America had several early diversity experiences, but most of them such as Amerinds and Africans were kept under wrap by both de facto and legally mandated segregation. The 1960s took care of the latter, and affirmative action shattered the former.
A more fundamental American diversity experience occurred when Southern/Eastern Europeans joined the previously wholly Western European population. This manifested in a number of changes, including the rise of diversity politics where these groups settled in large numbers.
In particular, cities like Chicago, which had high Irish and Polish populations, showed how groups from outside the West tended toward different systems of self-governance, specifically the strongman model that is common in the third world.
Generally, Southern and Eastern European countries do better with strong leaders and less rule of law or insistence on the lack of corruption that Western Europeans prefer. Consider Italy, Russia and Ireland as contrasted to England during the same time period.
In Chicago and New York, these new immigrant populations created the rise of machine politics:
City government experts point to a political culture that’s been in place for more than 100 years. This culture dates back to the late 19th century, when a gambling-house owner named Michael Cassius McDonald created the city’s first political machine. Under machine-style rule, those in power would hand out contracts, jobs, and social services in exchange for political support.
Chicago’s large immigrant population made it easier for political machines to grow in power. Poor ethnic communities could be played off against one another and manipulated with petty gifts. In exchange for political support, ethnicities would be given virtual fiefdoms within city government; the Irish, for example, were given police work, and the Italians jobs at the transit authority.
Of course, none of this was unique to Chicago. New York City had large immigrant populations and the notorious political machine at Tammany Hall. But machine politics faded away in New York, due in part to external pressure from former New Yorker Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was elected president in 1932.
Did machine politics fade away, or were they simply transformed into the Leftist agenda upon which FDR embarked?
It definitely appears that the Left has assimilated the lessons from machine politics:
Chicago moved towards a one-party system that made it even more vulnerable to corruption: The city’s last Republican mayor left office in 1931. Today, not even the Democratic primaries are competitive—for the most part, once you’re in office, you stay there. The weak campaign finance laws in Illinois probably helped to stave off competition in recent years.
Diversity means that no social standards in common exist, and each ethnic group becomes a special interest group, which means they can be bought off like other special interest groups (minorities, religions, unions, LGBT+, industries, mothers against drunk driving, environmentalists) by giving them monopolies on certain roles.
At that point, the only sin is to violate the rules of the machine itself, which exists solely to further control, a system of power based on uniformity and power as a means-to-an-end of itself. Control necessarily arises from democracy as Plato detailed 2400 years ago.
Notice how similar that is to both the contemporary Leftists in the West and the Soviet Communists.
The Chicago Machine relies on unwritten rules to recruit new members and control existing ones. The machine’s unwritten rules are very similar to those of organized crime families and street gangs. Machine recruiters don’t hand new members a manual containing the rules. New machine members learn the organization’s customs and norms through their elders or by trial and error.
The machine relies on peer and social pressure to enforce its rules. The machine does not physically beat or murder those who violate the rules. Nonetheless, the machine metes out punishment including excommunication, loss of jobs, loss of contracts, public humiliation, or inspections that lead to hefty fines and loss of income. People who live in Chicago know why you “don’t fight City Hall.” If you dare challenge City Hall, the machine will apply its unlimited city resources to make you pay.
Machine members will tell you the machine doesn’t exist. It’s in the best interest of the machine to make you believe there is no such thing as a political machine. The machine doesn’t want voters like you to know there is a political organization manipulating your vote. The machine relies on votes from the unsuspecting public to manufacture patronage jobs, political power, campaign contributions, and income for members who make the machine’s candidates invincible at the polls.
When people join the Chicago political machine, they aren’t photographed and issued an identification card. The machine doesn’t require its members to periodically receive an updated identification card that says, “Chicago Machine Member since 2003.” The machine has no official dues, no official articles of incorporation, and no official meetings. The closest the machine gets to anything official is the Cook County and State of Illinois Democratic Party. The machine camouflages itself under the false pretense of a political party that exists to serve the public good.
The machine is strictly business. The machine doesn’t sell drugs or weapons. Its stock and trade is political influence and power. The machine has control of city, county, and state taxes and often uses the money it collects as its own. At the very least, the machine’s elected officials trade government services for campaign contributions, which is why Jay Stone has sought a ban on political contributions from companies and people who do business with the city.
Everything the machine does is designed to get its members reelected so the machine can hold on to its political power and control government jobs and the taxes it collects. The machine is easy to get along with provided you play the machine’s game. If you ask members of the machine for help with problems concerning city, county, or state government, you can have it provided you help enough influential political machine members get what they want.
In other words, independent of the groups involved, the practice of diversity itself leads to thirdworlding, or the transfer of first world states to third world levels of order.
Our future under diversity is more of the same, except that thanks to FDR, the Chicago/Tammany Hall model has gone nationwide through the proto-Communist Left wing of the United States.
When we were growing up in spaced-out suburbia, people read Newsweek and The New York Times for information and repeated it as truth. That is what educated, successful people did; everyone else imitated in a covert and sly version of “monkey see, monkey do.”
In the method of controlling people since the dawn of time, these media establishments enjoyed preaching fear and then giving meticulous advice about details of daily life. This made it clear who was in the Cool Kids Group and who was just a — said in sotto voce — sad loser going nowhere.
The Times in particular conveyed all manner of dietary and personal care information like a tyrant dictating to his toadies. Eggs were bad; they would stop your heart. Fat was bad and should never be consumed. Coffee would make your brain turn to cheese. People need to stretch for thirty minutes before running or their tendons would explode. And on, and on…
Much of this “nu-knowledge” contradicted common sense. But it sounded good, so people kept running out to buy cottage cheese, low-fat salad dressing, light beer, bean sprouts and wheat germ. Fortunes were made based on what one $24,000/year writer the Times was able to twist out of a study written by a $18,000/year graduate research assistant.
A lot of us resented this stuff on a gut level. When people start dictating to you how to live your life, and anyone who does otherwise is seen as a déclassé moron, they have forced you into a control structure. You now either do whatever ludicrous thing they say, or admit you are part of the Great Unwashed, the Redneck Horde, or whatever group they are warning about this week.
Old-timers in particular took a cynical attitude. The papers always had some new fascination or fear to make the herd jump, buck and run. If you just waited twenty years, all of that stuff would be debunked anyway, and they might find out that some lobbyist slipped a few grand one way or another in order to buy a few hundred million of consumer interest. Quite a bargain, if so.
Now that years have passed, we are seeing the tip of the iceberg of the forgeries of “scientific opinion” that came our way during the consumer boom years of 1920-2000. In particular, it seems that the dietary advice of our big newspapers was just plain wrong, such as the Satanic Panic over saturated fats:
Dr Malhotra and colleagues Professor Rita Redberg, from the University of California at San Francisco, and Pascal Meier from University Hospital Geneva in Switzerland and University College London, cited a “landmark” review of evidence that appeared to exonerate saturated fat. They said relative levels of “good” cholesterol, or high density lipoprotein (HDL), were a better predictor of heart disease risk than levels of low density lipoprotein (LDL), also known as “bad” cholesterol. High consumption of foods rich in saturated fat such as butter, cakes and fatty meat has been shown to increase blood levels of LDL.
The experts wrote: “It is time to shift the public health message in the prevention and treatment of coronary artery disease away from measuring serum lipids (blood fats) and reducing dietary saturated fat. Coronary artery disease is a chronic inflammatory disease and it can be reduced effectively by walking 22 minutes a day and eating real food.” They pointed out that in clinical trials widening narrow arteries with stents — stainless steel mesh devices — failed to reduce the risk of heart attacks.
In other words, what was considered “settled science” and “everyone knows that” has become recognized as a false solution, which both wastes time on the irrelevant and obscures the necessity of the actual solution, which seems to be “walking 22 minutes a day and eating real food.”
Some might wonder how illusions like this have persisted for so long. The answer is that in a hierarchy based on popularity, instead of strict realism, whatever seems appealing to the herd will become dogma, and anyone who resists the dogma becomes an ideological enemy. Only with generational change do the illusions fade, because otherwise, those who oppose them find themselves ignored.
This form of “fake news” originated with payola to scientists by industry in exchange for conclusions favorable to that industry:
As nutrition debates raged in the 1960s, prominent Harvard nutritionists published two reviews in a top medical journal downplaying the role of sugar in coronary heart disease. Newly unearthed documents reveal what they didn’t say: A sugar industry trade group initiated and paid for the studies, examined drafts, and laid out a clear objective to protect sugar’s reputation in the public eye.
…Nearly 50 years later, some nutritionists consider sugar a risk factor for coronary heart disease, though there’s no consensus. Having two major reviews published in an influential journal “helped shift the emphasis of the discussion away from sugar onto fat,” said Stanton Glantz, Kearns’s coauthor and her advisor at UCSF. “By doing that, it delayed the development of a scientific consensus on sugar-heart disease for decades.”
Fifty years later, we have caught these two — who are now deceased, which may be why this came out — but have no idea how many more existed, and how much of what we accept as truth is in fact cash-backed lie.
When promoters like Bill Nye or Neil DeGrasse Tyson tell us that something is 100% science, we should stop and ask ourselves who is telling us this, and whether they are simply preaching to the choir for more bucks, or accepting cash behind the curtain. We will not know for another fifty years, if history is any guide.
Shills, all of them. Under democracy, whatever the herd wants is that it is told, and because there is no hierarchy of people oriented toward truth and sanity, whatever people can be paid to say using their positions of authority is preached to the herd, and then the herd enforces it on one another.
Do not trust the media. Do not trust “science.” Do not trust academics, or history written by them. Our only tool in this game is logical analysis (sometimes called “critical thinking”) and it never favors the Left, who built their beliefs on the illusion that people are equal, and have been perpetrating lies ever since.
The devastation of failing civilizations is that they leave behind third world populations, not just ethnically through beige mixing, but also spiritually, through people who are conditioned to helplessness, apathy and disorganization. Now Scientific American offers us some insight into the mechanism of the collapse within the collapse:
A number of studies have shown that seeing a peer behave unethically increases people’s dishonesty in laboratory tests. What is much harder to investigate is how this kind of influence operates at a societal level. But that is exactly what behavioral economists Simon Gächter of the University of Nottingham in England and Jonathan Schulz of Yale University set out to do in a study published in March 2016 in Nature. Their findings suggest that corruption not only harms a nation’s prosperity but also shapes the moral behavior of its citizens.
…The findings imply that highly corrupt countries may be difficult to change because their citizens have been shaped by norms that permit dishonesty. Yet there is also a positive practical implication. Rather than tackling corruption by targeting institutions, we might do better to aim at young people.
This shows us what happened after the French Revolution and Russian Revolution: the ideology of Leftism destroyed those populations, both by killing off the intelligent and by conditioning the rest to be weak and dependent on the state. As a result, they were stranded without hope in a world of symbols and obligations, oblivious to reality, through being corrupted in regards to reality
If democracy is allowed to play itself out to its extremes, it will leave behind a “white” race of mixed Southern, Eastern and Western Europeans who have no culture and act out the dispirited and conformist pattern of egalitarianism. They will not aspire; they will merely react, and when that fails, rationalize failure and return to a life of apathy.
Corruption is endemic to democracy. When leaders are elected for promises, and not actual abilities, they are granted a property that they can resell. Further, the nature of politics as the telling of pleasant lies, and the habits of the voters as throwing in their vote and then blaming someone else for the result, spreads corruption like a virus.
Democracy thus is the ultimate weapon of genocide: it will destroy what it can, then reduce the rest to a mental state of servitude, which will guarantee their further destruction.
In turn, this article recapitulates the Alt Right by suggesting that we give up politics as it is, and focus on building a cultural wave starting with the young that resists corruption, and thus by extension resists democracy, equality, diversity and the other insane ideas of the neurotic Left.
The dividing line between the Alt Right and Alt Lite exists on this issue. The Alt Lite thinks that democracy can be reformed and made useful; the Alt Right recognizes that all of modernity, or in other words all ideas emanating from the notion of egalitarianism, must be removed and replaced with the idea of facts over feels.
Donald J. Trump has brilliantly confused the entire world by refusing to announce his intentions, keeping people guessing. It seems to me that his presidency has had to recalculate its course because he encountered the Obama Deep State (ODS) which has been filled with careerist parasitic bureaucrats, and he is slowly removing or sidestepping them to achieve what he needs, while dazzling the rest of us with a baffling Downton Abbey or Game of Thrones style power-play drama acted out for our benefit.
(For the curious, Downton Abbey is Upstairs, Downstairs re-set into Edwardian England, and Game of Thrones is As The World Turns re-set into a Tolkien/L’Engle style future retro-traditional society. Both are worth avoiding entirely.)
Today, we see one of the first shots fired in his “drain the swamp” initiative which proposes to remove corrupt lobbyists, politicians and enablers from Washington. A career bureaucrat is most likely going straight to jail for corruption and espionage for China, and from the evidence gathered, the impact will be great:
According to the affidavit in support of the complaint and arrest warrant, which was unsealed today, Claiborne began working as an Office Management Specialist for the Department of State in 1999. She has served overseas at a number of posts, including embassies and consulates in Baghdad, Iraq, Khartoum, Sudan, and Beijing and Shanghai, China. As a condition of her employment, Claiborne maintains a Top Secret security clearance. Claiborne also is required to report any contacts with persons suspected of affiliation with a foreign intelligence agency.
Despite such a requirement, the affidavit alleges, Claiborne failed to report repeated contacts with two intelligence agents of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), even though these agents provided tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and benefits to Claiborne and her family over five years. According to the affidavit, the gifts and benefits included cash wired to Claiborne’s USAA account, an Apple iPhone and laptop computer, Chinese New Year’s gifts, meals, international travel and vacations, tuition at a Chinese fashion school, a fully furnished apartment, and a monthly stipend. Some of these gifts and benefits were provided directly to Claiborne, the affidavit alleges, while others were provided through a co-conspirator.
According to the affidavit, Claiborne noted in her journal that she could “Generate 20k in 1 year” working with one of the PRC agents, who, shortly after wiring $2,480 to Claiborne, tasked her with providing internal U.S. Government analyses on a U.S.-Sino Strategic Economic Dialogue that had just concluded.
I realize that it is de rigeur on the Left and Alt Right to view Trump as having sold his voters out, but we will not know because more time is needed and his strategy tends toward obfuscation, which means that for many of his actions, we will not know his rationale until 2070 at a minimum and may never know.
However, what we must do is support the man at a basic level to enable him to do what he promised to do, namely build that wall and clean up Washington corruption, and then push him to do other necessary things to “peel the onion” of Leftist changes to the West, namely by removing Affirmative Action and Civil Rights programs. At that point, we can work toward further changes bringing us in line toward a traditionalist and nationalist society.
The Leftist always accuses his opposition of what the Leftist is, in fact, doing. The recent rise of “populism” — which may be understood as political thought from outside the ordained Establishment/Cathedral blessed by academia and the political industry — has caught the internation Left (a.k.a. globalists) off guard, and so they have retaliated by calling populism corrupt:
But anti-establishment parties generally failed to address corruption once in office, the group said.
…TI said the report showed pervasive public-sector corruption around the world. Sixty-nine percent of 176 countries scored below 50 on the index scale of 0 to 100, with 0 perceived to be highly corrupt and 100 considered “very clean.” More countries declined in the index than improved in 2016, it noted.
Once in place, populist leaders appeared almost “immune to challenges about corrupt behavior,” Heinrich wrote. The scores of Hungary and Turkey – countries with autocratic leaders – fell in recent years, for example. Argentina, which ousted a populist government, saw its score improve.
Notice that we are referring to a rating of corruption that has been released by Leftists. In other words, we are not referring to actual corruption, but a measure of it filtered through an ideological source. This enables the Leftists to claim that the report is reality, while the actual reality is more complex.
For example, the actual changes implemented by a change in leadership take years or decades to see. In an intermediate state, there will be more chaos as things get sorted out because of the disruption caused by the change. Even more, Leftists are notorious for ignoring Leftist corruption entirely, at which point they can point to a single corrupt Rightist and claim the Right is corrupt.
A more accurate assessment, and this is what they are really hiding, is this: Leftists states are institutionally corrupt, which means they have created laws to transfer money away from the population and toward Leftist leaders. Their corruption is technically legal as a result, so they do not measure it on their surveys, and instead focus on one guy who got caught taking a bribe.
Under Leftist rule, wealth transfer and autocratic power create opportunities for Leftist politicians to receive money for a variety of non-essential and often entirely irrelevant tasks, and through the third parties they use as proxies — NGOs, not-for-profit organizations like the Clinton Foundation, and compliant businesses — they are able to receive bribes as favors and salaries and thus conceal the pervasive corruption.
Remember that the Leftist always accuses you of what he is guilty of, so when populists get accused of corruption, the real question is what Leftist globalists are hiding. The answer is that they formulated a system of institutional corruption so vast and all-intrusive that we can no longer recognize it for what it is, which is legalized deep state parasitism far worse than any surface corruption their studies measure.
Humanity must consider the possibility of a world order comprised of multiple independent civilizations which can scale independently. Globalism posits the idea of a single global civilization which is by definition not scalable because it controls all territory with this one type of civilization, repeated like wallpaper across the globe.
Our democratic leadership decided to oppose this notion back in 1991 when it posited the neoliberal “new world order” or globalism. This create a single order, but because of its lack of ability to scale, it quickly became unstable. In addition, globalization deprived people of what they may desire most, which is pride and belief in their nations.
In the chaotic moment while “signals” of an impending third world war cross television screens, which for all intents and purposes would induce an absolute climate disaster through nuclear fall-out, Donald Trump appeared on the international scene in stark anti-global contrast.
His appearance is not some opportunistic knee-jerk reaction. He carefully planned his entry, knowing globalism was debunked decades ago and the political elite is holding on to the illusion for its own convenience only. But people are intuitively uncertain of the prospect of the opposite of that wonderful “perfect” future. Does that actually mean that Trump proposes an “imperfect future”?
The argument made today is that an imperfect future is what humans actually want, that it is the future of developing organizational potential, that it is the future of realism. However, what are the imperfections that organizations will have to face?
The first endeavor will be to design organizations with known imperfections. Engineers already do that with electronic products, so it is possible at the organizational level. To do that, organizations must understand the time-based problem which means looking at history and organizational development phases over time.
Generally, organizations appear to start very militaristically (perhaps to establish authority such as with entrepreneurs) then organizations become very legally oriented towards “organization” (such as M.B.A. qualified managers). Once organized, they become very economic via trade (such as accountants, Forex and optimization) after which they become philosophically oriented toward homestasis, and thus opposed to any change in the situation around them.
It is obvious that not all organizations are in the same time-frame or even compatible. Internally, it is possible for “leaders” to deviate from their employees or electorate too, causing conflict within such organizations such as is currently happening in the West.
The same can be seen in other “civilizations,” for example the Congo. A militarist leader clashed with a philosopher leader but because the electorate was militarist oriented, they chose the militarist leader. In South Africa the electorate, despite being tribal “justice” oriented, were manipulated by their leaders in favor of the “universal” economic idea. In both cases the outcome was unacceptable.
The American internal conflict appears to be at the economic level where Trump wants to go up and Hillary wants to go “down” as it were. In other words, the American civilization has not reached the philosopher stage yet. But the confrontation can be considered a good thing because it is driving both leadership and electorate to a realistic positive and therefore imperfect future where different organizations must co-exist (which would require philosophical insight).
This re-alignment of “real” differences will be difficult as is already exemplified by the dual-cultural and dual-communication effects visible in Africa. Imagine the Tower of Babel happening again, but instead of being nihilistic about it, try to actually take the opportunity to catapult “forward” to the philosopher phase.
This does not mean that a new universal language or culture must be developed to enable co-existence, but rather that an imperfect solution might actually work far “better.” The current idea that all organizations can be measured on one continuum must pass into history. We can see this idea in the notion of polling for left-right orientation of rich-poor classification.
Another example is language imperfections. Take for example the words corrupted, interrupted and disrupted. In future it could include co-rupted, dys-rupted and evo-rupted as is illustrated by our present state.
Current academia and media demonstrated that even though they may not have acted fraudulently in maximizing their “industries”, that both these industries certainly have been “co-rupted” to serve the interests of utopia promoted by universalists based on universal “co-rency” and “co-herency.”
It appears that the above co-ruption caused dys-ruption while evo-ruption would have been more realistic for a positive “creation”, instead of a dystopian utopia.
One forgets that thousands of years ago, writers literally spent their entire lives to write a single article, where we could easily write multiple books. In those days, only the very intelligent and very fortunate were given the protection to write, the result of which was taken seriously by their leaders.
This is not the case today. Therefore, clever, top drawer people must be revealed (again) today. One example is Mensa revealing the name of Garth Zietsman, who just like most people, works for a salary.
In the imperfect future, organizations must realize that they are not on the easily abused single continuum that investors, marketers and “pollsters” want them to be. In other words, they need to stiffen their backs as it were (become forceful).
But also that language(s) should expand and clever people be revealed once again to develop the organizational potential inherent in all of us imperfect middle-class normies, so that we built ten Towers, not just one, and then ten different, better Towers after that.
So the NYPD Special Victims Unit searched a computer of a former Congressman accused of hitting up teenagers for sexual intercourse. The come across this folder labeled “Insurance Policy.” It’s at that point that the decomposing fecal material collides with the oscillating rotary device.
“Insurance Policy” was this folder filled with 650,000 documents that appeared far more likely to be sensitive government documents belonging to Democratic Party nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton than policy riders from Nationwide. This finally forced the FBI’s hand. If the Election of 2016 was going to decided by a law enforcement agency, the FBI would be damned if it would be decided by a Vice Squad with a fancy name.
You see the disgraced former congressman, Anthony “Leaky” Weiner, is married to a very important and powerful woman named Huma Abedin. Abedin has the thankless task of being Hillary Clinton’s personal fixer. While no actuary tables quantify the mortality rates amongst Clinton’s close political allies, the Weiners were realistic enough to take out the controversial and extensive insurance policy that fell into the hot little hands of New York Vice.
If you follow politics the way carny, inveterate gamblers fill out the racing forms at a dog track, these October Surprises are the stuff of yore. A part of me that asks just what Joe Namath knew when he guaranteed a Super Bowl victory loves this stuff. It’s just the sort of thing you could add to a Jack Reacher novel to spice up the boring fornication bits.
Then there’s the other pole of my bipolarity. Elections, you see, are meant to serve a vital purpose. In a Democratic Republic we call upon the wisdom of the crowd to select a leadership cadre that will ostensibly move society forward. We get a leadership cadre that trusts one another so little that they store incriminating data on one another under the file name “Insurance Policy.” Otherwise, their retirement plans resemble that of Luca Brasi: they sleep with the fishes.
This reveals the type of government this orc tribe provide to its people: a kakistocracy that veers into antipathocracy.
“Kakistocracy” roughly translates to a government of the harsh or ugly. The people exercising the wisdom of crowds are selecting the worst members of society to be our leaders. It would be an easy and comforting Alt Right meme to just blame the ignorant masses. But it’s not that easy. A lot of people who should know better play the political ponies rather than looking out for the good of society. These are people who knew about Clinton’s repulsive predilections long before the NYPD Porno Busters discovered the “Insurance Policy.”
As the inevitable destination of a kakistocracy, antipathocracy is government by those who secretly hate their constituents. The sort of people who refer to us as a Basket of Deplorables. People who hate more than just the phrase “Everyday American.” And how do we know these people hate us? Look at how they’ve handled this.
A candidate for president is voluntarily associating with the wife of a man who chose to solicit sex from teenaged girls under the screen name Carlos Danger.1 The journalists rush into print with a barrage of stories about how poor Huma Abedin is living a nightmare. Jamie Gorlick worries that the FBI is corrupt and politicized.
How should an intelligent adult feel about Amerikan Society? Anger is a reasonable emotion. Terror isn’t bad either. People this solipsistic could wind up sitting on the nuke button with no mental wiring that connects their actions with the results achieved by those actions. Maybe “horrified fascination” is fitting. We behold a candidate that attracts flies when she speaks in public.
The older I get, the baser my emotions become. It’s gone past fear, anger and disgust. Hatred goes against my ethos and gives them more power and credit than I believe they merit. I settle on pity. Pity with all of the contempt that the emotion implies. What else can you say for a society that voluntarily signs up to be ruled by people like Carlos Danger and “death grandma” Hillary Clinton?
1 — Presumably “Earnest Johnson” had already been snagged.
Elections have twists and turns, but what happened today was not an upset, but a culmination. The Clintons managed to simultaneously engage in blatant corruption and abuse those who worked under them, which produced a slow but steady pressure to hone in on not the details but the big picture.
Over time, a pathology of deception and extensive corruption emerged, which is an insult to any government worker, military member or law enforcement officer who takes the role seriously. It is a slap in the face to any who spend their days disciplining themselves to do things “by the book” or at least the principle of the law.
Our law enforcement agencies warned us of the seriousness of corruption as soon as it became apparent that the Obama regime not only allowed but encouraged gangster-style government under the aegis of Leftist egalitarian intent.
With the FBI effectively re-opening an investigation, it remains possible that Hillary Clinton will continue to skate on loose legal definitions, “I don’t recall,” and other subterfuge. But it will not happen silently, and in the meantime, endless weiner jokes will subsume any gravitas her campaign pretended to have.
The Book of Jude warned us well of the advent of Cuck Christianity. The relevant verses follow below.
16 These people are grumblers and faultfinders; they follow their own evil desires; they boast about themselves and flatter others for their own advantage. 17 But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. 18 They said to you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” 19 These are the people who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.
The 2,000 year old warnings found in Jude’s little-known epistle ring true as Christianity continues to degrade itself from the Passion of Christ to the legalism of the Pharissee. A vote against the will of these Real Christians, is indeed a toll pass via the express lane of AC/DC’s infamous Highway to Hell.
The gist of the conflict is that Christians, who have decided that Donald Trump is so evil and immoral that any vote for him is to approve of and even become complicit in his sin, are questioning not only the character but the salvation of those who support the GOP candidate. This condemnation encompasses even those reluctant and melancholy warriors for conservatism who are voting for him as a strategy to stop the advancement of a leftist political agenda that dominates a corrupt Democratic Party…
Are we really laid over for torture at the hands of Crom’s Devils if we urge our compatriots to vote against the type of people who are frustrated that Hurricane Matthew didn’t clean out more trailer parks to effectively scare the sheep about Global Warming? It depends on which whinging voice of Cuck Christianity is out there a-preachin’ it for Hillary. There are two versions of this sort of Neo-Judaizer Heresy – weak and strong.
The truth is, with headlines about Clinton’s emails, terrorist attacks, the Obama Administration’s advancement of transgenderism in the military, etc. I have been actively reconsidering my opposition to Trump. I’ve done it in conversation with friends, in prayer, and in quiet time dedicated to considering the future. In short, I see the election of Hillary Clinton as the antithesis of all my values and ideas on what fosters sound civil society in this country. Further, she should be in jail.
Once you’ve pretty much decided the opposition candidate is Alicia Capone, you’ve basically laid out your moral duty. You vote for the guy that will chain her up and parade her through Georgetown as part of his inaugural triumph. To weasel out of condign retribution against said career criminal, you’re stuck having to tear down the individual on the other side to a level of base deplorability that requires you to support Attila the Hag. And then get the muck off your hands a wee bit better than poor, old Lady MacBeth ever could.
So we get the predictable riffs about how Trump isn’t ¡PROLIFE! enough to fit in with a Congress that never had the guts to put a single piece of Pro-Life legislation on President Obama’s desk. We’ll elide past the historical illiteracy necessary to plant the axiom that a pride of Conservative Lions exists in today’s GOP. Let’s be sporting and temporarily let our #NeverTrumper claim that Trump could undermine this thin red line of heroes. I issue this intentional walk to get after the nasty beneath the beatific Churchian exterior.
When I see Christians defining deviancy down to justify a political decision, I see a real problem for the church. When I see Christians saying we have license to choose bad men because God chose bad men, I see the sparks of apostasy…The level of fear many of my friends have towards what a Clinton Administration may bring has turned to desperation and desire for a protector….While I concede they may be right, what I see is a level of desperation causing them to place their trust in one strong man instead of God.
The poor dears are just scared and don’t know any better. In the end, the accusation reads that any Christian of holds his nose and votes for Chairman Donald over Dear Leader Hillary has been frightened, unmanned and reduced to a gibbering blob of Glenn Beck worshiping at the foot of Trump Tower rather than the sacred cross. I’m sure the son of Jerry Falwell who recently said pleasant things about Mr. Trump has taken down all the Crucifix art he owns and replaced it with Trump Fuzzy Dice instead. Such ridiculous and small-hearted ecclesiastical nastiness hasn’t been this fashionable since Jimmy Carter won the Iowa Caucus in 1976.
There is also a stronger version of this heresy afoot that fears no killer rabbits. It preaches the fire and brimstone as if Making America Great Again would erect once more The Tower of Babel. If an angel descends and then Reverend Metaxas from Texas bursts into blue, incandescent flame, I will humbly seek forgiveness and admire the wisdom of Ed Rogers.
I wonder if this is the end of the evangelical movement within the Republican Party. Trump’s strength in South Carolina, of all places, is alarming. Many evangelical leaders, who can be so quick to point out the moral failings of others, are strangely silent concerning Trump’s shortcomings. How can they reconcile fidelity to their faith with a vote for Trump? How do they overlook Trump’s personal qualities and behavior? What about the morality of entrusting the presidency to someone with the temperament and questionable judgment we have all witnessed from Trump? I would like some answers. I find it hard to believe evangelicals are supporting Trump because of his policy positions, since he doesn’t have many. They can’t be supporting Trump because of his faith or godliness…
Alas Babylon, Ed Rogers. Alas Babylon. Rather than acting like he has the right to question the faith of churchgoers who vote athwart his divine commandmants thundered down to the mere mortals in the pews, he should ponder another question. How can a church that by all fair-minded and rigorous accounts is having its ass flambéed on any given Sunday like the 2008 Detroit Lions justify questioning the temperament and judgement of its rapidly declining membership. Maybe the people who no longer seek out salvation in the same church as Ed Rogers kinda-sorta have a point.
The starting Center from that Detroit Lions team looked in the mirror and saw reality. “I’ve got to live with this.” He lamented. “I’ve been here eight years. This is on my resume.” If we wake up on November 9 with a 50-49 Hillary victory, this will be true of #BibleThumpForNeverTrump. They will get to live with it as well. They will have elected a POTUS who will empower, hire and enrich a set of functionaries who at least empathize with the sentiment that nothing quite smells of lovin’ like an Evangelical in the oven.
Every single last one of these slimy #NeverTrumpers thinks they can leverage this betrayal to climb out of The Basket of Deplorables that Hillary has assuredly assigned them to and land a fat “loyal opposition” gig at CNN, Fox or K-Street instead. There were people like this all over China and Russia during these countries’ respective Communist Revolutions. They were the ones that got lined up against the wall and shot first.
Even the feckless and maladroit British Army leaders that lost the Thirteen Colonies were smart enough to significantly demote Benedict Arnold after his treason. They could not afford to see this sort of thing rewarded. It’s something for a #NeverTrumper to chew over for a bit if they ever seriously and sincerely reconsider their current trajectory into moral oblivion.
Mr. Robert De Niro, unquestionably a talented actor for anyone who has seen Ronin, has recently made the news for his verbal attacks on Donald J. Trump after a leaked hot microphone tape emerged of the latter making lewd statements which were widely misinterpreted as an endorsement of sexual assault.
However, [[[ De Niro ]]] — please excuse our “non-WASP” echo signal punctuation — was in the news fifteen years ago for his role in an underage prostitution ring:
The case uncovers the brutal methods used to snare young women – some as young as 15 – into a call-girl agency specialising in wealthy, high- profile clients.
…Six people are charged with the running of an international prostitution ring, whose call-girls entertained the actor Robert de Niro, the former tennis player, Wojtek Fibak, two senior (but unnamed) French politicians and several Gulf princes. The agency specialised in tricking, or trapping, star-struck teenage girls into selling their bodies with the promise of careers as models or actresses.
At one point, according to the report of the investigating judge, the agency became a kind of approved dealer in girls, operating with the connivance, if not the blessing, of the French foreign ministry and French secret services. By steering Middle East arms clients towards girls from a known, and closely watched, agency, there was thought to be a reduced risk of blackmail, or the leaking of secret negotiations.
Not only does this involve sexual relations with 15-year-old girls, but it is heavily mired in corruption and whiffs of organized crime. While this has no bearing on whether the criticism of Trump by De Niro is correct, it does add some framing to the seemingly perpetual Leftist tendency to use their own crimes as accusations against others.
