Each day at just after midnight Eastern, a post like this one is created for contributors and readers of this site to upload news links and video links on the issues that concern this site. Most notably, Islam and its effects on Classical Civilization, and various forms of leftism from Soviet era communism, to postmodernism and all the flavours of galloping statism and totalitarianism such as Nazism and Fascism which are increasingly snuffing out the classical liberalism which created our near, miraculous civilization the West has been building since the time of Socrates.
This document was written around the time this site was created, for those who wish to understand what this site is about. And while our understanding of the world and events has grown since then, the basic ideas remain sound and true to the purpose.
So please post all links, thoughts and ideas that you feel will benefit the readers of this site to the comments under this post each day. And thank you all for your contributions.
This is the new Samizdat. We must use it while we can.
**New intelligence suggests a specific course of action concerning use of Substack. For a variety of reasons, who owns it, and who owns the ONLY company that monetizes authors on Substack, the question for us has always been, ‘Why is Substack allowed to exist?” I believe the answer is now known to us. It collects data on you and who you are connected to. Substack does have the best writers out there for counter-narrative views, and does allow the authors to make money at it. Which is suspicious already. But the reasons were made known to us by a Cyber-security professional. The solution seems to be to use a dedicated browser, ONLY for substack. There are many good ones out there now. So downloading another browser is easy. Get the DuckduckGo go one, or Brave or one of many others and use it ONLY for substack and clear cookies after use. Like washing your plate after you eat.
For those interested, please check out https://vladtepesblog.substack.com/ as an another avenue of expression. The Substack is a different project in a sense. It is older videos that in the light of subsequent events, look different or of increased importance, Check it out now and again if you like. But use it safely.
ADDENDUM:
This site operates more at the philosophical level of the communist/Islamic revolution which is obliterating Western Civilization. Politics, culture, law are all down stream from philosophy. Understanding the philosophy of the attack is to understand what is an attack and develop tactics, both individually and collectively against them. The attack comes entirely (so far) in the form of Dialectics. To understand dialectics, watch and read everything you can by Maj. (Ret.) Stephen Coughlin.
Here is a repost of the simplest explanation, or at least the shortest one, we have been able to think of so far (Placed here by request)
We as humans communicate mostly via conventions. In other words, we decide what a word means by what we, as a culture want it to mean, then fix the term as a convention via a dictionary
or other means so we can express what we want to each other and be understood. It’s a group process more or less but based on what we want expressions, words, concepts and taxonomy to mean.
Dialectics is the imposition of meaning on existing terms for a political outcome which is destructive to what we all consider meaning. It is a complete hijacking of Meaning.
This also applies to taxonomy. The most underrated aspect of epistemology. Of how we see ourselves. Of how we understand the world, via categories. Via labels.
Dialectical taxonomy is what forces us to change everything we think about sexuality and accept political sexuality such as the Trans-movement.
Or somehow convincing everyone that the German National Socialist Worker’s Party is somehow “far right wing”, which may be the most masterful dialectical con of the 20th century.
This deserves a proper essay. But I just want to get the thought out there.
Imposing, forcing meaning on us. Changing terms to mean what a group of tyrants what us to think they mean as opposed to what they do mean and more or less always have meant.
Making words mean something other than what we meant them to mean, then banning or criminalizing them because of their imputed meaning, even though they were good, useful terms that helped hold our culture together.
Attacking us for using perfectly good words with important meanings, then telling us what we meant by what we said, then cancelling us for it in the pre-revolutionary stage, and now in the UK outright arrest you now that the revolution is all but complete.
That is dialectics.
“accuses a group of carrying out secret conspiracies to gain global control or that they are plotting to destroy western civilization”
Dear Dystopia,
Science fiction called. It wants its genre back.
Want to create a vast new class of political prisoner? Write this sentence into law. Want to confirm there IS a group conspiring to dominate? Use precisely these words. Want to reveal your fear of a particular demographic? Criminalize all theorizing except the kind that identifies those who oppose you.
Hate speech used to be called badmouthing the Soviets.
https://usawatchdog.com/canadas-war-on-jesus-pastor-artur-pawlowski/
I wish I still owned the paperbacks from the 60s about the conspiracies, I sold them at the used book store so I could buy more books
UK communist party revolves its revolving door:
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/prime-minister-keir-starmer-resigns-uk-faces-7th-leader-decade
Alan Greenspan has died. He can watch his handywork play out from above. He was a good man who had it right, then got it wrong.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/obituaries/alan-greenspan-economist-longtime-head-federal-reserve-dies-100-rcna42286
His famous article from 1966:
https://d6scj24zvfbbo.cloudfront.net/09163588d8f5746554ed981fdc24b322/200000080-4b0b94b0bc/Gold%20and%20Economic%20Freedom%20A%20Greenspan.pdf?ph=70549c4ce9
Gold and Economic Freedom
by Alan Greenspan
Published in Ayn Rand’s “Objectivist” newsletter in 1966, and reprinted
in her book, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, in 1967.
An almost hysterical antagonism toward the gold standard is one issue
which unites statists of all persuasions. They seem to sense — perhaps
more clearly and subtly than many consistent defenders of laissez-faire
— that gold and economic freedom are inseparable, that the gold standard
is an instrument of laissez-faire and that each implies and requires the
other.
In order to understand the source of their antagonism, it is necessary
first to understand the specific role of gold in a free society.
Money is the common denominator of all economic transactions. It is that
commodity which serves as a medium of exchange, is universally
acceptable to all participants in an exchange economy as payment for
their goods or services, and can, therefore, be used as a standard of
market value and as a store of value, i.e., as a means of saving.
The existence of such a commodity is a precondition of a division of
labor economy. If men did not have some commodity of objective value
which was generally acceptable as money, they would have to resort to
primitive barter or be forced to live on self-sufficient farms and forgo
the inestimable advantages of specialization. If men had no means to
store value, i.e., to save, neither long-range planning nor exchange
would be possible.
What medium of exchange will be acceptable to all participants in an
economy is not determined arbitrarily. First, the medium of exchange
should be durable. In a primitive society of meager wealth, wheat might
be sufficiently durable to serve as a medium, since all exchanges would
occur only during and immediately after the harvest, leaving no
value-surplus to store. But where store-of-value considerations are
important, as they are in richer, more civilized societies, the medium
of exchange must be a durable commodity, usually a metal. A metal is
generally chosen because it is homogeneous and divisible: every unit is
the same as every other and it can be blended or formed in any quantity.
Precious jewels, for example, are neither homogeneous nor divisible.
More important, the commodity chosen as a medium must be a luxury. Human
desires for luxuries are unlimited and, therefore, luxury goods are
always in demand and will always be acceptable. Wheat is a luxury in
underfed civilizations, but not in a prosperous society. Cigarettes
ordinarily would not serve as money, but they did in post-World War II
Europe where they were considered a luxury. The term “luxury good”
implies scarcity and high unit value. Having a high unit value, such a
good is easily portable; for instance, an ounce of gold is worth a
half-ton of pig iron.
In the early stages of a developing money economy, several media of
exchange might be used, since a wide variety of commodities would
fulfill the foregoing conditions. However, one of the commodities will
gradually displace all others, by being more widely acceptable.
Preferences on what to hold as a store of value will shift to the most
widely acceptable commodity, which, in turn, will make it still more
acceptable. The shift is progressive until that commodity becomes the
sole medium of exchange. The use of a single medium is highly
advantageous for the same reasons that a money economy is superior to a
barter economy: it makes exchanges possible on an incalculably wider
scale.
Whether the single medium is gold, silver, seashells, cattle, or tobacco
is optional, depending on the context and development of a given
economy. In fact, all have been employed, at various times, as media of
exchange. Even in the present century, two major commodities, gold and
silver, have been used as international media of exchange, with gold
becoming the predominant one. Gold, having both artistic and functional
uses and being relatively scarce, has significant advantages over all
other media of exchange. Since the beginning of World War I, it has been
virtually the sole international standard of exchange. If all goods and
services were to be paid for in gold, large payments would be difficult
to execute and this would tend to limit the extent of a society’s
divisions of labor and specialization. Thus a logical extension of the
creation of a medium of exchange is the development of a banking system
and credit instruments (bank notes and deposits) which act as a
substitute for, but are convertible into, gold.
A free banking system based on gold is able to extend credit and thus to
create bank notes (currency) and deposits, according to the production
requirements of the economy. Individual owners of gold are induced, by
payments of interest, to deposit their gold in a bank (against which
they can draw checks). But since it is rarely the case that all
depositors want to withdraw all their gold at the same time, the banker
need keep only a fraction of his total deposits in gold as reserves.
This enables the banker to loan out more than the amount of his gold
deposits (which means that he holds claims to gold rather than gold as
security of his deposits). But the amount of loans which he can afford
to make is not arbitrary: he has to gauge it in relation to his reserves
and to the status of his investments.
When banks loan money to finance productive and profitable endeavors,
the loans are paid off rapidly and bank credit continues to be generally
available. But when the business ventures financed by bank credit are
less profitable and slow to pay off, bankers soon find that their loans
outstanding are excessive relative to their gold reserves, and they
begin to curtail new lending, usually by charging higher interest rates.
This tends to restrict the financing of new ventures and requires the
existing borrowers to improve their profitability before they can obtain
credit for further expansion. Thus, under the gold standard, a free
banking system stands as the protector of an economy’s stability and
balanced growth. When gold is accepted as the medium of exchange by most
or all nations, an unhampered free international gold standard serves to
foster a world-wide division of labor and the broadest international
trade. Even though the units of exchange (the dollar, the pound, the
franc, etc.) differ from country to country, when all are defined in
terms of gold the economies of the different countries act as one — so
long as there are no restraints on trade or on the movement of capital.
Credit, interest rates, and prices tend to follow similar patterns in
all countries. For example, if banks in one country extend credit too
liberally, interest rates in that country will tend to fall, inducing
depositors to shift their gold to higher-interest paying banks in other
countries. This will immediately cause a shortage of bank reserves in
the “easy money” country, inducing tighter credit standards and a return
to competitively higher interest rates again.
A fully free banking system and fully consistent gold standard have not
as yet been achieved. But prior to World War I, the banking system in
the United States (and in most of the world) was based on gold and even
though governments intervened occasionally, banking was more free than
We will miss him, we need someone like him right now.
Test
Iran’s oil windfall fuels rapid rebuild of ballistic missile array
Iranian oil exports are breaking records, reaching volumes last seen in the previous decade, after the 2015 nuclear deal, known as the JCPOA. In just one week, Iran brought in nearly $3 billion through the export of 36 million barrels. This, incidentally, is why the Strait of Hormuz will remain open despite declarations by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that it could close it: It is clearly in their interest to keep it open. This is a flood of cash from which Iran had been cut off during the US naval blockade, which nearly brought its economy to complete collapse.…
[T]he overwhelming majority of this money is directed to the Revolutionary Guard: funding and rebuilding military power, the missile array, aid to regional terrorist organizations, chiefly Hezbollah, and strengthening the regime against domestic opposition. The meaning is a rapid erosion, within months, of almost all the war’s achievements, with the possible exception of the nuclear issue…
https://www.israelhayom.com/2026/06/22/irans-oil-windfall-fuels-rapid-rebuild-of-ballistic-missile-array/
Tom Lehrer – We Will All Go Together When We Go
Tom Lehrer – So Long, Mom (A Song for World War III)