The Post-modern Descent into Insanity and Chaos

The lastest and most dubious technique in the Jacobin book of subversive intrigue is the often effective scam of twisting reality. Now, things that were once indisputable are called into question and the obvious becomes a point for contention and debate. Famously, Orwell gave us the telling dystopian proclamation, “War is Peace, Freedom is slavery, Ignorance is strength” in his novel “1984.” The book was written before the post-modern / neo-Marxist mentality had seeped its toxic word games into the universities and popular culture. Even if one had not yet heard the famous lines, they could be uttered today and have little difficulty rousing nodding heads in agreement with absurdity on a grand scale.

Illegal immigration was defended by no one a mere few years ago and it is still resented by most sane people across the globe. It’s only in the pompous halls of the smug elitists who drive politics and culture that one holds a strait face while proclaiming the need to let anyone intrude upon your culture and diminish the safety and stability of your nations.

So, how did we get from “1+1=2” to, “we really don’t know and can never really know what is true...so do what the hell I tell ya to do...lowly plebeian!”

Radical skepticism and relativism has always existed in some circles at some times. As a philosophical mind-game, it can be pulled off just as effectively as the script to the Wizard of Oz. But real people inhabit a real world. In spite of larger speculations as to just how real our world is, the senses are quite reliable in keeping our lives intact. Even if life were a dream, do you really want to “dream” that your loved ones are being brutally assaulted or your neighborhood has been turned into a middle-eastern terror enclave? I know, most illegally arriving “immigrants” are rocket scientists paying taxes and proclaiming their love for their new home 😉

In the not too distant past, when a person held a view that flew in the face of logic and observable reality, they ended up putting their tail between their legs and quietly walking off the stage, plotting a new way to spin their bizarre twist on things. Now, flying pink elephants are destroying our planet and you’re told that you just don’t know it because you’re a bad person who lacks the deep insight afforded woman’s’ studies majors and post structuralist academics.

In our current political climate, the con-artists of Leftdom will look right into a camera and insist that a mundane phone call by the president (of the type that previous presidents routinely made) was actually a “high crime” and flagrant “abuse of power.”

Climate change bureau-freaks will fly thousands of miles to lavish resorts while telling the little people that they are producing too much CO2. The former president parroted the claim that the sea level is rising dramatically and will flood vast coastal regions....yet now purchases a multi-million dollar home — at sea level.

In the past, when blatant nonsense was uttered, the clown doing so knew they had to fine-tune the script so that it at least sounded plausible but now, no more. You can say anything no matter how divorced from reality, and a sizable percentage of the boot-licking public will nod in agreement. “It’s gotta be true. After all, it was a bonafide late night comedian that told me.”

None of this is an accident or lapse in critical thinking. This clouded perspective that allows anything to be said and anything to be believed, is a deliberate strategy laid out with intellectual cunning by post-structuralists, post-modernists, and other assorted quacks who would tell us “there is no truth, so you better swallow the truth we feed you” - after all, “ignorance is strength.”

I remember the intellectually vapid experience of having to attend classes in my university’s School of Education. There, future lemmings of public “education” were fed a regular diet of mind games disguised as sophisticated “critical thinking.” The most repeated soundbite was that, if teachers failed to promote “revolutionary” change they were, by default, promoting our current corrupt system of capitalism and white Euro-centric oppression. “You only think you’re free.” If one is lost in abstract philosophical speculation, one can of course argue such things but those of us who inhabit reality know in our gut that living in a free United States if preferable to using a food ration card in a “free” Cuba. The issue conjures the old leftist talking point that there are “different kinds of freedom.” If you’re in a cage and get a daily ration you are “free from want.” People actually buy bullshit like this, now more than ever.

In universities that graduate students who can barely write we are led to believe that hatred of success and achievement is a perspective born of deep knowledge.

At the heart of the contemporary disconnect from reality is a blatant disregard for consistency. The same people who justly opposed the apartheid system in South Africa brush off current murders, rapes, and land-theft in that same country. Amazingly, when a current leader notes publicly that mass execution of whites won’t take place “yet” it’s barely acknowledged. In the end, it’s all about power. The left in all its permutations wants power and, because they are by nature weak souls lacking honor and fortitude, the only weapon in their arsenal is guile and deception. In relatively free and established societies their strategy is not so effective. A dedicated authoritarian communist can’t just seize power and expect mass-public approval. In such cases, subversion is the way to go. Slave morality (as Nietzsche labeled it) on steroids can be an effective method to steal the hearts and minds of younger generations. A simple will to power through contrived victimhood can offer a fairly effective foot in the door. After that, a coup can be pulled off with little push-back from a generation that actually thinks the prosperity and freedom around them is an illusion.

Perhaps a descent into destitution and a loss of freedoms so taken for granted will teach future generations that some “illusions” are better than others.

🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄🎄 Merry Christmas!...and a Happy New Year 🎵🎶

(I’ll be away from blogland at least til the middle of January. Immerse yourself in knowledge and beauty).

Face of the American Politburo

Standing up to “The Man”

Standing up to “the man” requires that you know who the man actually is.

An excellent brief documentary that addresses the Brexit/Trump phenomena. Some people just don’t get it. All the more relevant considering the sham “impeachment” that has just taken place. Objective history will laugh and grimace in disgust at the Democomm’s partisan and fraudulent action.

(‘Will have a new essay up in a couple of days before I indulge in holiday frolic).

Nitpicking the Presidency and the Republic into extinction

It would certainly be wrong for the Republicans at some future time to turn the tables on a future Democrat President and insist upon impeaching him or her for concocted and tenuous “crimes.” But, that’s probably what will happen. Of course, future Republican administrations will also be cursed with dishonest and bitter attacks by a mentality that refuses to bow to the decorum of constitutional republican (small “r”) government. It’s now a free-for-all. If you lose an election, just keep pounding away, the voters be damned. Already, more than a few Democrats have fantasized concocted wrong-doing on the part of vice President Pence. Remember, the entire impeachment scheme isn’t only about removing an elected president. It’s just a step in removing a political philosophy from the public arena. Socialism always limits choices, from health care to the types of light bulb one is allowed to use. After a trail of public seizures, the big goal is always eliminating free choice of representation.

As with all politics, the current scam to undo an election has been, and will continue to be, about power. Democrats have successfully created one party cities and states in several locations around the country — California, New York, Baltimore, Detroit, et al. It has always been their goal to achieve the same on a national scale. Critically, one must remember that “power” for them has not been the mere corrupt act of seeking wealth and status. For the left in general, power is about gaining the authority to literally rule over everything. To seize public utilities, the healthcare industry, and ultimately individual households and the thoughts of citizens and their children. To exert and entrench the left’s control always requires punitive action. Already, on issues ranging from climate policy to presidential phone calls, several of the more honest Demo-socialists have demanded legal prosecution — some under their breath implying execution. Carried out to its natural course, we get China, or Cuba, or the former Soviet Union. In the end, every socialist is a communist, which is why they consistently defend and often praise leftist dictators like Chavez and Castro.

The talking heads of left-land would have us believe that their opponents are fascists, but the opposite of communism is not fascism. In spite of how much these ideologies hate each other, they’re competing for the same prize. Statism by any other name is still statism and opposed to it is the rare and laudable institution of free open society and self-government. Free people voluntarily create, buy, and sell things — they create wealth. This is not to say that a coercive state cannot at some point allow a ghost of a market to exist so long as they can effectively hold authority over it, bending capitalism to a hybrid model — socialism light, corporatism, crony capitalism.

A critical threshold has now been passed. Contending views will no longer be reconciled solely at the ballot box. America’s Demo-socialist party demands that, in one way or another, elections that keep them from absolute power must be nullified. This didn’t just happen with the current president. Al Franken lost an election several years ago but, when an election is even remotely close, out come the lawyers, the political operatives, and con-artists to eventually flip authority in their favor. Stacey Abrams lost an election decisively for the governorship of Georgia and still, like Hillary Clinton, appears on cable news rambling that somehow, in her alternate universe, she had actually won. In her case, she had the added benefit of being a black woman and, of course such an individual losing an election can only be due to RACISM! or SEXISM!

In the current impeachment charade, it’s already been stated by several Democrats that, if Trump wins reelection, they can repeat charges of impeachment perpetually, into the far corners of infinity. To set up future attacks on Trump they’re already laying the propaganda groundwork with the ridiculous idea that his winning can only be due to “stealing the election” through some dubious means. No opponent of the left can now be seen as winning elections fairly. It can’t be due to millions of people with conservative or centrist views. No,it’s got to be “Russia” or “bribery” or daring to demand voter ID laws.

Now, a phone call to a foreign leader by president Trump, of the type that has been made thousands of times by past president, comes under the bogus scrutiny of the vultures of political intrigue. Did he use the right words? Did he say the wrong names? Did he cough suspiciously to indicate misdeed and ill-intention? IMPEACH! And put Hillary on her throne so that she can return the operation of state to...the state, and ultimately to a new global order of constrictive undemocratic unelected authoritarian rule — dystopia on an unprecedented scale.

It’s been noted that the life expectancy of a free society doesn’t go far beyond two-hundred years. On that scale, America has survived as a constitutional republic beyond it’s shelf life. America’s founders were truly brilliant in their application of checks, balances, and fined-tuned mechanisms for preserving freedom but, in the end, the encroaching state always finds a way — a death (murder) of a thousand cuts, a few million bureaucrats, ...and a bogus impeachment or two.

Really? You’ve gotta be kidding me!

The latest clown parade in the left’s attempted coup d' 'etat is to now have testimony by partisan donors to the cause of the president’s former election opponent. Talk about “transparency” — transparently stupid.

The “legal scholars” that the Democomms invited to testify were flaming caricatures of smug leftists. More of the same; “Trump should be impeached because”...orange man bad.

My favorite issue of absurdity is when they and other prior leftist witnesses reference “patriotism” and “American ideals.” The left perpetually makes clear their disdain for America, its history, and the constitution that affords a free and open society. The America they love is the one they hope to create when they seize full authority to rule over, punish, and eliminate those who don’t wish to march in their global authoritarian social scheme.

If poetic justice is a real thing, and baring any unforeseen intrigues, Trump will win by a landslide in both the electoral and popular vote and he will share his success with both houses of congress.

Thank god for the stupidity and vengeful arrogance of America’s faux socialist “revolutionaries.”

Happy Group-hugism

Now, why would the good citizens of Hong Kong be wanting to avoid this great standard of political life? The loving fist of the Communist Party of China.

This is the end result of socialism and investing authority in a powerful state — every time.

Call it socialism, communism, fascism, nazism, collectivism, or happy group-hugism. Same as it ever was.

The Dichotomy of Quality vs. the Assault on Human Dignity

The pink plastic electric marching band vs. mahogony bookshelves and latticed windows

The screeching laughter of game show hosts and audiences captivated by glitter vs. a chord of sublimity carried from transcendent voices to gothic stone carvings.

The harsh attack of neon, an assault on human dignity vs. the gentle whisper of an angel at rest.

The ugly cacophony of idle chatter vs. the resignation of silence before an altar.

The pant of machines grinding like teeth on chalkboards vs. an autumn leaf touching the ground to move in random reply to a breeze, leaving trails of memory across damp earth.

The demands of the fervent vs. the solitude and contemplation of introspection.

The folly of the hollow grin before the mysterious portrait of a face that conveys neither sadness nor joy.

The wrong and the right. The good and the bad. The things that you’ve owned and the things you’ve had.

The snipping insults and demands of those fellow players in the 4-D matter world, whose only concern is to compel obedience to their tiny sliver of appraisal vs. the stern but caring voice that echoes through eternity, accepts all, guides but demands nothing but one’s ability to observe.

A wheel of perpetual confusion that occasionally affords a glimpse of heaven... or a residence in hell.

The Bogus Mantle of “Career Public Servant”

In the latest attempt by America’s Democomm/socialist party to remove the elected president, a parade of individuals billed as “witnesses,” were given the national spotlight, though few of them “witnessed” anything. During the attempt to pass off this elite clique' appraisals as a source of wisdom and goodness, an impressive moniker was often used, ... “career public servant.”

While there are bureaucrats and government functionaries that perform their jobs with little controversy or fanfare, it’s become a common defense of government overreach and incompetence to praise “public servants” for the simple act of scoring a well-paying and relatively prestigious job. Thus, a minion in the rusted wheel of government is compared to a fire fighter rushing into a burning building. The ultimate stretch in this absurd misnomer occurs when a politician is referred to as a “public servant.” It’s not as if most of them don’t leave their “service” with a vastly augmented bank account and followup careers as lobbyists or cable news “contributors.” Candidate Joe Biden is regularly praised for his decades of “public service.” What utter BS.

In the impeachment hearings over the past week, partisan media hacks and their brethren continually lauded the noble altruism and goodness of “career public servants” who have scored high-paying and prestigious jobs directing American foreign policy. Of course their job isn’t to direct policy at all but to carry out the wishes of an elected president. I have no doubt that there are many worthy staff members from America’s State Department who perform their responsibilities flawlessly and carry out their responsibilities out of a genuine desire to “do good” but I’m not so certain that monitoring and critiquing the president’s phone calls is in their job description — if they are entrenched partisans from a prior administration even less so.

There are very few people who are purely altruistic in their choice of career goals. Certainly many would like to see “helping people” in their job description but it’s hardly the first choice of how one gains an income. For most of us, adequate income and job conditions are reasonable targets for a satisfactory livelihood. If one can go a step further and add perks and prestige, all the better. But, pretending that one is performing a noble act of kindness by scoring a lucrative position in government is a bit over the top in the government scam-olympics.

At the impeachment “inquiries” one of the so-called witnesses (that the Democrat chairman would allow) was the now famous Alexander Vindman. Almost comically, he arrived in full dress uniform with medals blazing. Obviously military service outranks (no pun intended) a mere academic career as bonafide service but, the implication that his career choice somehow legitimized his worldview is absolute nonsense. The fact that his usual work attire is a conventional suit affords further skepticism to his posturing. His personal view of one phone call between the president and a foreign leader is meaningless in spite of his uniform or willingness to risk his life on a battlefield. The media, of course wasn’t so enamored by the uniforms of Oliver North, General Petraeus, or Michael Flynn. Before Petraeus was found guilty of anything, left wing groups pinned him with the moniker, “General Betray-us.” But, now we have a heroic “public servant” who agrees that “orange man” is “bad.”

The Democrats and establishment media have begun a horrible precedent by pretending it’s legitimate to literally monitor a president’s every conversation and action, insuring it complies with the standards of (unelected) “career public servants.” While clear and obvious crimes have occurred under previous presidents, all presidents at one time or another in the normal conduct of their duties have committed what are technically minor “crimes.” The pervasive go-to argument of “obstruction of justice” is one of those catch-all terms that could be applied to a host of actions carried out by virtually every chief executive. In this president’s case, the charge is made every time he defends himself from unfounded accusations. In the recent Trump / Ukraine example the tenuous claims of wrong-doing are absurd. Nothing he’s been accused of even happened. There was no “pressure,” no hoped-for Ukrainian actions delivered, and no money earmarked to them was withheld in the end. While the entire phone conversation offers some fun exercises for conjecture by legal gymnasts, none of it can stand as worthy of impeaching a president. Add to this the nonsense of Ivy League clowns pulled from the woodwork of government offices and testifying as to how they feel about a guy that most of them hated to begin with and what do you have? Just another group of partisans whining over their disappointment that queen Hillary lost an election.

So why is such honor directed at the pseudo-intellectuals of government agencies? Supposedly they’re smart but, there are a variety of intellectual styles. It could accurately be argued that the witty and successful entrepreneur with a high school education is as smart as the bookish Ivy League intellectual. George Bush was derided by the media and his political opponents as being “incurious” and lacking the scholarly disposition that the left so admires. Yet, he had been a fighter pilot...and, president of the United States — both requiring some intellectual fortitude. Donald Trump is a successful real estate developer and builder, not to mention successful television personality. He defeated several popular establishment political figures and became president of the United States. As president he quickly turned the lackluster American economy into one of unprecedented vitality. Yet, we are supposed to believe that, unlike “career public servants,” he is “stupid” because of botched spelling errors on social media (none of us have done that). No doubt he never memorized the capitols of Sub-Saharan countries or read Canterbury tales. Donald Trump would no doubt fail to establish the level of scholarship that Fiona Hill has been noted for but, conversely, I doubt that she would have the skill or instinctual awareness — intelligence— to successfully run a multi-billion dollar real estate empire...or the office of President of the United States.

This touches on the issue of what Eric Hoffer noted as the perennial dispute between “the [person] of action” vs. “the [person] of ideas.” One could simplify the analysis and simply refer to a conflict between business persons and intellectuals. The business mentality is directed toward practical results. The intellectual and their lightweight spawn in journalism and the arts lives in a world of theory and idealism. Pragmatism seldom causes mass destruction or dystopia. Idealism has left the pages of history soaked in blood and suffering. The world would be a better place if the ideologues of the world stuck to publishing their views in journals and directing their minds to creative pursuits.

In some ways the current divide is one of blue-collar vs. a strain of academic white collar (or maybe turtleneck sweater). I and many people I know who share my worldview coincidently share a blue collar upbringing. The friends I’ve had who hold beliefs more in line with current “progressive” thought have inevitably been from a more refined economic strata and I’d dare say, a more pampered background. Marx referred to the blue collar “working class” types who failed to follow the socialist program as the “Lumpen Proletariat.” Little has changed today, where the same smug arrogance is directed at those who just don’t see the wisdom in their intellectual betters’ plans on how to run the world.

Back to the current newsworthy characters in “public service.” Who are these clowns? People who aced their SATs, shook the right hands at Washington dinner parties, wrote some articles that no one read, and have been on the cutting edge of the plot to impose world government by a social planning elite (them). Bow down lowly peasant before the grandiosity of your betters.

In the end, the current divide in political thought is not one that sides can defend based on their supposed intellectual rigor. I can’t “prove” that I should have a high degree of personal freedom any more than a statist can “prove” that I should obey a powerful government authority. The intellectual credentials of one making such arguments really has little value. A lack of education or literacy in a backwoods countryman hardly nullifies the value of his or her desire to be free.

By definition a “public servant” should Serve the public (duh!). Using their pampered status as a means to assist in the imposition of statist authority over a free people is hardly an act of “service.” We can admire those who have attained status in their careers in government but to call them true servants we should expect them to restrict their actions to service and not merely be parasites with a will to power and a gripe with the current commander and chief.

Options in the Socialist Bureau-state

I believe I’ve linked to the following video once before rather long ago. It’s worthy of repeating. This old Television commercial for Wendy’s hamburgers is still the best depiction of the socialist template and its inability to offer anything beyond drab conformity and ugliness.

High Barr Standards

This talk by the current Attourney General, William Barr, is brilliant on many levels.

The now famous Trump Boomerang effect is about to present its greatest expression of poetic justice upon those who have sought to undo the results of a presidential election.

Two major investigations will soon be concluded looking into the events surrounding deep state attempts to undermine the election of 2016. By now it is clear that the CIA, FBI, and State Department, working, in accordance with the Democratic party, the Obama administration, and establishment media, sought to actively prevent Donald Trump from being elected and afterward sought to lay the groundwork to have him removed from office. These investigations will lay out the legal proof of these conspiracies and likely result in some serious convictions.

Preemptive attempts to tarnish Barr’s image have already been set in motion. To the clapping seals in comedy show audiences, Barr is merely a dupe of Donald Trump’s — imaginary — corruptions. Far from it.

This guy is brilliant. The linked video here shows him to be a knowledgable student of history and constitutional law and a stable, wise, and practical voice of reason. There are several points in the talk that are profoundly insightful.

In our rare times we are blessed with some rare public figures to battle the scheming minions of progressive authoritarianism. Who does their side have?....Adam Schiff — laughable.

Adam Schiff Applies a New Socialist Standard for Justice

Facinating speculations

A Cynic’s View of War

War is bad ...well, yeah. War is up there with racism and slavery as a topic to burnish one’s credentials for being opposed to the bad things that humans are capable of. I’m opposed to plagues and pandemics. Does that make me a good person? Am I on the “right side of history?”

I read somewhere recently that an opinion poll saw Donald Trump as the greatest threat to world peace. I wasn’t very impressed as I have seen similar polls before relating to George Bush and Ronald Reagan. In each instance the contemplative public apparently overlooked people like the Kims of North Korea and several other militant dictatorships scattered around the globe. No, the greatest threat to world peace is always the evil hegemon, primed and ready to open another theme park and fast food chain. America is often chastised for seeking the spread of Starbucks franchises around the world - the imperialism of flavorful coffee in a pleasant atmosphere. The former Soviet Union and it clones sought to spread — and the clones continue to seek the spread of — the miserable dictatorship franchise around the world (minus flavorful coffee and pleasant atmosphere).

Barack Obama actually thought that sneaking pallets of cash to the Mullahs of Iran would reduce the expansion of nuclear weapons in the world (for ten years). When a country publicly proclaims its desire to initiate a first strike and “wipe [another nation] off the map” I tend to view them as a great “obstacle to world peace.” It’s probably also reasonable to see anyone who bows to their behavior as an obstacle to world peace as well.

It shouldn’t be a surprise that, more often than not, the very policies that promote a strong military in a free society seem to be rather effective in reining in more bellicose countries. There are also more than a few examples of excessive idealism offering the green light to the real war-mongers of the world.

War and peace are an inseparable dynamic. There is nothing in the universe that does not interact with levels of harmony and dissonance. A hurricane is a war between hot and cold air. The more refined social templates that humans possess are still bound by degrees of harmony and discord in their interactions with others. It’s certainly practical to avoid the conflict that leads to mass-destruction, wanton violence, and grotesque physical harm but peace at all cost is often a very high cost and doesn’t necessarily guarantee peace in the end anyway.

Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters sings in his lyrics about how the British government “took my daddy from me” overlooking the fact that Adolf Hitler was a key player in taking his daddy from him. Even when you’re on defense you are still at war and only the most weak-minded of idealists will argue the virtues of not defending one’s self, one’s family, and one’s society from external violence. Throwing flowers at the enemy loses its effectiveness...immediately. Another singer lost in the clouds, Sting, once sang that “The Russians love their children too.” Many people no doubt thought this was a profound testament to the virtues of not recognizing formidable threats (“Hey! They’re just like us!”). No doubt the Russians in the former Soviet Union did indeed love their children but their government was an unelected totalitarian monster that abused it’s own citizens as well as sought to spread it’s coercive authority across the globe. It put up a good fight against Nazi Germany but it’s often forgotten that initially it was allied with Nazi Germany to plunder the innocent citizens of Poland.

I’m always struck by the images one sees in nature specials where a Gazelle tries to outrun a lion but ends up in its teeth. I wish the Gazelle had a gun. Not because I want to see war between lions and gazelles but I think Gazelles should be better prepared to defend themselves from the inevitable actions of predators.

War is stupid, wasteful, unproductive, and horrible. Humans are gifted with the capacity to contemplate their circumstance and on some occasions even act with the refined sense to resist the negative attributes of a biological inheritance.

War is bad...but, keep your military on alert, just in case.

The name of the deep state establishment Democrat leftist operative pretending to be a "whistleblower" is "ERIC CIARAMELLA"

Trump in Context

A very insightful — the best I’ve seen — talk by Victor Davis Hanson regarding Donald Trump as a unique and positive phenomena. (The actual talk begins at the 6:50 point in the video).

Thermidorian Reaction

I’m going to go out on a limb and make a prediction. Up until recently I thought the left had this chapter of history in the bag. They’ve certainly conned a generation or two into thinking that America is the worst thing going and that redemption can only occur when the bureau class is given their rightful place on the throne of governance. Recently I’ve had to consider another possible outcome on the turbulence of our times. Of course any prediction by anyone is subject to the laws of a final established reality (meaning, I could be wrong).

My usual concern is with just how effective the Jacobin rabble could become in imposing their dystopian nightmare upon us. The Democrat platforms are all variations on how they will curtail liberty and establish a powerful Washington command post to compel citizens to obedience. Of course this is transparently disguised as, “we will give you...”

Amazingly, with virtually nothing honest or accurate to go on, America’s Democomm party has been successful in furthering their attempted coup d' ètat while sane voices do little beyond stating their complaints on cable television.

Conservatives have been remarkably passive in accepting a perpetual onslaught of vicious attack. Conservative speech is stifled on college campuses and in social media. Wearing a hat with a benign slogan — Make America Great Again— can expose one to derision or even serious injury. Daily, values in support of limited constitutional government and traditional cultural values are spun by propaganda venues everywhere as attributes of “racism,” “white supremacy,” and other absurd monikers completely divorced from reality.

To be sure, conservatives (and libertarians) do not like the current political course of events but what I think could ultimately tip the scales in the other direction is a justified reaction to the extreme assault on traditional culture.

What had been a reasonable defense for alternate lifestyles has morphed into bizarre support for literally imposing niche agendas on the public. One must not only be “tolerant” (a sane, reasonable, and just position) but one must embrace every stupid excess of contemporary hedonism and “lifestyle choice.” Of course the same honors are not bestowed upon traditional family life or religious belief.

Where a clear line has been breeched is the increasing attempts to impose transgender “issues” on children in public schools. While supporting tolerance, it may be valid to note that we are talking about a tiny niche of society — less than 1% of the population. To perceive our environment as Hollywood and academia would have it, you’d think that a huge percent of our population embraces novel variations from what has been the norm in most societies for Millenia.

To debate issues regarding the role of the state in economics is, in spite of the passions aroused, largely an intellectual exercise. Forcing people to use special pronouns for an aggrieved victim du jour under threat of fine or jail strikes at a more visceral debate. Likewise for forcing kids to hide their personal religious values while simultaneously forcing them to recite passages from a politically correct favored religion.

While they may be aberrations sprung from the empty heads of some coastal partisans, crazy ideas like “drag queen story hour” for kindergarten-age children will certainly give a respectable parent reason to want the breaks put on “the revolution.” Likewise, telling kids that they might be the opposite gender and should consider changing their status may seem “inclusive” for the sliver of our population that ennobles such things, but most parents are not likely to favor having such nonsense forced upon their families.

By the end of Obama’s presidency, many people had had enough of the progressive march into cultural Marxism. Donald Trump was elected because the heartland is not “progressive” — they’re sane. They simply want to be successful, potentially prosperous, and happy. The voters’ attempts to apply the breaks to the Democrat’s faux revolution (power grab) was a reasonable reaction to too much history happening too fast. While tax policy can get some people riled up, the progressive agenda is ultimately about remaking society and making their agendas mandatory under threat of penalty. That’s not just an issue to debate. It’s cause for real — kinetic — resistance.

Millions of voters in the last presidential election sought a reasonable roll-back of the punitive and power-grabbing template of the left. Now, the one chance to salvage their civilization as they knew it is being undermined and attacked through flagrant dishonest banana republic tactics.

What’s a decent person to do?....guess.

We’re on an edge. Anything could happen but there’s a good chance that a reaction, driven by the instinctual response to assaults on stable traditional society, will come with suddenness and intensity.

Trump and his conservative base has had the back of law enforcement and the military. We know who they are likely to side with. Add to that the motorcycle gangs, veterans, farmers, and factory workers vs. the latte-sipping suppies (socialist yuppies) who have sought to rule society.

As one who favors open society, I wouldn’t be happy with the outcome of a “right wing” reaction. First of all, in this sense “right wing” could possibly lead to a strain of collectivist nationalism — national socialism. Stalin and Hitler just represented different strains of the authoritarian collectivist mission and neither style of governance would be a preferable option. A right wing reaction would, in all likelihood, not be “classical liberalism” (the more accurate expression of “right wing”). “For every action, an equal and opposite reaction.” As I’ve noted many times before, the laws of physics can tell us much as to how social events unfold. When the relatively passive right finally responds to the nonsense they’ve been subjected to over the last several years, they will likely do so with speed and intensity.

I’ve often expressed my concern that the progressive mission would be successful. That we would lose our constitutional republic for a politically correct rein of terror.

As the left continues its assault on decency with the unfair subversive advantage of support from media, education, and entertainment, there is a very real chance that it will all blow back in their faces.

I have to admit, in a brief period of turbulent transition, I’d no doubt enjoy seeing people like Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, John Brennen, and Hillary Clinton et al receive just instruction for their arrogance.

There have certainly been just causes to be addressed in the American system and any society can use some perpetual repair but, one of the most cogent statements in support of conservatism is, “if it’s not broken, don’t ‘fix’ it.” — definitely don’t seek to destroy it. No matter who comes out on top in the end, it is ultimately the left that has initiated the momentum toward chaos and the destruction of our constitutional republic as we’ve known it. And for that, they will likely pay a high price in the end.

Constitutional Procedure in the Age of Leftist Power Grabs

An attempted impeachment of an American president is currently being established by; one radical group within one political party within one house of one branch of government — in secret.

And there are actually people who will look you strait in the eye and tell you this is a legitimate process.

The Astrology of Donald Trump

I’ve occasionally noted before my interest in astrology. I realize that many roll their eyes up at such things. My intention here isn’t to sway the skeptical into my thinking on the subject of astrology. I have a relatively dormant blog that addresses issues regarding the subject.

Among the many accusations directed at the current president by his opponents is that he is, in one way or another, “authoritarian.” I find this absurd in view of his actual policy positions and actions. Enforcing a nation’s immigration laws is not an authoritarian action. Likewise for deregulation and lowering taxes. Calling the establishment press, “enemies of the people” may anger a few elites but it doesn’t come close the the actual actions taken against media figures by the Obama administration. Responding to attacks with comical monikers (e.g. “crooked Hillary”) is hardly the strategy of a despot. More often than not, the people calling Trump “authoritarian” appear to have the very traits they accuse the president of having. Antifa proclaiming Trump to be a “fascist” is beyond the textbook descriptions of psychological projection.

No doubt, Trump often exhibits a swagger and tough guy scowl that the less perceptive would immediately write off as authoritarian, but trying to look tough doesn’t make one authoritarian any more than Stalin looking like a gentle grandfather made him nonauthoritarian.

This is not going to be an exhaustive detailed appraisal of Donald Trump’s astrology chart. Just some basics. Likewise, I’m not going to list the many examples of groundless claims levied at him. I’ve already covered such things many times in other posts (my favorite exercise in wanton hyperbole is, “...ripping children from their mothers’ arms and putting them in cages,” which could more accurately be described as “temporarily removing them from the proximity of possible sex traffickers and providing for them in large areas with chain link partitions so they’re not commingling with adults and teenagers”).

Donald Trump is a “Gemini” (like only two other past presidents; Kennedy and the elder Bush). The “Sun in Gemini,” by itself, could be “authoritarian”...but would be very unlikely to be. The sign Gemini adds an element of mental dexterity and often a childlike playfulness to a personality. It’s a game player, impish and often funny — the “trickster” archetype. In astrology, Gemini is said to be a “mutable air” sign, meaning it possesses the trait of adaptable thought. Mutability by its very nature is adaptable, changeable, and flexible. It is decidedly not rigid. Such a person will often take a strong stand only to change it the next day. One can accuse such a person of being unreliable, unpredictable, and irresponsible — but quite the opposite of authoritarian.

In Trump’s case, the mutability aspect of his personality is augmented further by the moon being in the sign Sagittarius at his birth. Sagittarius is said to represent “mutable fire” which could be defined as adaptable enthusiasm - - a spirited and optimistic sense of adventure. This spirited and independent optimism is often prone to exaggeration and boasting excess but can be inspiring as well. This astrological trait is philosophical. Not the polished or sophisticated philosophy of the academy, but one more akin to cowboys around a campfire. An individual could have this placement (Moon in Sagittarius) and be “authoritarian” but again, not likely. Taken along with the “Sun in Gemini” and some other factors I’ll soon mention, this is not an authoritarian personality.

The term “authoritarian personality” was first coined by the Marxist psychologist Theodor Adorno. Adorno had developed a bogus scale that appeared scientific but was no more than a depiction of anyone holding conservative views as “authoritarian” (I guess he overlooked the rich history of authoritarianism on the left that still plagues us today).

In Donald Trump’s horoscope, the planet Neptune is at a ninety degree angle to Mercury. This can represent thought processes that are escapist or transcendent. They can appear muddled and confused and lack clarity and precision. Because their method of appraisal is not based on logic, such a person may appear confused and scatterbrained but, quite the contrary, they can have remarkable intuitive insight. This style of thinking is often written off as “stupid” by people with far less intellect but a more analytical approach to thought. The “Neptunian’s” speech often involves paradox, symbolism, and playful witticisms. If one is impressed with the academic elite that rules the federal bureaucracy, they aren’t going to like a character who thinks and speaks in the realm of spontaneous dream symbolism....(they probably won’t like being called “Pocahontas” either). His convoluted speech can be hilarious at times. I remember him once saying, “ there’s a cloud over my head that isn’t there.” ...a walking Buddhist Koan. Those of us who appreciate his style “know what he means.” To the many who hate him, he’s merely “stupid” or worse still, “lying.” Those who criticize Trump for being unpredictable, confused, irresponsible, or childish are probably right to a degree but are apparently unaware of a simpler and more accurate description as someone who “thinks outside of the box.”

I’ve concluded that a lot of Trump’s effectiveness comes from what I see as “school yard politics.” Most people’s desire to “think like an adult” removes them from some very effective strategies for dealing with others. Instinctual behavior is often far more effective than the contrived etiquette we are told to adopt as we become older.

The icing on Donald Trump’s unpredictable and erratic manner is a very prominent position of the planet Uranus. The planet Uranus is said to be “conjunct the Sun” in his chart. It is also “parallel” the Sun — an eclipse between the Sun and Uranus. All this jargon simply means is that the symbolism of the planet figures strongly in the overall motivations and character of the individual in question.

Uranus is the planet of revolution. It is “electric,” “shocking,” disruptive and independent to a fault. There is certainly disagreement among those who analyze astrology charts as to the benefits or pitfalls of a given configuration. I personally like Uranus. To more conventional types, a personality dominated by this planet is seen as “weird,” “crazy,” and disruptive. ‘Definitely “anti-establishment.” These very traits inevitably put one in the spotlight to some degree. Such a person can be a “loose canon” but also an innovator and someone who follows their own drummer. It’s likely that they will have considerable charisma but can also be a lightening rod to conflict. The forces of stasis and establishment values will feel very threatened by such an individual (picture the scowling former CIA director — and former communist — John Brennen to see a caricature of the establishment).

A kind of cool detachment often accompanies the “Uranian” personality. Their openness to the new, different, and unusual often means they are notably unprejudiced in their relations. While most of us constrain our personal encounters to those of predictable similarity, a Uranian type doesn’t care about such guidelines. They can mingle with anyone of varying races, ages, or lifestyles. Trumps detractors would of course deny this because the narrative is that he’s “racist” and “homophobic” etc. In fact, honest appraisal realizes that these accusations are completely groundless. Trump was always more comfortable around construction workers than the elite snobs of his economic class. He’s always been very tolerant of gays and had made a point of elevating woman to high positions in his companies as well as guiding his own daughter to a position of success and power.

While Donald Trump’s chart contains many factors that are decidedly not authoritarian, there are factors one may find in other ndividuals’ horoscopes that are notably authoritarian. As an prime example, “progressive” partisan (communist) Michael Moore is a Taurus with a highly pronounced Saturn. The very opposite of Trump’s chart in many ways, Moore’s horoscope exhibits all the attributes of someone who is extremely inflexible and resistant to adaptability and compromise. On the whole, his chart is that of a dogmatic control freak. Ironically, it is Michael Moore’s chart that bears considerable similarity to Adolph Hitler’s in spite of his finding “Hitler” out there, beyond his own psyche. It should be noted that some of the factors I’ve described can be positive. If one needs qualities of persistence, determination, and conviction, a Taurus / Saturn combination can be a positive thing. (I think it’s clear that Michael Moore does not exhibit the best traits of these astrological markers).

Of course, most people are likely to have a variety of factors governing their personality, some more dominant than others. Some people’s domineering rulership over a people doesn’t extend far beyond a family or office. Others will project their more negative traits and find “fascism” all around them. I’m quite confident that, if one were to study the astrology of Antifa, one would find a lot of astrological factors that indicate authoritarian attributes combined with an enhanced tendency to project those attributes.

Even if one does not have a birthday (specific astrological chart) available, the astrological system affords an interesting template to view behavior. There are nation-states and groups that exhibit attributes of inflexibility, domination, and control (we call them dictatorships) and there are nations that our highly flexible, changeable, and open-ended in relation to their citizens (which we can accurately describe as “free” to some degree).

As noted at the beginning of this analysis, this is not meant to be an exhaustive appraisal of Donald Trump’s astrology chart. While every astrologer interprets a chart with some degree of personal bias, basic themes are fairly consistent. One can look up the aspects noted (for example, “Uranus conjunct the Sun”) and find descriptions in line with what I’ve written here.

I’m not going to make any specific predictions but will note the very significant “transit” occurring to the President’s chart at this time. In the sky now, the planets Saturn and Pluto are at a discordant angle to the position of the Sun in Donald Trump’s chart. There is considerable culmination to this by January of 2020 and continues on well into 2020 to some degree. This would indicate what is obvious; frustration and confrontation with powerful forces that literally seek to “destroy” — a power struggle. Of course, this has been going on for some time but, as noted, a climax of some kind is likely by January. It’s not particularly impressive to “predict” such things as they are playing out currently but, one could have noted the astrological predictive factors occurring now at any time in Trump’s past. To lessor people, such a transit could parallel a period of utter defeat, and indeed, that may be the case here but...

When all factors are taken into account, the astrological chart of the president is a powerful chart. When compared to the minions who have sought to depose him, there is no comparison. The struggle is that of a titan dealing with mere mortals. Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, Nancy Pelosi...pleeeease. ‘Clearly sub mortals. It’s important to note, in spite of many flaws exhibited and magnified, Trump is sincerely fighting off a very powerful clique of entrenched elites — they are “Saturn/Pluto.” Their goals are dubious and, in the end, ironically authoritarian. Considering Trump’s astrology chart, those of ill will toward him may find themselves confronting some well-deserved poetic justice.Unfortunately, it is their corruption and unwillingness to accept the outcome of an election that will result in considerable disruption to the nation as a whole.

An authoritarian doesn’t conjure witty monikers for those who unjustly attack. An authoritarian willfully invests power in the state and seeks to enhance punitive powers to eliminate opposition and control a citizenry. Those who now fit that description are obvious...and they aren’t Donald Trump.

The Times They Are [Not] a-Changin

Note the psychological processes and chain of events that occurred in the French “revolution” (coup d' état) and every other leftist power grab in history and you’ll understand our times and the operations of the Democrat party in America today.

The Joke’s on Us

This is not meant to be a substantive movie “review.” I like movies, both light entertainment and quality “film.” I “get” Kubrick and even David Lynch (in small doses).

Over the last several weeks I’ve seen several reviews addressing the movie “Joker.” Some very positive and some very negative. Many alluding to political issues from either side of the spectrum.

After hearing one particularly good review by an intelligent reviewer who addressed the fine art aspects of the film, I decided to see it in spite of some of the negative things I had read about the film.

I can’t take a strong stand on things like this because I totally leave open the possibility that I’m missing something. I could totally be wrong but,...I think it absolutely sucked. Not only was the plot relatively meaningless and the context a bizarre negative caricature of the world we live in, I just didn’t see the great art in it that so many others saw.

I’m no fan of gratuitous violence. In that regard, my response was similar to that of “Reservoir Dogs” when several people told me how great that film was. Watching a bound person having their ear cut off and being doused in gasoline is not my idea of “art.” “Hannibal” was another classic example of Hollywood garbage. Violence can sometimes have merit in a film (e.g. “Saving Private Ryan”) but the kind of imagery depicted in Joker and films like it is beyond gratuitous. I’ve certainly seen worse and it would be misleading to imply that the movie does not have more than some isolated scenes of violence.

Again....who am I to say. I could totally be wrong, but film is an art form. I believe art should leave one with a richer understanding of life or spark one’s imagination. Sometimes philosophical insight requires dabbling in the darker aspects of life and there are some very good films which do this, sometimes including violence “to make their point.”

People have different tastes and my views are not the final word on what makes a good movie but...

Our current age is clogged with a decline in creative quality. Between cars flipping over and exploding (Joker has that too, of course), there’s not a lot offered that elevates the human condition.

No doubt “Joker” offers something for someone.

You know that feeling when you’ve stuffed yourself with cookies and cake and the next day all you can think of is a fresh salad and a fruit dish? That’s kind of how I felt after this “film.” I think I’ll rent “The Sound of Music” to cleanse my pallet of this garbage.

The China Problem

It’s a pity that concocted scandals have recently overridden items of genuine importance in the news cycle. Hong Kong is still teetering on the edge of a commie bloodbath.

We can hope that sober minds prevail but the “party” that brought us the Tiananmen purge is still as ruthless, cruel, and totalitarian as it was from the days of its inception. This is a country that literally censors a cartoon character (Winnie the Pooh) because some citizens were saying he looked like their “leader for life.” What utter fools.

The issues of our time that annoy me most — like the current fabrications against the American president — are the one’s that defy the most basic attributes of common sense. Citizens of Hong Kong — a free and prosperous region under China’s...thumb — wish to remain free. This should hardly be an issue for debate. The Communist Party of China (like most communist institutions) has never been about debate anyway, and certainly not about the freedom to do so. Collectivism is always about power. In practice its brutality drawfs the accusations directed at capitalism. At a communist “revolution’s” start, they may throw in a few ineffective welfare programs to get the ball rolling but, in the end, socialism’s only goal is to establish total rule by “philosopher kings” — people who think they should control your life (and, think they are philosophers).

The Chinese Communist Party’s circumstance this time around is very problematical for them. They don’t really care if they are seen by the world as cruel or evil so a Tiananmen-style crackdown wouldn’t be beyond their options. Their concern now is that a major cash cow and conduit to world finance isn’t cooperating with the latest attempted power grab.

The protesters — common citizens — who are now defying these ruthless and dishonest tyrants are the true heroes of our time. They wish to be free...and China doesn’t want them to be — it is that simple (!)

I don’t think anyone is in a position to guess how this will play out in the end. The authoritarian government in Beijing is waaaay overextended in energy, money, and resources. The mass-surveillance state is expensive and, with Obama and other globalist hacks no longer occupying the White House, the gravy train isn’t as reliable as it once was (Obama certainly could not have been accused of following a policy of “America First”). A massive system of domestic spies, “reeducation” camps, and propaganda crusades are costly, particularly in view of the fact that they are spread out across western China and Tibet as well as ....everywhere else in China.

I went to China a distant seventeen years ago. I keep a blog account up describing my experience there, even though it was so long ago. Most of what I had written is still quite valid today. Under Xi Jinping, a massive campaign to reinvigor the party’s grip on society has no doubt made things as bad or worse for those who wish to live freely. Add to that the technological edge the surveillance police state now holds over everyone.

Unfortunately, as in every country, there are fools who are more than happy to kiss the ass of tyrants — the result of being too stupid to question one’s circumstance or lacking the will to challenge injustice. A more reasonable cause for concern is fear. The party can hurt you, as they usually do to anyone who disagrees with their self-deification. I still find it rather amazing that more citizens of China can’t effectively discern the difference between China and the communist party. It’s understandable that one would have feelings of patriotism for one’s country and culture. It’s ridiculous that a sane person would have feelings of fondness and loyalty for a 19th century German ideology (Hegel and Marx) that was imposed on them and, in practice, can do little more than enslave, coerce, and murder on a mass scale. The fact remains, “China” and “The Communist Party” are not the same thing. China is a great culture with a remarkable history that contains unlimited potential for good in the world and its future. The Communist Party is a cruel authoritarian/totalitarian enterprise born of foreign philosophies that seek to subdue the human spirit for the benefit of a small clique of elitist social planners.

Does anyone truly believe that Tibet, Taiwan, and Hong Kong would not actively seek affiliation with China if it were a free and open society?

Excuses excuses... the Communist party often tries to justify its oppressive and violent hand as the necessary means of keeping order. In their fanciful view of life, without them in charge, all manner of chaos would break loose. Thus we again see the pendulum-paradox of radical politics. Forces of chaos seek to destroy traditional stable society, and once in power, seek to maintain their grip with rigid inflexibility. Hannah Arendt said it best, writing something to the effect that “It is widely known that the most radical revolutionary becomes a conservative the day after the revolution.” Of course, by “conservative” she didn’t mean a 19th century free market believer in natural rights but, the more generic definition as one opposed to change.

Everywhere communism has been imposed, people have lived in bondage under threat of imprisonment, torture, starvation, or execution. The “justice and equality” promised is nonexistent and the collective journey to hell is codified and enforced. Communism has always been a disease that spreads. If China is permitted to continue its influence and domination, it will eventually be at our door step — no matter where you live. Does any sane person really want to live in a society where all hope, progress, and happiness is constrained by a small group of cruel overlords?

There truly is an evil empire in our midst. Stand with a future where the pursuit of happiness is not a crime. Stand with the heroic citizens of Hong Kong!

Government is Evil

They won’t come right out and say it but, ultimately, the left and any lover of the state wants more of this.

Well...This link worked for awhile. Now, it just goes to a random YouTube page. Whether it’s a massive multi-billion dollar tech firm or a spoiled coffee shop poet, the left just does not want people to have access to different viewpoints.

Please check out the YouTube channel for the “Institute for Justice.” There are several videos that will inferiate fair-minded people. It shouldn’t surprise anyone when a monolithic government bureaucracy begins to destroy people’s lives and harass decent citizens.

As we know, in the case of socialism, give them enough power and their harassment will lead to destitution and eventually...death.

The Deep Reasoning of the Anti-Trump Deranged:

“Orange man bad!”

For example?...”he just is.”

For example?...”There are so many reasons. I just can’t name one right now.”

For example?...”He’s a racist!”

For example?...”He”s a Nazi!”

For example?...”He goes to Central America and rips babies from their mother’s arms and puts them in cages...and then eats them.”

For example?...”He’s orange!...and socialists only like red.”

For example?...”Shut up or I’ll burn your hat, spit in your face, set fire to a local shop, and hit you...you...you...fascist!”

The ”Divisive" Aggressor and the Noble Pristine Angels of State Coercion

Part of the recurring litany of attacks on the current president is the oft repeated statement that he is “divisive,” That he is “tearing the country apart.” Given Trumps brusque and sarcastic manner, many could be easily swayed to think this is so but...

The left — and Democrats specifically — regularly says things like, “get in their face,” “If they bring a knife to a fight, we bring a gun,” or Maxine Water’s famous command that anyone merely in The White House staff should be made unwelcome anywhere. We see mock severed heads and assassinations of the president. We are told regularly by media talking heads that he should be imprisoned, that his family members should be imprisoned, and the pervasive and groundless accusation is made daily that he’s a “racist” (of course, anyone who disagrees with a Democrat is a “racist”).

We should all be used to the concept now that when someone makes a critical comment about Trump, that very person is more than likely guilty of that very claim.

Back in the real world, if one listens to Trump’s controversial statements they are almost always a response to some rabid attack upon him. Yet, the media spin is that he has attacked some innocent angel from Leftdom. He calls the brutal gang MS-13 “animals” and the next day, the lockstep drones of leftist establishment media report that he “called immigrants animals.” He proclaims himself a “nationalist” elaborating that he loves his country and views his role as defending its interests first and foremost. The next day the thugs of state media proclaim that Donald Trump admited he was a white nationalist.

As it turns out, Trump is not “tearing our country apart.” He simply wants to serve in his capacity as commander in chief and do so in the interests of his country and its citizens. There is a notable a contrast between Trump’s valid responses to unjust attack and the pathetic responses of so many in his party. The Mitt Romneys of the Republican party are ever ready to bow their heads and apologize to placate the rabid wolves of the leftist industrial complex. What they call divisiveness is the rare and appropriate response of a conservative finally standing up to the daily bullshit of leftwing demagogues.

The polarization in America today is the result of the lefts’s inability to acknowledge or accept the fact that there are other contending philosophies in our system and when they win elections...They Won! The Jacobin horde was all ready to carry their flag of statism across the finish line. They had inculcated generations with their knee-jerk neo-Marxist dogma. The universities, public schools, Hollywood, musicians, and Silicon Valley have all rallied around the same stale crusade to supplant the free will of citizens with a powerful oppressive apparatus of state. If the president — or any citizen for that matter — questions the suicidal march into tyranny, they are labeled divisive. Didn’t they get the memo? The left says “forfeit you freedoms” and we’re supposed to say..."OK.” If someone holds a weapon to you and issues a command, are you “divisive” for taking defensive action? Conservatives can’t speak on college campuses? Why not? The Democrat’s Antifa shock troops will bash your head in for wearing a hat that expresses the desire to make your country “great again,” and one is divisive for wondering why all standards of decency no longer apply...when they don’t like your hat(!)?

Examples of the absurdity in all of this occurs now as a Democrat operative from deep state intelligence sought to paint themselves as a “whistleblower” monitor of presidential phone calls. Everyone on the Democrat side of the con has lied, colluded with the partisan so-called “whistleblower,” and breeched the rules and decorum of congressional protocol. After years of nonstop attack, harassment, and injustice, Trump is finally responding with an emphatic “fuck you!” (Not his word but no doubt, his thoughts). Which the Democrats label “obstruction.” It’s as if someone were falsely accusing you of a crime, presenting false evidence, and won’t allow your witnesses to testify, while they ramble incoherently that you’re “obstructing justice” because you’ve hired a lawyer.

The concocted accusation of wrongdoing regarding Trump’s statements to foreign leaders is laughable. To think there are Democrat partisans with the nerve to act as is they’ve never sought foreign cooperation in getting dirt on an opponenet. Ted Kennedy openly communicated with the leadership of the former Soviet union to assist in keeping Reagan from being elected.

No doubt some boot-licking statists will cheer when “whistle-blowers” working for America’s intelligence community perpetually monitor future presidents. Obviously they’ll let Democrat indiscretions slide since they are the party of the state but, either way, this is no way to run a republic.

In tandem with an overused victim-strategy, American Democrats have found it useful to paint America’s traditional party (little has changed in Republican policy positions over decades) as a sort of aggressor. With the guiding fist of establishment media, entertainment, education, and government bureaucracy, we’re supposed to actually view the party of low taxes, deregulation, and constitutional originalism as somehow an active agent of aggressive action toward the docile innocence of America’s new socialist party (previously known as “Democrats”). In the left’s eyes, conservatives are divisive for not obeying the commands of their ”liberal” ruling class.

Conservatives, unlike leftists, don’t believe that half the political spectrum is invalid. We don’t need to shut down free speech or demand that all sources of information only spout a one-party line. We also don’t need to deny the resuts of an election and try to stage a coup before an election winner even takes his or her oath of office.

After decades of “progressive” subversion into American culture, the U.S. has been on the verge of being taken over by a clique of authoritarian intellectual bureau-thugs. Trump appears to be the only American political leader to have the energy, determination, and raw will to challenge these corrupt institutions. He is NOT one of THEM.

It’s now clear who the media, “entertainment,” and “education” side with...and, it isn’t the common citizens of our country. Yet, some citizens are stupid enough to side with them, their future masters who will tell them what or if they can drive, what they can eat, and what portion of their wealth they’ll be allowed to keep.

Trump is a one-man contemporary Boston Tea Party and that’s something leftist fools and control freaks fear...and all decent citizens can appreciate. If that’s “divisive,” carry on.

Quid Pro Quo

This is information that is readily available from multiple sources and not all partisan, yet...

You won’t be seeing it mentioned on the likes of CNN or the Washington Post.

It should be noted at the time that the Soviet Union was a communist dictatorship and America’s greatest enemy. Kennedy wanted to help them defeat Ronald Reagan in return for ...defeating Ronald Reagan.

This is one — very significant — example of Democrats conspiring with foreign leaders to “get dirt on” their opponents and to sell the country’s security to do so.

Democrats. Move along, nothing to see here.

Candice Owen...Not taking Any of their Shit

This is another one of those YouTube clips that Google-owned Blogger doesn’t seem to want me to post a link to. Soooo, do a search on Youtube for “Candice Owens EXPLODES on white liberal professor.” Go to the two minute-twenty second point to see some really good fiery polemic. The video begins with classic whiney smug suburban milquetoast leftism.

The Cabal and it’s Facilitators

Maybe this isn’t a big issue but, I did a search on YouTube for (Ex-CIA director) John Brennen. I tried different wording such as “recent interview” and “September 2019” etc. No matter what I did, the results only came back for videos from many months and years ago. I had previously seen recent interviews with him on state media (CNN, MSNBC, etc.).

What’s up with that?

This is not the same case for Rudolph Guiliani, where several recent interviews are shown from various media outlets. So why the odd omission of Brennen’s many recent rants? I could be wrong, but I think most people know that current investigations into the deep state coup attempt are likely to reveal some troubling news to the anti-Trump forces. People who have been following this nonsense highly suspect that Brennen is one of the ring leaders in all of it. At this point it may be somewhat embarrassing to the networks that regularly let these deep state demagogues spout their attacks on the president.

John Brennen, former communist turned Muslim and head of the CIA under Obama (!) — go figure.

The Irony of the Space Schiff

I don’t think it’s a whistle the “whistleblower” was blowing.

“Impeachable Offenses”...Pulled from the Ass of NeoComms

In any other time or place, a country’s population would be rolling their eyes up over the blatant absurdity of what the current president is being put through.

There are certainly more than a few observers’ clarifying arguments in defense of the president. The best, in my mind, being Tucker Carlson and Mark Levin. God help the clueless Democrats who one day have to attend a confirmation hearing for Mark Levin as a Supreme Court Justice.

I’m not going to repeat the many absurdities of the Democrats’ position in this latest attempt to ...”orange man bad.” What I am going to do is note the most significant thing in all of this. It should concern everyone that the most bizarre and meaningless accusations are now looked at as if they are serious points for debate.

A president holds different views regarding policy, and won an election expressing those views. None of the views are extreme or particularly unusual: He sees his own country’s citizen’s interests as his first priority. He believes in actively pursuing economic and trade policies that will result in the most positive good to his fellow citizens. He wishes to enforce his country’s laws regarding immigration and border security, he feels that America’s Bill of Rights must be adhered to and that citizens’s voices and beliefs should not be censored or infringed upon. There are, of course, numerous specifics that are reasonable points of contention but such partisan disagreement has always been the case in past administrations. Again, we’re not talking about an attempt to “fundamentally transform” the country, which was the stated goal of the last president.

So, again, what is so special about now that the most mundane roles of a president are labeled authoritarian, fascistic, Nazi, and...”orange?”

One significant catalyst in all of this is a news media that is compliant in the wishes of the entrenched Bureau-state. The establishment media is for all intents and purposes, state media. Remember, no matter who you vote for, the government always gets in.

Even the issue of media collusion in the coup that has been taking place is just an example of a larger issue.

The leftist industrial complex is not trying to stop Trump from doing something. They’re freaking out because Trump is successfully stopping them from doing what they have directed their efforts toward for decades. Aggrandizement of power by the state seems to follow some basic principles, whatever statist minions may individually seek. The centripetal momentum is beyond the parts which seek to direct it. (Anthropomorphizing) Government “wants” to grow and consolidate power. There are individuals who think they are behind the wheel, but they’re not. An archetype pulls events and actions as much as individual players imagine they are directing them. I won’t claim it is any different for those of us who believe in individuality and freedom. Our support for freedom is certainly a valid personal belief but the principle itself is beyond us and directs us as much as we hope to direct it.

As I have stated many times before; the momentum to focus unbridled centralized power has been an ongoing project of at least a hundred years. The founders knew this would happen. They brilliantly established the country’s framework to make the statist task beyond difficult but, the defenses against emergent tyranny couldn’t last forever.

Donald Trump is an unforeseen obstacle to the state’s intrusion upon individual liberty. Election year soundbites like “free healthcare” and “free college” are meaningless. It is always the myth-like battle between centrifugal and centripetal gods directing the course of history.

So it is that we’ve reached the point where people can seriously pretend that a major scandal has occurred because a president talked on the phone with a foreign leader. Some would even suggest that he “sought dirt on a political opponent (gasp)” — like that never happens. The entire last three years has been an exercise by the Democrat/socialists to fabricate dirt on their political opponent!

An almost amusing side-note in all of this is the Democrat/socialists pretending that they haven’t already been trying to impeach Trump since before he was even elected. They simply can’t accept the outcome of the election. They can’t let their mission to establish socialism in America falter. They can’t let the forces of manifest state authority lose to the forces of individual liberty. And, as usual, they just can’t leave people alone.

Communism in America

The left showing its true colors...red.

A $250,000fine for not following leftist etiquette commands. Unbelievable.

Methods vs. Results

In a prior post I touched on the issue of “Methods vs. Results” as it related to the Trump presidency. Like most successful businessmen, he is directed primarily toward results. While his critics may often have lofty end goals, their obsessions are for applying a host of cumbersome methods and punitive legislation which, in significance, often override any end goal they may have.

Most of my appraisals are strongly colored by a philosophical template that sees manifestation occurring within the bounds of archetypes replicating as fractal-like constructs. Be it plant growth, family dynamics, economics, or political developments, the universe seems to have some very basic ways of manifesting. No matter how complex things may appear, simple principles continue to repeat - aggressive/passive, transient/enduring, course/refined, short-term/long-term...etc.

One of the recurring themes that occurs in social behavior, whether it be among mundane behavior or national policy, is the proclivity for applying one’s energies toward an end goal or a set of methods for achieving that goal.

I live in Japan, and by many standards it’s a great place to live. When I critique the environment here I feel the need to preface my comments with the fact that, for the most part, Japan is a superior civilization. The people are generally wonderful in a variety of ways. But... When one has settled down somewhere it’s easy to begin noticing things that you wish were different. With all its advancement as the world’s third greatest economic power, something that holds Japan back from fulfilling an even greater potential is a very basic but obsessive standard that Japanese culture directs to all aspects of life. In work, school, and daily interaction, Japanese society directs obsessive attention to method and procedure over results. It’s not to say that results are irrelevant In Japan but, first and foremost, a worker, student, friend, or acquaintance must follow a given procedure for anything — even if it interferes with attaining a desirable result or runs contrary to one’s own preferred style of action. A friend of mine was once in a cafe and ordered a sandwich. He asked that they omit the egg. He was told that it “comes with an egg.” The sandwich hadn’t been made yet (!) but the restaurant staff literally found it impossible to simply not put an egg on a sandwich that “comes with it.” I was once at a restaurant where I ordered french toast. It turns out that french toast only came as a set with coffee. I didn’t want a drink and told the waiter that I only wanted french toast. Of course, not bringing me a cup of coffee was impossible because...it comes with it — seriously (!) 🤪

Anyone living in Japan knows the horrors of dealing with the banks here — quasi-government institutions steeped in time-consuming and useless procedures. I once needed change to make a payment to a machine in a bank lobby. There were at least eight people “working” in the bank and no other customers. I went to the counter to ask for change and was told to “take a number.” I took a number and sat. After being called, I made my request and was given a form to fill out. Of course my ID was required as well. Getting change could pose a risk of some kind I suppose. ‘Better know the identity of the guy who got change. That was the procedure. One could get the impression that, if there is any end goal sought by Japanese institutions and businesses, it’s to inconvenience customers as much as possible. Japan is a top-heavy bureau-land with a rigidness of thought that adheres strictly to procedure. This mentality permeates all aspects of society. As a first-rate power, Japan has a surprisingly limited amount of Nobel Prizes awarded to it (often, when a Japanese citizen does get a Nobel prize we find that the person was working at an American university). It’s not that Japan lacks skilled scientists, it just lacks the benefits of free-thinking imaginative efficiency in daily activity. Amazingly, the society that has offered incredible imagination to popular expressions like Anime, restrains such creative independence and creativity in fields where standards are ordained in stone and adhered to with neurotic precision.

I note this issue as it applies to Japan but it’s a standard that permeates all institutions to some degree in all countries. It’s a manifestation of “bureau-mind” - the word I think I coined to describe rigid adherence to procedures and ideals over actual result.

How this relates to politics and government: the private sector in a capitalist system is primarily results-oriented (they have to be) and those who choose to tie themselves and their staff down with process-tedium inevitably reap the negative consequences. I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen businesses in Japan forfeit additional sales because they’re bogged down in some procedure that reduces costumer satisfaction. The government by its very nature is “methods” oriented. It often has to be as the minions within a bureaucracy are usually too incompetent to make proper judgements. One size must fit all in bureau-land. In fact, this typical government stance is the hallmark of bureaucracy — perpetually bogged down in rigid concern for procedure over substance and end goals. It’s no surprise that when government gains enough power they seek to impose the same methods on the population at large. No one need get results but everyone must adhere to a procedure, be it recycling properly to using the “correct” vocabulary when speaking of and to others.

On more than one occasion I’ve watched obnoxious journalists pound away at the current president (in a way they never did for his highness, Sir Barack Hussein Obama). Trump is clearly a guy who goes for results...and, usually gets them. His methods are often those of the school yard; simple, instinctual, psychological, unpredictable. How many times have we heard Trump speak of how well he gets along with — and “likes” — the dictators of China or North Korea? I’d certainly be the last to sympathize with such sentiments but it’s beyond obvious to anyone not bogged down in the school of procedure-over-result what he’s doing. China and North Korea et al. know it’s B.S. but how can one publicly spar with someone who’s constantly telling the world that he likes them and has good chemistry with them. This method is simple, basic, and beyond the comprehension of egg heads in government and journalism who are obsessed with proper procedure over results. “Acting presidential” is far more important than getting things done in minds of the minions who nearly destroyed America in the last few decades.

There’s nothing wrong with establishing reasonable methods and guidelines for the purpose of finding solutions and reaching goals but the choices between actions and results lies on a spectrum. Free people with free minds can accomplish miracles when given a clear goal and trusting them to utilize effective methods for reaching it. People enslaved to decorum and procedure are bound to follow the procedure — the key word being, “bound.”

There are many styles of governance. Some are dynamic. Some are tyrannical. Some are inefficient...and, some are just stupid.

Micro and Macro Socialism...’Same Thing

I realize that some would see my rants on socialism as beating a dead horse but, it’s not a horse...and it’s very much alive. I’d say that the main point of this blog is to take issue with socialism and the other permutations of statism that would deprive me, my family, and fellow citizens of the freedom to pursue happiness. I’ve despised this clique of autocratic busy-bodies from a very early age. They show up in our lives in a variety of ways. In politics and government they appear just as they do in daily life when we are confronted with parasites and control freaks who think their business is to mind others’ business. Their bogus claims of humanitarian motivations are beyond transparent, a leftist will use any excuse possible to justify their claim over other people’s lives. Whether a sloppy inconsiderate roommate who steals your food or a government bureaucrat who seeks to steal your life, they are all kindreds spirits in the mission to truly oppress their fellow man or woman. In the process; entropy. We are all, willfully or not, participants in the play between order and chaos. The sentiments of the left are the mouthpieces of chaos which is no more than a preamble to an excessive imposition of “order.” Not the order of a simple and serene routine in daily life but the order of imposed control.

There are different reasons one may recoil against socialism. I wouldn’t be foolish enough to think it is ever going to go away. One could argue that all of history is the sway of societal constructs between individual liberty and the perennial appeal of collectivist sentiments. Not to bore one with autobiographical testimony but, a few things in my past directed me onto the road of at least suspicion if not outright disdain for a worldview born of envy and power-seeking.

Some of us are not as geared to collective allegiance as others. Not because we are “selfish” or “uncooperative.” Some people just prefer a large degree of latitude in making the choices that direct their own lives. Allegiances with people and beliefs should be a pro-choice circumstance.

I and my sister were briefly in foster care as children — I was probably about seven years old. Our mother was ill for several months and our father worked two jobs. He was able to visit us and take us out for several hours a week before having to return to his work routine. The foster family we stayed at was miserable. Vetting in the day wasn’t so good (and probably still isn’t in many locales). The family had a few children of their own as well as a drunk grandfather. To make a long story short, my father came by on Christmas Eve to deliver some gifts which we would open on Christmas morning. Upon waking Christmas morning, the entire family of proto-socialists were gathered around the kitchen table. Having opened my gift, they were all playing with it. Now some would no doubt see it as selfish of me to not be overjoyed at the thought of “sharing” my “property.” From my perspective (and any sane non socialist-inclined person), this was no more than theft, an intrusion into my personal life.

The aforementioned events are not meant as a pleading justification for my adult political values. They are mere example of the type of worldly encounters one may have with the socialist mindset that sees property and value as things to be “shared” and distributed in spite of one’s personal choices.

There are of course other observations made in life that have colored my appraisal of the values we refer to as “socialist,” “leftist,” or “progressive.”

Almost everyone has had experience with roommates, family members or acquaintances at work who take it for granted that others exist to make up for their own misfortune, shortcomings, or incompetence. You budget your money appropriately, make choices as to what you want in the refrigerator and you keep finding your portions disappearing (another true story). You call them on it and instead of apologizing and offering to replace the missing items, they act shocked at your “selfishness” for not wanting to “share.” On the macro level these same clowns now lord over a society where hard work, organization, and responsibility are met with demands to “share” the fruits of your success. After all, “you didn’t build that” (to quote Obama when he chastised small business owners for thinking their successes were largely the result of personal choices, risks, and a steady devotion to achievement).

Masters of projection; ...Is it any wonder that the average leftist is so angered by “greed” and “selfishness” when their own interactions with the world are so often based upon those very things?

Extrapolate the personal encounters one may have with micro-socialism into the world of the overbearing structures of the bureau mega-state and its punitive authority and one can at least see why some of us are not enthusiastic about new sophisticated ways to steal and impose authority.

Socialism always begins as a deceptive docile belief in altruism by government planning. It then “progresses” to a Marxist-style desire to remake society, and ends as a Stalinist gulag with distributed destitution.

Anyone claiming that Sweden and Denmark are models of socialism is full of shit (they’re free market/capitalist economies where private property, action, and thought are honored).

Venezuela is an example of a socialist society where the state is losing its grip but still tries to maintain power. North Korea is a socialist state that has successfully imposed a rigid framework upon its population and continues to hold absolute power.

Millennials enamored with socialism should be careful what they wish for. Virtually every trendy academic philosophy of the last hundred years has been a footnote to standard Marxism. They are all mere methods of arousing and channeling the human emotions of envy, resentment, and vengeance to establish the authority to enslave fellow citizens. The leftist can only see two players in society, the oppressed and oppressor. Themselves and some nebulous entities that are vicariously oppressed, and a conjured oppressor.

The socialist just assumes that, once “the system” is brought down their more just system will replace it. With that vague endpoint in mind, the leftists direct their energies towards the means to that end — destruction of society as it is. The economic system, the cultural traditions, the moral sense of right and wrong. It must all be ripped down, punished, and eliminated so the Jacobin fantasy of personal purity can rein over every aspect of existence.

Collectivism/statism is a cancer, a poison, and evil force that has never brought good and has always spread a paralyzing rot from within.

Compulsion, coercion, and punishment. The socialist triad. Libertarians simplify this appraisal even further - “force.” Socialism is ultimately about force. It is the enemy of both free will and the individual pursuit of happiness. How it justifies it’s use of force is irrelevant to the endgame. In fact, the means and ends are the same; compulsion, coercion, and punishment.

Call it “fascism,” call it “communism,” call it “democratic socialism,” call it the “Democratic party.” Leftism’s goals are always the same. Say it’s for “equality,” say it’s for “race purity.” Say it’s for “mother Russia,” the “class,” “the people.” ...”It’s for the children.” Whatever the proclaimed motivation or goal, the method is always force and it is always achieved through compulsion, coercion, and punishment. And afterward, all a society under its ugly scheme will have is theft and victims of theft. No doubt the thieves of state began their mission while playing with other’s gifts at Christmas and stealing others’ food from the fridge. Nothing changes.

“Tolerance” for all Cultures...but Our Own

If you note that someone goes to church twice a week and prays before eating, the left will sneer and remind you how backward and intolerant such a person is.

This, on the other hand, is an expression of diversity and cultural expression.

When you’re trying to pull off a “revolution” to put yourself in charge of everyone else’s life, common sense no longer applies.

Meanwhile, the Jacobin thugs are worried that they may be deprived of the right to kill a newborn baby and sell its body parts.

Breaking the Half Full Glass

I wouldn’t go as far as to say that all conservatives are optimistic and all leftists are pessimistic but it is reasonable to note that the world is a complicated place. At any given time the world, and the United States specifically, is a place full of problems, injustices, and cause for pessimism. Just the same, again, at any given time, the world and the U.S. are full of stunning examples of progress, achievement, success, and (voluntary) altruism. It’s not far-fetched to say that the public appraisals of leftists are decidedly negative. Conservatives tend to see America’s past as unique, dynamic, and successful, their approach to problems is to consider practical solutions. There is nothing “extreme” about creating a society where business activity thrives and the family unit is held in high regard.

To the left, America is little more than a failed enterprise wrought with racism, sexism, and an increasing list of other “isms.” They see America as a brutally unjust society where only a “few” reach any level of success and the many grovel in suffering and victimhood. To the left, America’s glass is always half empty and their only solution is to seize the water in it to mold to their vision — a new glass, new water, and all of it under their direct jurisdiction.

Case in point; the debates and daily soundbites from Democrat candidates for president. To hear all of them, one would think America to be one of the worst possible countries. One must remember as well that characters like Bernie Sanders actually have spoken admiringly about places like Cuba and Venezuela, as well as the former Soviet dictatorship (he didn’t go on his honeymoon in Sweden or Denmark).

Until Trump and his America First policy, Democrats, and most establishment Republicans for that matter, looked the other way while the communist dictatorship in China literally robbed the American worker blind and stole ideas and innovation in rampant intellectual property theft.

If America was indeed a hell-hole of failure and injustice, it would require someone to establish order, and that’s their point. “The world is going to hell and only we can save you. Your loss of freedom will be worth it.”

It would be considered extreme to suggest that many progressives today are basically authoritarian communists but more and more we see the daily expressions of a political view that is bitter, angry, and punitive in it’s plans for the future. This is no exaggeration. One of the front runners has just proclaimed their belief that the heads of fossil fuel companies should be put on trial for “crimes against humanity.” Hmmm, I wonder what the punishment for that would be? Prosecution for providing a needed service to a prosperous society — only in left-land and the Venezuelan playbook. Democrats regularly speak of imprisoning people for holding “incorrect” beliefs. How is today’s leftist industrial complex and Antifa shock troops any different than the red guards in China’s communist “cultural revolution?”

We still hold some semblance of the rule of law and Democrats, for now, still have to actually run for office, but each year new ideas are formulated to seize greater power and eliminate any chance for fair and democratic opposition. The fact that a compliant media and tech sector openly assists in the establishment of authoritarian government is now pretty well established.

A mere few Republicans now actively resist the real threats from statism and collectivism. Most are weak-willed sell outs to the cult of apology - “Oh no! I used the wrong word! I didn’t show enough sensitivity to the latest contrived victim de’ jour!”

There is literally only one person in the current political climate that is consistently taking on the momentum of social-globalism (and that is why they hate him).

Say what one will about “tone,” “intellect,” “cooperation,” — all debatable points — the fact remains that Donald Trump is the only candidate running for president who is fully committed to reducing the authority of the Washington bureau-beast over citizens’ lives. Likewise, he is the only candidate unwilling to sacrifice America’s prosperity, employment vitality, and sovereignty to China, the EU, unelected global bureau-structures or pseudo intellectual control freaks and demagogues.

On the flip side, every other candidate running is to some degree supportive of an increasingly more centralized, powerful, and authoritarian apparatus of state. Likewise, they all to some degree seek “cooperation” with (subservience to) international institutions that have no concern for America or its citizens. Their “collusion” is real. A collusion with powerful Orwellian high tech ideologues who would turn our feee and dynamic society into a dystopian surveillance gulag and, at this early point in the game plan, punishment for disagreement is already high on the list of strategies. If they get the grip on absolute power they crave, the firing squad will be close behind and there are pages of history and psychology to back up that predicable outcome.

Again, whine on about the perceived flaws of Trump the man and continue to foolishly act bewildered by those who merely wish to retain their freedom and recognize that there is only one candidate committed to addressing their legitimate concerns.

Keep the leftist thugs away from our half FULL glass.

Same as it Ever Was

Hong Kong. A free and open prosperous dynamic society.

The Chinese communist party. A stifling authoritarian institution that exists solely for its own aggrandizement of power.

Leftism

...Same as it ever was.

Honesty vs. B.S.

Most telling in the current lead-up to civil war (ok...maybe) is the way each side appraises their opposition. It’s occurred to me as I’ve watch the perpetual sparing between left and right in the Trump era that most conservative appraisals of the left are basically grounded in practical and objective understanding of what the left has actually outlined and stated. On the flip side, most appraisals of conservative policy and goals by the left are riddled with assumptions and often fabrications that have nothing to do with actual conservative belief and policy objectives, stated or otherwise.

The left says they want to see “walls come down.” They want a country where “everyone is welcome,” where convicts, teenagers, and non-citizens can vote and non-citizens receive “free” (taxpayer-funded) health care, education, and government “services.” They say this...often. Conservatives make no conjecture regarding these goals. There is no need to read between the lines. They are taken at face value. Conservatives believe that the left’s stated agendas are what they actually want to do.

The right says it wants a country where the rule of law and established standards are applied to America’s border and immigration policy, where practical vetting occurs to determine exactly who is coming into the country and how they hope to sustain themselves and vicariously contribute to fellow citizens standard of living and quality of life. The left’s interpretation? ...”Racist!” “Conservatives want concentration camps so they can eventually exterminate non-white people.”

The left views America and its history as uniquely evil, it’s defining characteristics exemplified by “slavery, racism, and oppression” by a ruling class of greedy capitalists. They state clearly that for America to atone for its perceived sins, it must radically alter its style of government and invest authority into the hands of...leftists (a state run solely by leftists). When conservatives regularly hear variations on this theme, they objectively assume that the left doesn’t really like America very much and is striving to radically change it.

The right is patriotic in the most traditional sense. They are proud of their country’s history of dramatic advancements, financial success, and dynamic creativity. While they may or may not be aware of the many warts that exist in America’s history, they see no need to dwell exclusively on past sins in a world full of far worse. The left’s interpretation? ...Conservatives support a nation of “racist Nazis and fascists” who believe in “white supremacy.” Patriotism is a “dog whistle” to fellow Klansmen. The left’s image of America is slavery. The right’s is a fellow citizen walking on the moon...and Disney cartoons on screens throughout the world.

The left views America’s unique constitution as a flawed document that is no longer relevant to the goals of an elite caste of intellectuals who wish to impose the whims of a moment. They see court justices as entitled to override the established standards of governance outlined by the constitution. The right objectively interprets the lefts’s perpetual desire to alter the constitution as a threat to the freedoms that the constitution guarantees.

Conservatives honor the constitution as the product of brilliant minds who had codified timeless principles to restrain the scheming ploys of power-seekers and tyrants. They see America’s constitution as guaranteeing maximum self-government and freedom so citizens may pursue happiness and success as they see fit. The left’s interpretation? ...Conservatives who admire the American system of limited government are, again, “racists” who “cling to their guns and religion” as a means of oppressing fellow citizens.

Leftist believe in the sanctity of the collective, that resources and policy be directed to state projects and that citizens should be compelled to obey government edicts and forfeit substantial amounts of personal wealth and freedom to bureaucratic decrees. Conservatives see this as a abridgment of personal liberty.

Conservatives believe in maximum freedom for the individual to decide who or if they wish to ally with groups of their choosing. To conservatives, the family and the individual are the bedrock of a stable and moral society. The left’s interpretation?...Conservatives hold a selfish disregard for the standards deemed best for society by the state and its well-meaning insistence that one affiliate with and sacrifice to abstract groups on demand.

The list can go on and on. In virtually every instance of worldview and policy the right and left are at odds. When they appraise each other’s sentiments, conservatives are fairly honest, objective, and accurate in taking what leftists say at face value. The left, on the other hand, is adamant about injecting their own fantasies as to what conservatives believe and what the motivations are for their beliefs.

The left believes in a powerful central authority to compel adherence to collectivist principles. The right interprets this as ...a leftist belief in a powerful central authority to compel adherence to collectivist principles.

The right believes in limited constitutional government and a proud defense of individual liberty and pursuit of personal progress. The left interprets this as ...”Racism...Nazism,...fascism,...selfishness, and greed!”

In the end, the entire conflict between right and left is one of pragmatism and objectivity vs. idealism, illusion, and emotional whim. The former has led to unprecedented progress for the United States and its citizens. The latter, to the collapse of progress, moral decline, and societal instability.

Conservatism wins for a moral stance of pragmatism and honesty. Leftism loses for an immoral crusade of deception and delusion for the sole end goal of imposing its will upon others.