Monday, December 04, 2023
  Articles of Note  
The Last Exit: Revolution


By CulturalHusbandry | September 18, 2023

What causes revolutions? When does the violence start? To find the answer, study one group: Dissatisfied, angry young men. Nearly every revolution in human history was started by this cohort, and if you want to know how likely you are to have a revolution, ignore everything else and study the angry young men in your society. Why are they angry? How many of them are there? Do they communicate regularly? Do they have weapons? Are there political movements that address their grievances and defuse their anger, or are they mocked and shamed and at the point of boiling? Do they have a stake in society, and do they have incentives to maintain stability and keep things as they are or are they wholly disincentivized? These are the questions you have to ask to know if landlords are about to get dragged out of their houses and shot. These are the questions you have to ask if you want to know if aristocrats, celebrities, academics, journalists, and politicians are about to be beaten, killed, and paraded through the streets. These are the questions you have to ask if you want to know when the next genocide is going to occur. It's happened hundreds of times, dozens in the 20th century alone, and it could be about to happen again, in the USA. We are coming up on the final chance for a political solution to the USA's problems before we could enter a full-blown, violent revolution. We have had multiple missed exits to political solutions to violence, which I will describe below.

Missed Exit 1: the 99% and Occupy Wall Street The first missed exit was in 2008-10, in the form of Occupy Wall Street. Young millennials protested the banking system and their exclusion from the normal avenues of building wealth and buying property. The OWS protesters didn't want handouts. They weren't calling for UBI or more welfare. They didn't want Latin American Venezosocialism. They simply wanted wages commensurate to the value of their labor, and a chance to buy and own a share of America: A slice of American land and a stake in American businesses. Millennials were the first American generation in living memory to have little hope whatsoever to own land and build wealth, and they knew it, and they protested. They wanted dignity. They wanted those responsible for the financial collapse to be held accountable. Instead, the banks got bailed out, the already broke 99% were saddled with the bill, and one of the largest wealth transfers from the middle class to the hyperwealthy took place. OWS was not identitarian: It cut across lines of race, gender, etc., and it dissolved along these lines, as identity politics emerged to dismantle the movement. Current Progressivism, social justice, restorative justice, and white guilt were introduced: the 99% died immediately after, and actual class politics have never come back to mainstream discourse here in the US.

Missed Exit 2: #MeToo The next large left-wing movement was #MeToo, borne from GamerGate. Angry, dissatisfied young men of the millennial and zoomer generation, sick of being perpetually demonized as the villains of identity politics in their heretofore male spheres of gaming, as well as mainstream culture and (for zoomers) in classrooms and colleges started voicing their anger. #MeToo was the elite response, a broadside of thinly veiled managerial supremacism under the guise of feminism. #MeToo was exclusively bourgeois, exclusively moneyed, and incredibly politically influential. From 2015-2018, #MeToo accelerated the reconfiguration of American politics, journalism, media, culture, and the overton window of mainstream discourse. Identity politics was no longer just an obscure instrument to destroy class solidarity in OWS: It was now the official civil religion of the USA, a replacement for Christianity. No aspect of #MeToo addressed any kind of material inequality, wealth inequality, property ownership, land ownership, or other traditional popular concerns. Around this time, the word 'populist' became a pejorative: a perfect summation of the total capture of leftwing politics by wealthy, whitecollar, sanctimonious, and overwhelmingly female managers.

#MeToo was exclusively concerned with superstructural minutiae, tone-policing, editorial decisions of fantasy novels, micro-aggressions, and policing the grey zones of human sexuality. Perhaps because of its astonishing vacuity and pettiness, it didn't last long. Leftwing politics soon pivoted to #BLM. Proof that #MeToo is entirely dead can be found everywhere: The 'Karen' meme is clearly a sexist disparagement of women, and is totally acceptable dinnertable conversation. Jeffrey Epsteins client list was never revealed and his partern, Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of sex trafficking minors to “No One” - because to reveal the truth would have been to reveal the game. There were no protests, and there was no vociferous objection. The "feminists" were silent, partly because they had nothing to say about the material world. Biden sexually harassed Tara Reade and had inappropriate sexual showers with his daughter, and his son is a known John who bought foreign prostitutes, slept with his dead brothers sister, and had a laptop detailing sex with minors: nobody cared. #MeToo was more successful in reducing the breast size of Japanese videogame characters than it was in creating any tangible improvement to the lives of Americans, male or female. And now, #MeToo, like OWS before it, is dead.

Missed Exit 3: #BLM BLM is the largest social movement in postwar American history and THE largest “charity drive” in American history - although the billions of dollars raised went to ACT Blue, numerous mansions for its leadership, and interracial trust is at a historic low since the Civil Rights era. If #MeToo approximated a civil religion, BLM codified its doctrines in Critical Race Theory, complete with foreign missions (European football players kneeling to the new American God), prophets (Robin DiAngelo, Ibram Kendi, etc.), martyr saints (George Floyd, whose image is painted on the walls of every American city) and had a funeral which brought together world leaders who bowed before a golden casket, castes (blacks at the top, whites and Asians at the bottom), and a motivated political party (the Biden administration, the DOJ/FBI, and the Bureaucratic State). BLM's sister doctrine, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is a tithe that every organization, public and private, pays to the new religion. As with #MeToo before it, BLM is only nominally leftist, and as with #MeToo, it's overwhelmingly bourgeois, openly disdainful of the productive classes such as manual laborers, farmers, etc., who it openly mocks and despises. Cultural workers, teachers, and government or corporate bureaucrats are the heroes of BLM: farmers, oil field workers, and bricklayers are its deadly enemies.

BLM has no plan whatsoever for fixing the wealth gap, land ownership, or public stakes in businesses: it's primarily concerned with openly anti-empirical police and educational policies, which dramatically fail every time they're implemented. Conveniently, BLM is also strictly opposed to objective measurement and accountability, a sensible orientation that may allow it to endure for a year or two more than it would otherwise. Critical Race Theory is fundamentally a faith-based doctrine: facts don't matter, only spiritual virtue, admissions of guilt, and celebrations of the religion itself. Unsurprisingly, the old Atheist intelligentsia that castrated Christianity for young millennials -Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, et al - absolutely loathe CRT. Presumably once people start realizing that defunding the police massively increases rape and murder rates and that abolishing standardized testing doesn't improve black literacy, there will be a backlash, and we are starting to see this in small forms in various cities and locales. From the public perspective, the best aspect of BLM is a typical Latin-American style socialism based on demanding a vastly expanded government bureaucracy to give welfare and handouts to an elect class of professional victims. Even in this regard, it appears to have partially failed: Blacks are no better off than before #BLM, likely due to the extremely corrupt grifters in charge of the treasury of the organization - Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Melina Abdullah. BLM has, however, successfully increased the proportion of white-collar managers and nonproductive workers in every institution, and in this regard is a resounding triumph for the useless managerial elite. Back in 2000, boomers used to joke: "You'll never get a job with your degree in comparative African lesbian basket weaving". The average DEI officer earns $122,000, around four times more than what an average worker earns. Is the joke funny now? Are you laughing?

Sex and stable societies: Stable societies have to find a way to pacify young men, for the above mentioned reason that young men are THE only known cause of violent revolutions. If you piss off enough young men, your civilization doesn't survive. Throughout history, countries have found different ways of doing this: empires typically send their young men off to conquer foreign land - this is what the British did, and what the Japanese did after the Rice Riots of the early 20th century. Send the angry young guys to kill foreigners and take some land for themselves. Modern, non-colonial nation states don't usually have this option. They have to calm the guys down another way. One traditional way is marriage. Get the guys married, ideally in a 1:1 ratio, and things calm down a lot. Polygamy typically creates unstable societies: look at the constant strife in the middle east as an example. If 3 guys out of 4 can't get a wife, expect constant violence, suicide bombings, etc. Similarly, noncommittal relationships tend to be associated with very high rates of violence. Look at the West African matriarchal societies, where men don't stay with their pregnant partners, and instead form rotating circus of bandits, rapists, and murderers. These societies never invented the wheel, the plough, the sail, or a written script, and today enjoy the highest rape and murder rates on the planet. This is almost certainly because of the constant havoc caused by angry, unanchored, deracinated, alienated men, few of whom knew their fathers. Tragically, this pattern that has been nearly-identically reproduced in black communities in major US metro areas, see: Baltimore, East St. Louis, Detroit, etc.; communities that BLM is conspicuously silent about, because BLM is a managerial project for increasing the number of white-collar administrators in public and private institutions, NOT a project to improve the lives of black people.

Increasingly, young men in the USA don't marry, don't have sex, and don't have girlfriends. Over 40% of zoomer males have never had sexual intercourse. The median age of the cohort is 21. This is historically unprecedented. Women have a calming and pacifying effect on males, even on the biological level; cohabiting with a partner lowers your testosterone and drastically decreases your violent crime rate. But young men in the USA aren't doing that. Settling down with a woman requires resources. It requires a stake in society. It requires a slice of American land. For millennials and zoomers, this is close to impossible. The chance that you marry increases massively if you own property. The chance that you have children increases massively too. The inability of young men to buy property is directly causing their failure to have long-term partners and children. Guys who 40 years ago would have been doing DIY, building a front porch, volunteering at the local church, and helping raise their kids, are today spending their nights ranting about the Jews on 4Chan or are gaming until 4am – they've given up on a promise that largely doesn't exist anymore. If you are concerned about the possibility of a violent revolution, this development should alarm you. OWS touched on this issue, but the two major "leftist" political movements, #MeToo and #BLM, have not even obliquely addressed this problem. In the case of #MeToo, male success and well-being is probably directly antithetical to the movement's stated objectives (inasmuch as they ever relate to material reality, which is rare).

The USA has developed a new solution to pacifying young men that does not depend on marriage, children, love, community, business ownership, or ownership of a little plot of land to call their own. The new solution is drugs, pornography, videogames, junk food, social media, and the now ever popular gender transition. So far, it appears to have worked to sedate the young men. Even the angriest young men are so physically unfit from their sedentary lifestyles and corn-syrup diets that the chances of them forming a cohort of red guards and door-to-door murdering landlords is vanishingly slim. They're much more likely to smoke a blunt, eat some fruit loops, watch Rick and Morty, or dress up as their favorite female anime character for other lonely guys online. But how long can this passivity last? Are we kicking the can down the road, or have we finally found a way to permanently stop violent revolutions? Is this what Francis Fukuyama called the 'end of history'? Will Zoomer males, totally iced out of land ownership and business ownership be content with subscription-service *everything*, spending their lives as perpetual, sexless tenants, receiving government UBI stipends which get funneled instantly into the pockets of a hedge fund megalandlord like BLACKROCK and online pornography purveyors of OnlyFans? Is Ready Player One the perfect image of the immediate future? Are corn syrup, Nintendo, porn, and weed the ultimate technology in preventing Mao Zedong or Adolf Hitler from rising again? It's very hard to tell, not least because exactly 0 good-faith sociologists are examining what is going on in all-male spaces and male culture. We simply have no idea how close we are to a Bolshevik revolution. It might happen tomorrow. Or, it may never happen again in the West.

Here's an excerpt from an online forum popular with zoomer males: "I'm going to own a house by the time I'm 40. If I can't afford it, I'll fucking take it. I'll shoot someone and take their fucking house. I'm an American, and I'm going to own a piece of America. My ancestors killed and took land. If I can't buy it legally, I'll do the fucking same. Fuck Black Rock Capital. Fuck the government. Fuck my faggot kike landlord and his bitch of a wife. I'm not a rentcuck." How many young men feel the same way? Do they speak to each other? How many more politically peaceful chances do we have to avoid them enacting this fantasy? Do wealthy Americans of the managerial class understand that there are increasingly angry, deracinated, alienated young men with absolutely no incentive to maintain society as it is? The CIA, FBI, and NSA have identified angry young men as the #1 terrorist threat to the USA. But is that really true of a group of emotionally and mentally castrated young men? Unfortunately, the proposed solutions by those at the helm are, inevitably, of the managerial type: we need more censors, more anti-bias training, more government spying, more anti-racist educators, more control over publishing, more scrutiny of social media,more censoring, more shaming of young men, more language policing, more women and people of color in positions of power. None of these solutions make even passing reference to why males are angry. Who cares? Will these solutions work?

Many of you may think that I'm exclusively talking about the bete noire of American politics, the dreaded White Male. Soon, that won't be true. Over 50% of under-18's in the USA are Hispanic. As of 2021, the median age of Hispanics is 11. In less than a decade, a colossal cohort of young, low-net- worth, low-education young males are going to begin adulthood. Their parents usually married and settled down. The younger generation of Hispanics do not. They don't marry, they don't have kids, they don't own businesses, and they don't own property. Will they be satisfied with a future of perpetual tenancy to non-hispanic landlords, compounded by their humiliating cultural inferiority to the non-hispanic white population? Will they peacefully lay down and accept their fate? The best outcome is a descent into constant low-level violence, as we see in Columbia, Mexico, etc. However, another likely outcome is an actual revolution as young men from this cohort decide to take what they want. If working doesn't get you anywhere, what kind of an imbecile works? Americans tend to think of everything in racial terms, but I'm suspicious. If we look at the groups that those in charge try to pit against each other (whites, blacks, latinos) we can see what this group may look like if they ever came together. You'd have rural whites, urban blacks, and 2nd generation Hispanics setting aside their differences and torching country clubs and breaching the most exclusive gated communities. Little wonder that identity politics is so enthusiastically endorsed by politicians and elites! They're absolutely right: At this point in history, actual cross-racial solidarity will almost certainly lead to a violent revolution. If white young men and black young men realize that their enemies are landlords, hedge fund managers, and the politicians who protect them - well, if that happens, I hope you've stocked up on ammunition, and that you don't have too many frail dependents.

I encourage you to take a glance at the Chinese anti-rightist campaign, the Chinese Land Reform movement, or Soviet dekulakization. Check out Pol Pot's Year Zero. When young men get angry, get together, and put on armbands, stark changes start to happen to society. If #MeToo is a concern, please understand that mass-rape has been a component of many revolutions throughout history. If #BLM is your concern, please understand that racial genocides have also been a component of many revolutions, with few exceptions. I would encourage the intellectual and managerial elite to stop trying to find innovative ways to be remunerated for non-productive labor, stop focusing on virtue and culture, and instead start worrying about material reality. Worry about property ownership, about who owns this country, and about what is going to happen if we don't get back to a place where owning a little bit of land and a home to raise a family in is possible.

I'm not a cynic or an empty critic. I have suggestions. I believe that politicians must address the following: - Facilitate a course that restores the basic premise of residential property ownership by US citizens. Every American should be able to own a piece of America. - Inhibit mega-landlords and absentee landlords (Blackrock, StateStreet, Vanguard, etc). Landlors have been the direct, proximate cause of several revolutions in human history. - Inhibit hedge funds and banks from speculating in residential property and buying up entire neighborhoods for SFR's or buying properties 20-30% over appraisal which prevents everyday buyers from participating in home ownership and wealth building. Inhibit foreigners from purchasing US land; ideally forbid it entirely. There is no reason China or any other nation for that matter should own land around US military installations, major sections of our domestic food production facilities, or our infrastructure. The Aristocracy must engage in good-faith conversations about immigration that are not centered on racism. Increasing the supply of labor decreases wages. Increasing the supply of tenants increases rents and house prices. Foreigners are less likely to unionize. These are cogent, left-wing concerns, and smearing all discussion about immigration as racist is not productive. And we MUST discourage identity politics. Poor blacks and poor whites have more in common than poor whites have with rich whites. Ditto women and men. Class politics and real issues have to be endorsed again.

We must avoid and disassemble the welfare-bureaucracy-handout/ UBI style socialism that has taken root in this nation. Its a safety net for hard times. Not the base upon which entire communities and cultures should be built on. This is the Latin American model, and it's historically disastrous. Cuba, Venezuela, Columbia, etc. have experimented with it, and it always fails. Politics should focus on the wealth gap and ownership. The general public should own their own home, have a stake in their business, and have a stake in their community. A nation of government-dependent tenants WILL be violently unstable. History proves this. - Stop shaming the poor and everyday folks as 'hillbillies', 'hicks', 'rednecks', 'flyover country', etc. The Aristocracy and those who vote alongside them MUST stand up for the everyday worker. The elite, hypereducated capture of the left is utterly, disastrously toxic. There is no reason a guy working construction should be paying taxes which pay for some Ivy League students worthless English degree. It prevents us from solving the problems that threaten social stability. We must encourage real-life social institutions. The abandonment and disenfranchisement from society is disastrous. Humans need social community in the physical realm. Respecting young men may be difficult, but if society continues this trend it will, likely within a generation or two learn to fear them. Understand that collectively men do, to a real extent, hold a gun to the head of civilization. It is young men who decide if we have a Great Leap Forward or a Dekulakization or a Kristallnacht. Ideally, society should be encouraging young men to have a settled stake in society by offering them prestige and respect for doing the right thing. At the very least, the aristocracy and managerial class that appear so blind must begin to appreciate the fact that every civilization is in a hostage situation, and it is ultimately the young men who decide if we have revolutions and genocide or if we have white-picket fences and golden retrievers. You may not like it, you may hate it, but you must understand it.

Be Kind To Your Neighbors.

Last edited 6:15 AM · Sep 18, 2023
266.9K Views | 592 Reposts | 189 Quotes | 1,886 Likes | 1,471 Bookmarks

CulturalHusbandry’s Newsletter: An American Philosophae

Whisphers in the Wind


by Kym Robinson | January 8, 2021

As the fiasco of U.S. democracy shreds at any sense of dignity the world watches on and pretends that the health of the American empire is vibrant, the opinionated social media activist and the interested expert all find outrage in the moment.  Biden and Trump drips from the chanting lips of those who are storming the halls of political might. Far in distant lands, inside the obedient nations of the American empire heads of state read out words of support and condemnation. Outraged citizens from abroad criticise the ousted president, or they cheer for him to troll from the platform of twitter. The social media giants had long ago shown their loyalties as they ban and limit elements of some perspectives of very much the same political monstrosity. But in the end, does it change anything?

The outraged and protesting tug and pull for the reigns of rule. The mob that failed at the sort of works democracy now reveals itself as just that violent destructive blob of people who want more control, want more influence and want a government that does things for them often against others. Whether it is proud boys, ANTIFA, MAGA or BLM the government as it stands really does not change that much, perhaps ‘Amen’ is switched to ‘Awomen’ and pronouns are balanced with some sensitivity or maybe the jingoists get another minority group to blame for the decay of Western or American civilisation. But in the end the empire is ever present abroad and at home.

For the rest of the world, we are forced to watch the melodrama of U.S. politics, again. As though the United States is the centre of the world, or universe. Perhaps the world should care less about what happens inside the U.S. with as much concern as the average American seems to care about the rest of the world. Millions of humans lead their lives despite the petty and often pathetic self importance of US partisan politics and yet some how, the American empire finds them. Whether it is a drone hovering high above, visiting with random murder or a blockade of warships enforcing an almost ancient embargo, it is the American prevalence in all of our lives that seems to be destroying not only the U.S. itself, but the wider world. And when a victor emerges, the world still gets war. Mostly American wars. These are not civil riots protests that waved a fist against state led bigotry, nor are they anti conscription riots over government forcing individuals to fight overseas in another war. Such past riots, have had limited impact in quelling the growth of government or in tempering its destructive might.

Journalist Julian Assange is held captive in legal purgatory, punished for revealing the crimes of war mongers and lifting the up the skirt of many governments. Ross Ulbrycht a prisoner because he created a website, the details of his conviction would  make for an unbelievable fiction and yet it was all too real. Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning are pariah patriots, believers in the religious texts that most Americans claim to uphold and yet most of the voting public and voted for rulers disregard the details of such a constitution and Bill of Rights. And millions of poor and desperate foreigners live and die in the frontiers of foreign policy, their homes and day to day ruined so that macho sounding politicians can profit by propping up tyrannies of maniacal madness. Inside the prisons of the U.S. itself are thousands of convicts punished for victimless crimes, the prohibitions and regulations of a cancerous government that claims to be for freedom, when in fact it dissolves it at every chance. The protests are not for any of them.

A small child, perhaps now dead, coiled in infant agony, starved as its innocent eyes bulged in anguish fronted recent articles covering the desperate situation in Yemen. A situation that would be impossible if not for the aid and assistance of the US and it’s imperial allies. Neither Trump of Biden would save that baby and the many others like it.  The Saudi kingdom, is a profitable friend. The protesters that support the two coins of US partisan politics do not care about the children of Yemen either. One needs not look too far to find the victims of foreign policy, recent and distant to see the true outcome of such actions, but it seems few actually care to. And should they be presented with such facts and terrible images, a religious fog washes across their eyes, allowing them to either dismiss or contextualise the murder and suffering. But a slob tweeting from the toilet or a hair sniffing buffoon are both credible enough to lead, and be despised because they are not the other.

Protests inspired by Greta Thunberg visited many cities across the planet, sort of serious protesters found more energy than the Kony2012 social media inspired activists. They chanted and spread hashtags, cheered for the Swedish teen to shame political masters and then as often is the case, the energy dissipated. Nature continues to suffer, but a new smart phone in the hand is more appealing than living inside a canvas tent among the trees. The fixation with taxing the problem away and regulating industry to ‘not pollute’ is one of often curiosity, ignoring the waste of government itself. Not to mention the destructive pollutant that is the war machine. There once was a time when green movements were anti-government and anti-war. Now many of the supposedly green champions are inside the cathedral of government and so long as biodegradable material is used to transport the depleted uranium shells or a tree is planted on a base somewhere as gas guzzling tanks trample trees in distant lands, then the message is sound.

It seems that since the emergence of COVID-19 that the Peoples Republic of China has become popular to despise. An authoritarian government that had bashed human rights since before its inception, a nation of growing power and influence, that with patience managed to take advantage of the laziness and complacency of modern Western culture. Many inside the West profited from and helped to cultivate the communist planners of China. But now supposedly courageous journalists and politicians criticise the communist state.  Those who had their fingers inside the red cookie jar are ousted, the many honey traps are revealed but before COVID-19, few cared about the organ harvesting, mass executions, forced labour camps and surveillance state. It is hard to reveal those things as Chinese money flowed so lavishly.

The future unfortunately is China’s, not because of the billions of unique individuals of China but the regime itself. The culture of control, social credits, censorship, travel restrictions and surveillance. The nationalism of compromise communism that has developed in the decades since the death of Mao. It is a template by which other national governments may adopt, not by any devious design, but inevitable instinct. The protesters, voters and mobs that throw their violent tantrums do not stand opposed to that, unlike those in Hong Kong who feel the crushing tyranny grip them.  In the US and its partner nations, the coming tyranny is inevitable. It is often welcomed and it is one of elite insight, for your health, for your safety. The custodian government is here for the child citizen, and jobs, welfare will be available. Is that not Utopian?

Just as the war on terror normalised the security state, the war on drugs introduced no knock raids and intrusive searches, the war on the virus will bring with it the ever controlling health state. One that had already been creeping in. A health state of supposed benevolence for those nations of Public Health will continue to see grow, where an ideological health care system trumps choice and efficiency. Instead it gives careers and less care and a generic approach to solutions, that seldom suits the many individuals in need. Then the many regulations strangling society to ensure that the consumer, employer and employee are all directed and guided into one homogenised pattern. Choice, freedom, independence and individual responsibility are all deemed to be selfish. To be dependent, to have fewer or no choices and to be part of a collective is considerate, altruistic or even woke. For many of those protest, the public tantrum is about themes of the same controls, not ending them.

Whatever Americans think about their nation, whether they burn or worship their flag. How little or much that they know about their national history, it is insignificant to the perspective of those in foreign lands who understand the USA for what it actions reveal it to be. A war empire. When the mostly slave owners penned those words on that famous cannabis sheet it is unlikely that the republic that they envisioned would some day become greater than the British empire. And when the French sold lands on the North American continent, that never really belonged to them, to the young republic or when the British burned the capital building after defeating the U.S. invaders of Canada it is unlikely that they could imagine their future dependence and partial obedience to mighty U.S. empire. For those who have been visited by U.S. warplanes, tanks and ships the rhetoric of freedom and liberty are bloody lies. Just as they are for most Americans. But that is not being protested about.

So now as social media waffles on over the calamity in the streets of U.S. cities, will it change a thing? In a few months it would have been but one in many riots that have ravaged U.S. streets. Riots that have claimed lives and destroyed property.  None of which changed the perpetual nature of the US government, domestically or abroad. The outraged don’t really care about much other than the shrillness of the other side. The dead children in Yemen or Afghanistan, the burning lands of foreign wars don’t get that much concern, such scars and tears belongs to others. So when one side stands atop of the heaped mess as winner of the US government, the business of war will go on. The dignity of the individual will be bludgeoned and those who want nothing more but to control, to rule and to be taken care of, shall be victorious. But too few really cared enough to stop it. And those who do care, they are but whispers in the wind.

Lights Out for the City on the Hill

Lights Out

By Stephen Karganovic | January 10, 2021

The first and most overpowering impression upon seeing a great state suddenly plunged into agony and disarray is sheer disbelief at “how the mighty have fallen”.

Elitist mind-moulder Edward Bernays’ generous concession to the common man, “People are entitled to the choices we give them,” was played out dramatically during America’s recent electoral season. The multitude gobbled up the meagre choices, and did so voraciously. The distinction between theatre and reality was plainly lost on most of them. They became impassioned actors in a self-destructive play minutely choreographed by forces unseen, for ends suspected by some but completely understood by none.

Students of the controlled demolitions of the USSR and Yugoslavia may also see the ultimate game plan “through a glass, darkly” (1 Cor. 13:12), much like everyone else, but they will at least enjoy a significant heads-up. The rumblings of impending disintegration that even in the initial stages were audible to keen minds back then, are again unmistakably perceptible today.

The first and most overpowering impression upon seeing a great state suddenly plunged into agony and disarray is sheer disbelief at “how the mighty have fallen” (see 2 Samuel 1:19 or 1:27, as the reader may prefer, for both are spot on). The magnitude of the disaster overwhelms both literally and metaphorically. In the latter sense it is particularly striking. A formerly dynamic and agile commonwealth, as in a fiendish practical joke, now in its doddering phase is being put in the charge of an embarrassing senile dotard whose decrepit condition exactly matches the demise of the once imposing entity that he is being installed to nominally govern.

But to shift from broad generalities to banal particulars, it is doubtful that after these outrages America will still be able to represent itself to the outside world as the lofty paragon of the Biblical “city on the hill.” Far more importantly, however, the internal consensus that has held it together as “one nation, under God” (to use another biblical allusion) is now irredeemably broken. The indoctrinated nation that over two centuries was meekly contented, in Bernays’ terms, to settle for the choices it was given, has now fully realized the systemic scandal of that cynical arrangement, and it no longer feels comfortable with it. Still not all, but certainly a good half, and then some. Their overwhelming electoral preference for the “losing” Presidential candidate, regardless of the ruinous economic and health situation of unparalleled severity, is a telling sign. Since, as all pundits know, Americans always “vote their pocketbook,” even if the incompetent incumbent’s opponent happens to be an impaired dotard, such electoral behaviour is a game changer that the Bernays-inspired ruling elite disregard at their peril. In the short-term, after January 20th, the complete gutting of the Second Amendment will undoubtedly be their emergency reflex response; but whether that will be sufficient to restore obedience remains to be seen.

But more fundamentally, beyond mere discontent, and in spite of the greatest coordinated news blackout ever seen, the unhappy masses, some intuitively and some empirically, through the still unrepressed alternative sources, have now grasped the shocking magnitude of the fraud played on them. One of the basic props of the engineered consent upon which public order and social stability have rested for decades, the naïve belief in the democratic essence of the system, was foolishly overturned on November 3rd, and it was done precisely by those who should have been the most interested in keeping it intact. The schism that shattered faith will engender is bound to have incalculable consequences.

But the sacrilegious mob incursion into the hallowed precincts of the Congress definitely was not one of those consequences, the carefully contrived appearances notwithstanding. It was a classical false flag operation, an American adaptation of the standard color revolution playbook that previously had been successfully applied elsewhere in numerous regime change situations. The incessantly battered and largely demoralized regime, headed by a political illiterate whose grasp and cunning do not go far beyond routine prevarications required for New York real estate deals, apparently was thoroughly infiltrated as well, exactly like its third world homologues. Violent Antifa shock troops, now the elite’s Brown Shirts, were bussed into Washington in white vans, under police escort.  Capitol Hill guards facilitated the storming of the Congress by removing barricades and letting the mob through. Nor did the choreographers forget to make sure that there would also be the obligatory sacrificial victim. [For a contrary view, see Miles Mathis] From an operational standpoint, Gene Sharp would have been pleased, though it is unlikely that in his day the domestic application of his technology had actually been envisaged.

The expectation of millions of Americans of all political persuasions and from all walks of life that after repeated court challenges, rejected on flimsy procedural grounds, on January 6th Congress would at last exercise its constitutional authority to order a thorough review of the disputed issues on their merits, came to nought. The officer of the government who had the legal authority to act, Vice President Mike Pence, pointedly failed to do so. Pence practically mirrored the behaviour in 1992 of Yugoslav Presidency member Bogić Bogićević. At a critical moment leading up to the break-up of Yugoslavia, Bogićević refused to vote for proposed solutions that might have defused the crisis, thus ensuring that the measures would not be adopted and laying the groundwork for the country’s ensuing collapse and bloodshed.

The curious fact that in the end establishment figures of both parties and from all major institutions of formal and informal governance were aligned on the same page, certifying a totally implausible electoral outcome, is perhaps the ultimate proof of attorney Lin Wood’s otherwise shocking explanation of how the system works.

Personalizing the issues underlying this crisis, as many outside the United States are wont to do, is mistaken. Both principals are strawmen devoid of substance. In his whimsical quest for the Presidency four years ago, engaged in as a rich man’s ego trip rather than with a serious intention of winning, probably accidentally the incumbent articulated the brooding masses’ deepest concerns and frustrations. They, in turn, projected their exasperation, bitterness, and illusions back onto him, turning him by default into their standard-bearer. The fact that after four years in office their symbolic champion has nothing to show, yet in the midst of economic collapse he was still able to garner about eighty million votes, is a huge sign. It is a sobering warning to the ruling elite that blatant electoral manipulation and ruthless information censorship may serve as Band-Aid solutions, but are losing their effectiveness.

You can pull the tiger’s tail only so much before it pounces.

The Last Straight Before The Global Crisis, Or How Much Freedom Costs

Stalker Zone

By Mikhail Khazin | January 7, 2021

On January 7th in the United States, electors chose the new president of the country. It seems to be an important event, but in reality, it is completely irrelevant in the strategic context. Why? For a number of reasons…

The first one is the simplest. All those who subscribe to the reviews of the Mikhail Khazin Foundation for Economic Research know that pre-election conflicts have had little impact on macroeconomic trends. Why – I will tell you a little below, but what is fundamentally important for us [in Russia – ed] is that they did not reflect. So, they are not of interest!

The second reason is why. Actually, this is the main question that is generally absent in the modern political science discourse. Apparently, the blockhead political scientists who implement it have not read Kipling’s famous poem translated by Marshak (“I drove them around, like dogs. In bad weather, rain and darkness, five thousand of ‘Where?’, seven thousand of ‘How?’, one hundred thousand of ‘Why?‘). And therefore, such questions are not asked.

And the question is quite relevant. How will the US economy develop? Where will the new economic policy of the United States be formed? Why will those programs, which are expressed by candidates (both of them!) lead to success? In fact, the research of the Khazin Foundation just shows that the question is somewhat different, namely, whether the recession will be manageable or not, but not at all about what the recovery of the economy and the greatness of the United States will be like. But – it is impossible to explain this to the political elites in the United States today.

READ:  US Election: What Will Happen Now?

Onto the question of the power of the word. When our first book about the collapse of the world dollar (Bretton Woods) system appeared (“The Decline of the dollar empire and the end of Pax Americana”, published in 2003), it was strongly disliked by adherents of liberal ideas. And they decided to dirty (or trivialise) it and in turn to marginalise us. Accordingly, the book about the collapse of the dollar currency zone started to be called a book about the “collapse of the dollar” and “the collapse of the United States”. The result is obvious: ideas that were completely crazy at the time of writing our first book have become quite real today. And it was not we who did it, but they.

Thus, it can be stated that practically nothing depends on the results of the election and today’s conflicts in terms of the development of strategic economic processes. It may be possible to influence them, but today there are no corresponding institutions, no alternative directions to liberal ideas, and there are no people from whom these institutions can be formed. Well, more precisely, there are ideas and people, but in Russia, not the west.

Why are there no people? This can, in general, be explained quite simply. The fact is that the economic model is a mechanism for creating added value. There is no added value (in the amount sufficient for the reproduction of the economy), and there is no economic growth. So, the problem is that since 1944, the main mechanism for creating added value has been a financial mechanism, stimulating demand by issuing the dollar. This mechanism has been quite seriously adapted in the course of its existence, but, in general, its effectiveness has been falling all the time.

READ:  What happened in the US

Well, it fell to such a state (in 2008) when it became impossible to reproduce the economy. This effect no longer works. So, there is a need to look for a new one. The trouble is that during the monopoly of financial mechanisms, all economists were trained for them. I.e., they are always trying to change or bring back the old versions of financial mechanisms, but under the same format of creating added value. And it doesn’t work anymore… How sad!

It is difficult to change thinking in adulthood, it is simply impossible to give up social and scientific status. And what to do in this situation? Forcefully change old bosses for young geniuses? But where to find them, if they were all taught in the logic of the “only correct” financial doctrine? They start to reproduce the same paradigm that no longer works.

In other words, jumping from the frying pan into the fire no longer works. I have already written that US presidential candidates are so old because they were formed before the monopoly of financiers in American education became total (i.e., before 1974). All the younger ones look like Chinese nodders from this point of view: they shake their heads in exactly the same way and say exactly the same economic statements, which, by the way, have no special relation to modern reality.

There are only questions. Who will rise, whose career will be ruined, who will go to prison… Well, when the collapse begins, tomorrow or the day after. From our point of view, this is not very relevant. It all looks like a theatrical performance. Well, or, more precisely, a sports match. In which, regardless of the result, the people living in the United States lose.

READ:  Estonians Were The First To Understand

And nothing can be done here.

Actually, there is nothing more to say here. Life around the world continues and only one conclusion can be drawn: now everyone will have to live using their wits. Not American ones, but their own. This is very difficult, and at the first stage there will be many obstacles. And maybe there will be dangerous injuries. But – there’s no getting away, the time for real freedom has come.

Mikhail Khazin

Copyright © 2021. All Rights Reserved.

Read 84 times


Articles of Note

  The Last Exit   Click for contents September 18, 2023: The Last Exit January 8, 2021: Whisphers in the Wind January 10, 2021: Lights Out for the City on the Hill January 7, 2021: The Last Straight Before The Global Crisis What causes revolutions? When does the...

Monogamy: a Critique

Monogamy: a Critique    Source Almost all of us have entered or will one day enter a specifically standardized form of monogamous marriage. This cultural requirement is so very basic to our existence that we accept it for most part as a...