leftists will accuse you of being absolutely against it. Hence, saying “All Lives Matter” is synonymous with “I’m a racist.”
The insurgents foment distrust for public institutions, which leads to more favorable public opinion for the insurgency. We’ve seen that BLM’s and Antifa’s preferred targets are the police and the judicial system, which are the very foundations of law and order.
At the same time that they garner popular support for the movement and vilify its opponents, the insurgents also work to infiltrate public institutions and spread their narrative into all sectors of society. Celebrities, government officials, universities, corporations, and others have bought into the BLM narrative, either through intellectual laziness or for personal gain. This results in broad popular support through funding, quasi-intellectual backing, active protest and rioting, and even sympathetic inaction.
Hawk Newsome, the chairman of BLM’s New York chapter, claims BLM is following in the Black Panther Party’s footsteps and adds that former “Special Forces officers” train the movement to protect itself — presumably from the police. Armed members have attempted to replace police officers in abandoned areas of Seattle and Atlanta. Justifying and introducing armed insurgent personnel is a key step toward more militant acts. One example, from June 26, is the pre-planned ambush against two police officers in Tampa who were called to a phony shooting, only to have glass-bottle throwing rioters attack them.
Having foreign countries legitimize and support the insurgency is also critical. BLM protests erupted worldwide after George Floyd was killed, and Antifa has fraternal organizations across Europe. It’s still unclear what America’s die-hard international enemies are doing to support BLM and Antifa. Still, if they aren’t acting yet, they are most certainly looking for their opportunities.
Insurgency Pyramid. Actions already completed or begun by BLM/ANTIFA are in color. These actions do not have to take place in the order they are listed. Graphic by Matt Rowe.
The three co-founders of BLM — Patrisse Khan Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal Tometi — all have Marxist Socialism at the core of their ideologies. According to the Capital Research Center, the three women worked for the Freedom Road Socialist Organization’s front groups. The FRSO is one of the country’s largest radical-left organizations. Tometi actively promotes Socialism and anti-western socio-economics, while Cullors has publicly stated that the leaders of BLM are “trained Marxists.”
Antifa nominally believes that the country is heading toward Fascism and touts President Trump’s election and “America First” platform as proof. The organization has existed since the 1980s, but its radical anti-globalism and anti-capitalist rhetoric was inconsequential. By taking on BLM’s “anti-racist” cause, Antifa significantly increased its opportunities to act. Antifa has not hidden its Marxist Socialist objectives, but it has modified the traditional conflict from “workers versus the owners of capital” to “identity conflicts” based upon race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.
The vast majority of BLM members and supporters make up what Vladimir Lenin called “the useful idiots.” That is, the people actively working for a cause without really understanding the cause’s objectives. They are cynically being used to achieve an end they may have never intended. The core organizers’ goal is to keep the useful idiots blind to the truth for as long as possible while indoctrinating them into the cause.
To defeat this insurgency, we must eliminate the dissatisfaction that drives the largest groups of actors. We cannot change the political beliefs of hardcore Marxists. Still, we can help lift the millions of the poorest and least educated black (and other) Americans out of their current conditions and deteriorating culture. First, we must counter the propaganda that their plight is the result of current systemic racism. Instead, they must be led to understand that their current problems are the result of old behaviors. They require new solutions that will reintegrate them into society to give them a genuine stake and the ability to exercise legitimate influence.
Doing so will deprive the insurgency of millions of activists. It will also harness the sympathetic energies of the millions of people who understand that there is a problem but are misled into believing the insurgency can fix it. This means acknowledging that the pain our most impoverished communities experience, regardless of race, comes from long-standing cultural behaviors.
We must redirect cultures that have a history of welfare dependency; single motherhood, depriving children of fathers; skyrocketing numbers of high school dropouts who are unprepared to meet the needs of an increasingly technological society; higher risks of drug use and dependence; the extraordinarily higher crime rates with community members as both predators and victims; and the isolation and utter hopelessness that comes from being trapped there.
Good families, good educations, real opportunities, and the hope that every person can achieve the American dream are not racial or police issues. What we’re currently seeing is a halfway completed insurgency. If we are to end this unrest, we must face these truths and develop longer-term solutions immediately. Otherwise, judging by socialist “successes” worldwide, the suffering could increase exponentially for all of us.
Matt Rowe is a US Army Special Forces veteran and an independent business management consultant. He earned his MBA from the University of Notre Dame after graduating magna cum laude from Campbell University with a BS in government. He has written feature articles for several publications, and his first novel, White Passage: Red Sun, is loosely based upon his experience in the “drug war” in Latin America.
The company spread from beginnings in Cold Spring Harbor genetics and virology labs on Long Island and Berlin, to today become one of the largest organizations in the US. Rockefeller-Bayar Co., BASF and Hoechst petrochemical-pharmaceutical consortium were all initial funders of the group.
Make no mistake: Planned Parenthoodwas built on population control schemes — allied with the same groups who wanted genetic hierarchy laws to ‘preserve’ humanity and who sought to ‘beautify’ countries by stopping the “unfit” from reproducing.
In their 2014 Annual Report, the pro-abortion and anti-family group reported seeing over 2.5 million patients in over 4 million clinical visits, including 324,000 abortions. The group claims to be a proponent of ‘free choice’, yet it is a eugenics front organization in disguise.
Planned Parenthood has recently gone through their second executive in just eight months, after sacking President Leana Wen for daring to suggest the group should focus more on women’s health.
Does this sound like a group dedicated to improving society? This one showdown revealed a genuine rift in the organization and a simple truth: promoting ‘women’s health’ was always a cover.
Bill Gates proudly speaks on his father’s involvement on the board of Planned Parenthood, which was founded on the concept that most human beings are just “reckless breeders”.
The methodologies have evolved leaps-and-bounds since the early formation of the movement; however, the objective remains the same. This time, the new multifaceted approach would see the philanthropist group partner with powerful United Nations organizations like the World Health Organisation (WHO) and UNICEF.
Today, the group is focused on many areas that drive continued work across the world. These activities have given birth to new forms of technological, eugenic endeavors.
The organization is simply continuing the Gates family legacy of trying to dominate and control the world’s systems, including in the areas of technology, medicine, and now agriculture.
In 2010, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation purchased 500,000 shares in Monsanto valued at more than $23 million. This is when it became abundantly clear that the so-called benevolent charity is up to something other than ‘eradicating’ disease and feeding the world’s poor.
The evidence that GMOs cause disease has been piling up for decades, as the list of countries banning their import and cultivation grows. Bill openly promotes GMOs as the ‘answer’ to world hunger.
Melinda Gates has also made ‘women’s issues’ one of the top priorities for their philanthropic work. This includes the decision to elevate contraception-promotion and population control as “arguably the single most important part of her work”. She has been openly criticised for these moves.
In 2017, the Gates Foundation pledged another $375 million for ‘family planning’, with the goal of providing contraception to 120 million women across the world, particularly in developing countries.
This emphasis on blanketing developing countries with artificial contraception for which women aren’t asking for reeks of social engineering and paternalistic eugenicist thinking.
The fact that couples in developing countries often desire and value large families means nothing to many Western elitist philanthropists: the not-so-subliminal underlying presumption is that women who desire large families simply don’t know what’s good for them. As such, they need to be educated and ‘encouraged’ with large-scale, foreign-funded advertising companies, and coercion.
Now that we have explored the history of the Gates family, influences, and aims of philanthropist philosophies and modern eugenics programs across the world, let’s explore the relatable picture.
BILL GATES AND VACCINES
In recent years, Gates has turned a good deal of his attention towards philanthropy by creating the largest private foundation in the world, with over $46 billion in assets. He has secured billions of dollars in contributions from other wealthy benefactors such as Warren Buffett, and is primarily dedicated to ‘enhancing healthcare’ and ‘alleviating poverty’ across the world…
Today, GAVI has grown significantly. The group brings together developing country and donor governments, the World Health Organization, UNICEF, the World Bank, the vaccine industry, research and technical agencies, civil society, and other private philanthropists.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has donated $1.56 billion to the alliance’s 2016-2020 strategic period as of March 2019 and continues to advise the group on key business decisions.
Gates heavy involvement in the vaccine industry, in addition to continuing the eugenicist’s visions of the ‘social’ reformation, was fundamental in framing his positive public perception on the matter.
Considered a ‘hero’ in the fight to develop new technologies against growing diseases, the stage had now been set for Gates to become the new ‘go to’ voice if a pandemic was to ever break out.
COVID-19: A PLAN-DEMIC? ‘PREDICTING’ AN OUTBREAK
The Microsoft co-founder has hinted on multiple occasions over the past decade that the potential for something like the coronavirus that would soon arise and the world must be ‘ready’.
In 2015, Bill Gates gave a TED Talk titled, The next outbreak? We’re not ready, which is being shared widely online in recent weeks given the impact of COVID-19 across the world.
The part of the talk that’s making rounds online shows Gates explaining that while the greatest threat to humanity when he was growing up was nuclear war, the greatest threat now is a virus:
“If anything kills over 10 million people in the next few decades, it’s likely to be a highly infectious virus rather than a war. Not missiles, but microbes.”
Rather, through these ‘cryptic’ messages, Gates was positioning himself in a positive light to connect with the public psyche. If something was to happen, ‘Gates would know the solution!’, they will cry.
Did Gates know something we didn’t know in advance? Emerging evidence suggests this ‘pandemic’ was foretold by the billionaire, which now serves as the mechanism to further carry out the agenda.
EVENT 201
On October 18, 2019, The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, which is described on the group’s website as “a high-level pandemic exercise” carried out in New York.
The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be ‘necessary’ during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences:
“Experts agree that it is only a matter of time before one of these epidemics becomes global — a pandemic with potentially catastrophic consequences.
A severe pandemic, which becomes ‘Event 201’, would require reliable cooperation among several industries, national governments, and key international institutions.”
The group claims they did not ‘predict’ the coronavirus, despite modeling their pandemic under the same name. However, when examining their documents, striking similarities begin to emerge:
“Event 201 simulated an outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people that eventually becomes efficiently transmissible from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic. The pathogen was modeled largely on SARS, but it is more transmissible in the community setting by people with mild symptoms.
There is no possibility of a vaccine being available in the first year.“
Furthermore, the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation funded a research center in England called the Pirbright Institute, which specializes in the study of viruses that affect farm animals, and viruses that transfer from animals to people. They own a very similar patent for a type of coronavirus affecting animals.
The world fell for the deception, hook line, and sinker. Now, nations are crying out for a ‘solution’ to the growing COVID-19 ‘crisis’ and Bill Gates (not surprisingly) has emerged at the head of the pack.
GATES TO THE RESCUE
Bill Gates is now the talk of the town, and in a recent interview, he told The Daily Show that his foundation was funding the construction of factories for seven coronavirus vaccine ‘candidates’.
He says the foundation would end up picking only one or two of the seven, meaning billions of dollars spent on manufacturing would be abandoned. However, spending a few billion to capitalize on the growing $35 billion vaccine market seems like a calculated investment.
So, a man who has profited largely off vaccine development for years and also held ‘simulations’ of pandemic outbreaks is now cashing in on the chase to develop a COVID-19 vaccine? How fitting.
Gates ultimate influence in this unfolding plan can be found in the instructions given in recent weeks.
THE ‘ONLY WAY OUT’
Bill Gates now has a net worth of $97.8 billion. Yet, being the ‘relatable’ person that he is, took to Reddit for an Ask Me Anything on the COVID-19 pandemic. He would share his thoughts on ‘how best to deal’ with the outbreak and explored possible long-term effects on the world.
Gates said that broad vaccination for COVID-19 will need to become available “before you can be completely safe”. Until then, according to his claims, there’s a risk that communities could rebound unless they continue to practice strict social distancing and quarantines to see case numbers level off.
Gates said he doesn’t think large gatherings will be able to resume until widespread vaccination has taken place, as the ‘risks would outweigh the benefits’ of such events:
World leaders also agree with Gates’ timeline and perspectives. Shortly after doing the media rounds, the Australian government hinted at the fact society will be in lockdown until a vaccine is developed. This was soon followed by the New South Wales government and others.
Furthermore, Gates called for a “national tracking system similar to South Korea“, saying that “in Seattle, the University of Washington is providing thousands of tests per day, but no one is connected to a national tracking system”. He said that whenever there is a positive test, it should be used to understand where the disease is and whether we need to strengthen the social distancing.
In the future, he has floated the idea of ‘vaccine certificates’ to show proof-of-vaccination following the widespread rollout of COVID-19 products. This would be a new requirement for international and domestic travel, and is tipped to further expand to all facets of life.
Given the context detailed in this feature piece, do you trust the intentions of this man?
Gates has a rich history of eugenics influence and partakes in activities across the world that further progress the aims of the original movement, albeit in disguise.
Such is the story of the Dehumanization of Humanity. The ‘death of god’ lead to parasites believing they were gods, and this premise serves as the underlying force driving the transhumanist era.
If a COVID-19 vaccine uses strains of an actual virus, as many do, in order to encourage the body to build immunization, subjects who receive the vaccine will be carriers of that virus.
Bill Gates, and the forces that drive this puppet, are pushing the world towards a choice: Take the COVID-19 vaccine and deal with the health consequences, or refuse and be denied basic services and after being labeled as a ‘health threat’. Take the jab or be targeted.
I know where I stand.
Will you be lining up to receive the newly developed Gates-funded vaccine?
Last night’s presidential debate revealed the faulty assumptions most media are using against President Trump. President Trump was right when he said to moderator Chris Wallace, “I guess I’m debating you, not him, but OK.” President Trump is debating almost all media outlets and journalists.
This morning, there are countless stories and tweets that President Trump “refused” to denounce white supremacy. Many people claim they are outraged because President Trump didn’t specifically disavow the Proud Boys. Tim Scott is also falling into this trap by saying the president “misspoke.”
Colbert calls Trump’s refusal to condemn the white nationalist men’s rights group Proud Boys “one of the most telling, one of the most upsetting moments, not only of the night, but of my lifetime” https://t.co/HgFPfz39yZ
Chris Wallace: (41:33) You have repeatedly criticized the vice president for not specifically calling out Antifa and other left wing extremist groups. But are you willing tonight to condemn white supremacists and militia groups and to say that they need to stand down and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we’ve seen in Portland.
Donald J. Trump: (41:57) Sure, I’m willing to do that.
CW: (41:59) Are you prepared specifically to do it.
DJT: (42:00) I would say, almost everything I see is from the left wing not from the right wing.
DJT: (42:10) What do you want to call them? Give me a name, give me a name, go ahead who do you want me to condemn?
CW: (42:14) White supremacist and right-wing militia.
DJT: (42:18) Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I’ll tell you what: Somebody’s got to do something about Antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem this is a left wing.
JB: (42:28) He’s own FBI Director said unlike white supremacist; Antifa is an idea not an organization-
JB: (42:47) Everybody in your administration tells you the true, it’s a bad idea. You have no idea about anything.
DJT: (42:53) You know what, Antifa is a dangerous radical group.
CW: (42:56) All right, gentlemen we’re now moving onto the Trump-Biden record.
DJT: (42:58) And you ought to be careful of them, they’ll overthrow you.
President Trump did say he was “willing” to condemn “white supremacists and militia groups.” However, he wanted specifics. Joe Biden named the Proud Boys. The Proud Boys are a multiracial group of civic nationalists. President Trump may have made a verbal fumble when he said, “stand back and stand by” instead of “stand down,” but he certainly didn’t call for them to march. In any event, why should the Proud Boys have to stand down? They aren’t the ones burning shops and attacking police.
Chris Wallace vaguely referred to “white supremacist and right-wing militia” but didn’t give specifics. However, he mentioned “Kenosha,” which is almost certainly a reference to Kyle Rittenhouse. Video evidence suggests Mr. Rittenhouse shot leftist protesters who attacked him.
What makes this even more absurd is that President Donald Trump specifically disavowed white nationalists after Unite The Right in 2017. “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally,” he said at the time. He simply added that there were “very fine people” on both sides and that antifa were “troublemakers.” Nonetheless, this lie that he supported white supremacists won’t die. Indeed, it’s the lie on which Joe Biden built his campaign. President Trump also said that if the Robert E. Lee statue was taken down, George Washington’s would follow. Journalists mocked him, but history has already proven him right.
Joe Biden said antifa were just an “idea,” not an organization. I’ve written a book on the subject; I speak with authority. “Antifa” is a brand, a front for leftist groups. However, those groups exist. They aren’t just an “idea.” There are specific antifa groups, with specific leaders, and specific sources of funding. They call themselves “antifa” because it is better than calling themselves anarchists or communists.
Critical Race Theory was also an important topic in the debate, but Mr. Wallace misled viewers: “This month, your [President Trump’s] administration directed federal agencies to end racial sensitivity training that addresses white privilege or critical race theory. Why did you decide to do that, to end racial sensitivity training?”
Critical Race Theory is not “racial sensitivity training.” Critical Race Theory holds that American institutions are inherently racist. It says all whites are racist. It is openly anti-white. No country can survive if its own government teaches that its institutions are illegitimate. I wish President Trump called it “anti-white” but his essential point that he ended it because it was “racist” is correct. It is racist against whites. Most Americans would probably be horrified if they knew what their tax dollars were funding. However, if it is called “racial sensitivity training,” it seems harmless.
Mr. Wallace clearly wanted it to sound benign. “What is radical about racial sensitivity training?” he asked. President Trump, again accurately, said that the instructors receive a great deal of money to teach that America is a horrible place. Joe Biden’s response was simply to deny reality. “Nobody’s doing that,” he said. “He’s [President Trump] the racist.”
Mr. Biden’s campaign thinks that President Trump’s comments on race last night hurt the President’s chances for re-election. It put up an ad that linked Kyle Rittenhouse to white supremacists. This is a potentially defamatoryclaim.
There’s no other way to put it: the President of the United States refused to disavow white supremacists on the debate stage last night. pic.twitter.com/Q3VZTW1vUV
Complaining about Charlottesville is absurd when American cities have been in chaos for months thanks to left-wing rioters. Furthermore, an independent report showed that state and local authorities allowed and arguably encouraged violence at the Unite the Right rally in 2017. However, many journalists either don’t know or pretend not to know. Mr. Biden’s campaign can act this way because media figures are covering for him.
President Trump has not done nearly enough to support white interests. He hasn’t defended the people who supported him so passionately in 2016. I wish President Trump were the pro-white, strong-willed nationalist of the Left’s nightmares. If anything, he’s far too weak. But President Trump is fair-minded. In a healthy country, this would be taken for granted. In 2020 America, it’s a scandal.
About two years ago I was permanently blocked on Facebook. This was a result of their policy to stifle opinions they don’t like.
