Men and women both find themselves confused, lost, and unhappy in this modern society. All the while, oversexualization and LGBTQ promotion has led to high rates of STD’s.
Drug Use has become an epidemic in and of itself and similar to mold on a fruit, it is slowly going through society decaying it all the way to the core. Drug use has also led to diseases, mental issues, homelessness, deaths, divorces, and a further breakdown of the American way of life.
Everything Pat Buchanan warned America about has become true and is becoming worse than he predicted.
While the 80s presented, a semi-return to traditional values and rest from the excesses of liberalism; the 90s brought back the extreme left under the first boomer president.
By the late 90s/early 2000s; it had seemed that America had reached an equilibrium.
However, things were about to only get more dire:
For every action, there is an equal or greater reaction. As the left had gone off the rails, the right had slowly started to become more extreme as well. Soon, they went off the rails, and the Neo-Conservative movement was born.
Neo-Conservatives were created by a lot of former liberals. In essence, they did not truly believe in the conservative ideas of Nationalism, Limited Foreign Engagement, and small Government.
They believed in the liberal ideas of Globalization (Free Trade, Etc.), International Interventions, and an activist Government.
Outside of the Civil Rights Movement, the liberal/progressive movements of the sixties (60s) had resulted in the destruction of American society. Drug use, Divorce, and Disease had come to dominate a nation founded upon puritanical beliefs.
The destruction was so sudden, severe and widespread that as a Conservative there was nothing left to protect. In this way, Neo-Conservatives provided not traditional Conservatism or protection of the status quo but an activist agenda to counteract the liberals.
By pulling in former conservatives, who were driven by their anger against the changes in society; the liberal driven Neo-Conservative movement was able to dominate the right of American politics. Soon, they started to use the name “Paleo-Cons” for true pushing them outside the mainstream.
Similarly, the left started to go through changes as well. As many of the liberal ideas became mainstream, the left came to dominate the mainstream.
Since the left became mainstream, corporate and globalist interests took control. The left started to purge out idealist elements especially those who were against a globalist, corporate economy and those who were anti-war.
The domination of the left by the so-called “Neo-Liberals” was the death knell for the traditional two-party system. In its stead, America had one party with two slightly different wings.
Given the emphasis for the poor, helping other nations and their Peace and Love slogans; the right always viewed the left as “soft”.
One of the few things that remained from the genuine disagreements of the past was this “soft” label. This label was used to perpetuate the myth of debate and disagreement.
The left vs. right divide in the politics of the United States devolved into “soft” vs. “tough”.
On all the main agendas and policies, there was agreement; but the disagreements were how to do implement them. These “non-partisan” or “bi-partisan” ideas became indoctrinated in movies, tv shows, news, think tanks, and bureaucrats.
Anyone who disagreed was viewed as fringe or extremist.
Disagreements were hyped by the media to seem legitimate and significant and given almost 24-hour wall to wall coverage.
Disagreements would usually boil down to the same unimportant arguments:
- Cultural Wars: Neo-Conservatives would randomly and occasionally pick out wedge, cultural issues to make a stand. Overall, the Neo-Conservatives were not that different on the cultural issues and allowed the cultural changes that the left championed to happen except for periodic push back.
- Corporate Control/Free Trade/Global Economy: No Disagreement between them here as both are for the global economy. The only difference was in the left’s supposed “soft” approach of some unionization, some regulations, and some environmental concern while the right advocated a “stronger” approach of less unions, less regulations, and more freedom for the corporations to do as they pleased.
- Global Activism: Again, both sides are for intervening in other nations. The “left” takes the “soft” approach of multilateralism and “nation building”; however, the “right” takes the “tough” approach of unilateralism and “regime change”.
These faux debates came to dominate all levels of the United States thus enforcing and instilling the Deep State’s agenda.
The debates also served to entertain the American population, and distract them from the Deep State’s real agenda. (In fact, the whole purpose of the MSM became to entertain the population with these increasingly trivial debates)
The American public was also trained to become hypersensitive and have a shorter attention span.
American debate became obsessed with hyperbole and emotional debates as opposed to rational and logical discourse.
This made the populace easier to control.
As the Deep State’s strangle hold over the country became stronger, it became easier to fall afoul of the ever-shrinking circle of allowed dialogue.
The internet, on the other hand, provided a means for people, who were disenfranchised, to contact each other.
As with any authoritarian regime, as the grip of control became tighter; more challenges to the power arose. Over time, these challenges became stronger and sharper.
The Deep State responded with a policy of a) defaming; b) ignoring; and/or c) controlling these challenges.
Prior to the explosion of social media, those who expressed thoughts on the internet outside of the Deep State sanctioned media debate where attacked with the same accusation of being a strange, fat, losers eating Cheetos in a basement obsessed with conspiracy theories.
As more and more people started to join political groups and received political news online, this troupe failed to be as effective.
This hasn’t stopped the mainstream media from attacking those outside of the mainstream as crazy (one way or another) for simply stating opinions.
In addition to attacking and trying to paint them as crazy; the Deep State will often try to cut oxygen to debates and people outside of its control. They are given very limited media time, and if they do make it on the media, they are usually ruthlessly attacked without having much of a chance to defend themselves.
The Deep State, due to the supposed Russian attacks and the supposed Cyber War against the United States, is now looking for ways to censor Social Media and not allow those who it disagrees with to have a voice.
Finally, the Deep State will try to control you and ultimately bring you under its yoke.
As an example, one may look at Breitbart. Breitbart is presented as a member of the Alt-Right by the MSM. While this may be true on the comments section; the site itself is more in line with the new Republican Party then it lets on. It just presents itself in a more robust way.
In other words, Breitbart is “Deep State sanctioned Alt-Right”
Trump was also a Deep State sanctioned outsider. As detailed above, Trump became a puppet and a controlled tool of the Deep State.
However, as is the case in many authoritarian regimes, even when an outside group or politician is sanctioned or controlled by the system; there can still be damage to the authoritarian regime.
In the case of Trump, his inability to be nuanced has laid bare some of the true politics of the United States. By attacking The Fake News Media and calling out the Deep State; he has put a spotlight to what was once automatically discounted and dismissed.
The blind support of his followers and media has made the biased nature of the system clear for everyone to see; and his foreign policy had the finesse of the hammer. By openly and aggressively doing the bidding of the Deep State, he inadvertently revealed the Deep State’s true plans.
The Liberal/Progressive Hippie movement, ironically, ended with a unified, corporate global economic world order. America’s politics ended up with one dominant shared thinking where supposed political parties bicker over how to best execute the same policies.
Of the programs pursued by the Liberals/Progressives; the only one which was argumentatively brought about true, necessary positive change was the Racial/Civil Rights movements.
It is now becoming evident that the Civil Rights/Race Relations movement has been a failure as well.
The forced assimilation/integration policies have led to:
- White Flight: Constant Movement of Whites and Other Affluent Populations away from minority populations and cities. These populations are running away as far as they can and hiding behind the walls of gated communities. Soon, there will be nowhere left to run.
- Poor, Desolate Black Communities: Black Communities have been drained of money and resources leaving behind poor schools, no jobs, crime, drug use and gangs.
- Suppressed White Rage: With the forced injection of minorities into their communities, a formal and informal campaign against White Culture and Heritage, and Racism used as a baton to squelch dissent; there is anger boiling within the White Community and suppression of this anger is serving only to increase pressure thus leading to a possible explosion of White Racist Rage.
- Systemic Racism: On the other hand, consciously and/or sub-consciously, the system has engrained in it disadvantages to ensure that black individuals are held down within the system often finding themselves incarcerated and used for cheap labor.
This system has created neither a melting pot nor a multicultural society where all cultures are equally protected. Tensions between the races is on the rise as society is starting to fail.
America is truly at risk of a racial war.
In response, as always, the Deep State provides only limited, false choices to choose from.
In this debate, the option has been defined as being:
- A Good Person vs. A Racist
- Segregationist vs. Complete Integration/Assimilation
Racism can be defined differently by different people and different circumstances. In many ways, racism is a part of human nature, and it should be accepted to some degree in a free society. People cannot be controlled, molded, or dictated to in a free society for better or worse.
True Freedom is not defined by the good that it allows but for the bad that it can tolerate.
Racism can be accepted to exist but not promoted. It can be controlled by society but not completely abolished.
The first step is to stop using racism as the Modern Scarlet Letter to punish and oppress people into the system. People shouldn’t have to live in fear of suffering punishments or losing their jobs do to making racist remarks especially when in private environments.
The second step is to make room for all people and thoughts into an open discussion and debate. No matter what their ideas. Arguments and Debates must be widespread throughout society (in person, on television, and on social media). No idea, whether racist, offensive, or disgusting should be automatically withheld from any discussion. No person should be stopped from expressing their thoughts and excluded from the discourse. The debates should also not be limited to having biased moderators assisting others in ganging up on undesirable participants nor should it devolve into labeling participants as “racist”, “anti-Semite”, “homophobe”, etc.
No matter HOW BAD OR DANGEROUS AN IDEA, trust in the debate to expose it as such and have FAITH IN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE to make the right decision.
This debate can initially act as a release valve allowing blacks and whites to finally, fully, and freely expressing their true thoughts about society instead of letting it percolate underneath.
Finally, America can look beyond the limited options presented by the current, decaying system and look to new, pragmatic options with reasonable, rational goals for the betterment of the entire system instead of the failed utopian vision of a world without racism and hate.
As this rage became unleashed in the street in mid-2020, there were indications that various groups were coming in to take on the entire system. The media and the system as a whole has been doing its best to control the rage and steer it into topics within the framework of the system.
One of the claims that you have heard often is
“Protest but don’t riot”
In fact, Tom Cotton, an unabashed looter of Iraqi goods, and an extremist Deep Statist put out an editorial in which he openly advocated for a military Deep State take over.
These reactions by Deep Statists, who advocate military violence against mostly peaceful protestors and their warnings against “looters and rioters” is ironic and once again exposes their true intentions.
Always, remember the best way to understand the Deep State is through its persistent habit of projection.
When faced with true, legitimate resistance and dissent; the Deep State panics and calls for violent repression. This exposes that it understands the danger of protests and it recognizes that there is a difference between protestors and agitators looking for the destruction of the state.
The Deep Statists also claimed that outside states were involved and various groups were looking for interference in the United States.
Think about these admissions by Tom Cotton and other Deep Statists next time they are promoting and encouraging violent anarchists in the Middle East, who are burning buildings, banks, gas stations. This is a tacit admission that they are pulling for the agitators and that they are the ones that are interfering in another country.
The media/system has also been trying to limit these protests to limited and controlled topics like black grievances, police conduct, and racism.
Think about how media insists on these controlled topics, next time, when the same media/Deep Statists quickly ask for “Regime Change” when there is some political issue in another country.
Tom Cotton is apparently being groomed as the heir to Trump in order to bring Trumpists and a segment of the Alt-Right further under Deep State control.
