Category Archives: Dialectics

Examining how two words have been weaponized to cause us to self obliterate: ‘Radical’ and ‘Corruption’ (with additional bonus word!)

Posted on by

Corruption:

This may be a longish ride so let me put the punch line first so you can decide if you want to read further.

If someone puts a strip of plastic over your nose and mouth after writing down somewhere that you have to have a strip of plastic over your nose and mouth by decree, and you poke a hole in it so you can breathe, is that corruption?

If the state kicks you in the knee and you discover you can only walk with a limp, is walking with a limp corruption? Or just the only way you can walk as a consequence of being kicked in the knee?

Let me start with a couple of anecdotes from people I know well:

A Canadian store owner back around the turn of the century, somewhere between 1998 and 2002 or so, was buying goods from a wholesaler in NY. He asked the wholesaler to please provide him with an invoice to ship with the goods for less than half the actual price of the goods with a real invoice to follow later by mail.

The wholesaler laughed and asked the question: “Is your government (in Canada) trying to turn you into a nation of criminals?”

The store owner asked for details, even though, as I am told, the shop owner perfectly understood the comment.

The wholesaler continued: “Every Canadian I deal with asks for fake invoices because they simply could not sell the goods competitively if at all if the official tariff rate was paid on these goods! (This was decades before Donald Trump remember!) Your costs would be too high to do business at all! What’s Wrong with your government! They are making you a nation of criminals!”

Much more recently, and for similar reasons, when you buy a used car, the government of Ontario will not accept a sales receipt presented by the buyer from the seller. So a car, which has already had all sales taxes paid on it when it was purchased new, must also have sales tax paid on it when you buy it used from someone who bought it new and paid tax on it, or also bought it used and paid tax on it. The government has decided not to accept a sales receipt as proof of price paid, because simply no one would present the honest price they paid as the tax required would make the car, if not unaffordable, much more expensive than it was likely worth.

So now the Ontario government demands that you go to a specialized garage and get an estimate on the worth of the car, so that the state approved level of taxation can be applied to the sale of the used car. This is irrespective of what the buyer actually pays. The tax rate is set by an appraiser approved of by the state.

Which then sets the appraiser up in a position where he might be tempted to split the difference with a purchaser. Offer a lower appraisal rate for the car for a higher appraisal fee. Now I am not saying this happens, just that this would be a fairly predictable market response to being kicked in the knee when buying a car.

As a response to this non-practice which likely never happens, the state of Ontario has decided they want a video tape of the appraisal itself so they can judge if the appraisal was honest.

By the way, this applies even when the car is a gift, unless it’s within specified relationships. Those include common law spouse or actual official married partner, and direct descendants.

This additional 13% can change the decision to purchase the car as it can take it from affordable to not affordable.

Is that corruption? Or is the system forcing a free market to behave this way?

So is trying to work around these state imposed, anti-free market measures corruption? Or walking with a limp, or breathing through a hole in a suffocating gag?

Remembering a book I read in 1976 by Hedrick Smith called, The Russians, the entire book was dedicated to describing day to day life in the Soviet Union. How in fact the official or state mandated artificial economy was something like only 10% of the organic or real free market economy, which people called corrupt, or “the black market”.

A person would rapidly discover that their government pay checks would not pay the months food and rent or even close to it. The reason being that while the state had artificially fixed the cost of food and rent so that your monthly wages would cover it, in order to actually get to the food, or be allowed to stay in your government owned apartment, you would have to pay usually around 10X the official price of the thing in bribes. You had to bribe the doorman to get into the store, The cashier to get the goods, and of course, they would issue you a fake receipt showing the official rate of the loaf or bread for example, as opposed to the 10X rate you really paid, since, like all Canadians Soviet Citizens you are now a criminal, they had to cover your crime of actually buying food with paperwork that conformed to the state narrative of the cost of goods.

One can stand in a field and scream orders at the earth as much as one likes but it won’t produce a single grain of wheat without seed, water, fertilizer and lots and lots of hard work. So there are, shall we say, real-world costs to things. We measure those costs in money. But we cannot change those costs by merely revaluing the money itself arbitrarily any more than we can make an 8 inch ruler, for example, say that it is 12 inches when it’s really only 8. The man who is five feet two is no more attractive to women just because the ruler insists he is six foot four. There are real world and organic standards. And a free market economy is one of the best ways of measuring them. Yes, to a degreee this can be regulated. And to a degree, a very successful one can be slowed down with taxation etc. in order to control growth or create a tax base to advance civilization itself. But even in a perfect world like that, taxation etc. slows growth. And what we have now is that one and only feature of taxation, the slowing of growth and disincentivisaiton of production in place.

Taxation increasingly is a weapon against the middle class. And as the government simply prints money to do things which are damaging to Canada and claims it cannot afford to do the obvious things, like look after war veterans, we can say with some certainty that taxation is not about generating revenue for the benefit of Canadians and Canadian culture and society. It is punitive.

But to the point. Clearly in Hedrick Smith’s The Russians, and to Canadians who try and find a work-around from punitive taxation and regulations beyond any reasonable explanation for them, this also cannot be called corruption but a reflexive survival response. The corruption is the system that necessitates such responses. And even then, it is not technically corruption, but a pure and properly constructed and directed weapon against Canadian liberties and free market system.

Nazis who shot at allied forces in WW2 were not corrupt. They were ideologically pure. As were those allied forces that tried not to get shot and also shot back at them.

So the word corruption at this point looks like another dialectical or rhetorical weapon to manipulate public sentiment in such a way as to assist them in total self destruction.

“Radical” or “extremist”

Sometime in the early 2000s, a study was done on US mosques. It was conducted by a very reputable survey company who had a reputation, and much more importantly, used excellent methods for determining the nature or views of the thing under study.

The purpose of the study was to find out what percent of US mosques taught “radical” or “Extremist” Islamic values such as jihad for conquest of the US and what percent taught a sort of narrative version of Islam as another religion of personal choice within the US with no frothing at the mouth sermons about jihad.

From memory, the number of mosques who did not teach jihad, violence and hatred was well under 10% and those that did, over 90%. That is within the USA.

A large number of mosques were sampled and across the whole of the country.

So now we run up against what might be the most important aspect of this.

How can 90% of a thing be “radical” or “extremist”?

Sam Harris, author of the book, End of Faith put it best: “The problem with Islamic Fundamentalism, is the fundamentals of Islam”. A clip I have posted many times but can no longer find on YouTube. Curiouser and curiouser. In any case, clearly the words, “extremist”, “Fundamentalist”, “Radical” are rhetorical weapons against those people that observant Muslims would destroy, namely us, and to help us destroy ourselves.

The central dogma and doctrine of Islam is of jihad. and destruction of all other systems of human organization, belief and law and to replace it with Islamic orthodoxy. To dismiss this as the view of “extremists” etc. is to use a version of Hanlon’s Razor. Instead of claiming those who create destructive policies or actions are merely stupid or incompetent to divert the fact that they are malicious, we are saying that all those constant string of stabbings, mass casualty events, ramming with cars and so on represent only a tiny minority of people within islam who, perhaps, do not understand their own religion. Sayeth the people who have never picked up a Koran but claim they have read “parts of it” because they heard a few out of context quotes on CBC or CNN.

The way it works is, a few people wage acts of kinetic jihad in a way that kill some small number of people, but is horrific and then treated by the media in a specific way. The state, will simultaneously claim this is not what it obviously is, but admit there is a security problem, and take away knives from old white German women that they may have as a protection from a very legitimate fear of being raped or otherwise abused by Muslim migrants. These crisis can be conveniently reworked by the state-media apparatus to justify the removal of all people’s most essential liberties. And is.

So you don’t actually need a lot of these acts of jihad. But they achieve the results both the Muslims and the communists are after.

Bonus word: Minority:

One really outstanding example of a dialectic might be the word, ‘Minority’.

It is brilliantly used as a cover to mean anyone but white people.

White people, or caucasians, which might be a more scientific nomenclature for white people, are in fact a minority if we are allowed to use the anthropological definition of races. There are certainly more East Asians than white people. Probably more South Asians as well. Certainly more Africans. But the media will still refer to say, Muslims as a minority in a city in the West when they are in fact an overwhelming majority of the population and have transformed the culture to an Islamic one to the extent that the kids don’t even know they live in a non-Islamic country. Although perhaps was, is a better tense.

It is important to also remember all the emotional attachments that the word has today. In essence, a minority, being non-white is always oppressed, and are always victims, and must always be given higher status in law, and a lower standard of expected behaviour and conformity to the law than non-minorities, meaning whites and Jews. The Jews of course, are or are not part of the majority depending on if they are conservative or leftist. Leftist jews still get to have a victim/minority label. But Jews who stand up for Western civilization will be accused of everything the constant marches through every city insist they are. Colonizers. Oppressors and commuters of genocide.

The selective use of the word, ‘minority’ might be one of the easiest examples of dialectical weaponry to expose.

I’ll leave it to the reader to decide why this video is in this article and how it fits.

And this:

Human Rights lawyer, Bath Sheba Van den Berg speaks publicly on the state of Canadian law and rights

Posted on by

Last Friday night, Canadian human rights lawyer, one of the very few left in Canada that actually do Human rights cases as opposite to it’s dialectical opposite like the Canadian Human Rights Commissions and its various local branches, Bath Sheba Van den Berg spoke to a live audience in Ottawa.

Bath Sheba is the lawyer who represented the astonishing hearings of Ottawa Police detective, Helen Grus. And although we teased out this short clip of her talk a few days ago, it is worth repeating, and for those who may not have seen it, this is truly an astonishing act by the hearing officer, or what people would think of as the ‘judge’ in this hearing.

Also for those who don’t know, Det. Grus was charged with misconduct for doing an investigation which clearly everyone already knew would show that a huge spike in baby deaths in 2021 was caused by the mandatory mRNA injections. The full story on this can be read here at RAIR and here on the site of a retired Toronto Police detective, Donald Best.

This video needs to be seen by all Canadians, and any Westerners who feel their country is under the same kind of attack as Canada by the COMINTERN. You know, the guys who ran the autopen.

And one could tell as she was talking that she was pulling punches. Clearly things in Canada are much worse than she stated explicitly. So much worse she wouldn’t actually state some of the specifics.

But what is in the talk should be enough.

 

DEI destroying the military, imminent war with Western troops? And a look at the Climate dialectic with some interesting examples: Links 1 for May 2nd, 2025

Posted on by

1. This is a very worthy video about how DEI is destroying the UK military. We certainly all know that, and Stephe Coughlin is on record saying that in fact the actual PURPOSE of DEI was to destroy the military.

But he makes a throw away remark that is worth noting. “And they say we are going to war very soon”. I have heard the same thing from sources in Canada in fact. And from extremely reliable sources. Things are in motion behind the scenes. And they aren’t good, depending on why these things are in motion.

2. Swedes are starting to treat bombings as a day to day affair. They are fully demoralized. Many Swedes seek to leave Sweden. I have no idea where they will go, but they clearly want to leave because their government, along with the COMINTERN offices like the WEF and UN and EU have destroyed their nation and identity.

3. Dr. Patrick Moore (Cofounder of Greenpeace) is totally scientifically correct in every assertion he makes in this video… but there is something that he may not get, or if he does, chooses not to address the problem in the way needed in this video.

This presents the same issue that many of our favorite scientists and doctors present when discussing the ‘science’ behind Covid and the mRNA injections. Which is that these and other lines of operations are narrative attacks on our civilization. That liars know they are lying and telling them the truth not only doesn’t matter, but it’s literally an allowable counter narrative to a degree. A form of controlled opposition.

With Covid and the vaxx, the real issue was that the state did not have the power to do what it did to us, even if, and I need to stress this, even if the damned injections were safe and effective. The dangers they represented is not actually the issue. It was the choice we all inherently have to refuse it for our own reasons.

And we maintain that there is simply only one allowable reason to refuse a medication. Only one ever, And that is that you don’t want to take it.

While I agree with Orwell in the voice of Winston Smith that “Freedom means the freedom to say 2+2=4” we also feel that Freedom means the freedom to do your own risk assessment. And for that matter, what constitutes a risk at all.

The state did not have the right to stop people from going outside. It did not have the right to cancel protests against Covid measures (while allowing BLM and other Marxist efforts during the same period). It did not have the right to coerce people into taking a potentially deadly experimental technology or face one form of societal destruction or another. Instead, the media sort of tolerate some forms of questioning of the value of the vaxx itself, although mocked and ridiculed all who even questioned it from the laity, while defrocking any actual doctors or credentialed authorities who actually spoke out with the scientific truth about it. But no where could people simply say, “I doesn’t matter if they work or not. I have bodily autonomy and will not submit for my own private reasons and the state does not, and was never given the power to make me take it” etc.

The Global Warming narrative is clearly created for the exact same reason as the Covid narratives. ‘We have a problem that is global in nature, so we need a solution which is global in nature. This means you have no rights and your nation state no longer may set policies for itself than run contrary to the global interests.’

And sometimes, arguing the actual science is mere controlled opposition, because it was never about that. It isn’t like they don’t know zero percent of their predictions on climate have ever come true.

Recently, A Ph.D in Biology, Madeline Weld, presented to the Club of Rome Canada. An organization which appears to be about global environmentalism but is clearly far far to the left and while perhaps not all members are seeking moving the nation and world to the left, the net effect of the Club of Rome appears to be about making that effort. Its predictions from its earliest report published in 1972 famously titled, The Limits to Growth made quite a few bold predictions for the future as well. At some future point we may peruse the book and check how well their predictions did. And the computer modelled future as a justification for policy, that is something which at this point should really ring alarms, which is what the Limits to Growth actually is.

Her presentation, which she was asked to do, was on Canada’s Century Initiative. This is the lobby group/NGO/GONGO (government funded and operated NGO that actually pushes government policy) which is the Canadian branch of the effort to flood Western nations with Muslims and Africans to dilute them to the point that they cease to be, as they have always been.

Even though they asked her to present on the dangers to the environment by increasing Canada’s population from now, 40M people to 100M people, each time she suggested not importing all these people she was met with counter-arguments that Western industry (not Chinese or Indian) had made their own countries unliveable due to Global Warming and we had an obligation to take them all. When she countered by questioning the facts on that, she was met with the usual dialectical show stopper.

“You sound like a denialist”.

Where exactly is the science in that? It is in reality, science denial. Check it out.

We have posted this clip many times before, and frankly it is extremely dense, even by this site’s standards. It is a Polish expert on Communism, meaning on its dialectical nature. In this clip he explains how a second generation Frankfurt School acolyte named Habermas invented a con called “Discourse theory”. In it, a communist think tank would come up with a narrative, and then launch critical theory attacks on anyone who challenged the narrative. This is what you see above. Not that Madeline’s interlocutor is aware of the machinations he deploys. At this point it is just how the culture works. Please note that “Denialism” is both adjacent to, and a precursor to “hate speech”, the direct communist analogue to Islamic blasphemy laws.

No opposition to state narratives can be permitted in a communist or dialectical state: Example UK and abortion

Posted on by

 

This is the letter sent to Scottish households near abortuariums.

GB.

 

 

Ottawa: Protest against actual genocide in Syria gets about 150 people

Posted on by

First, a note to everyone who has been kind enough to sign up to get notifications from this site.

This is an issue that comes up a lot, but I don’t often remember it because I don’t check the emails as I know what post I just made. But many people do not visit the site and just read the emails. The problem there is the emails will show you the text, and maybe an image. But the embedded videos do NOT show up in the site emails. This means that a lot of people cannot make heads or tails of the posts since they are often, perhaps even usually about a video, or an event shown in a video embedded in the post.

Also the numbers of people who visit this site has been sinking hard. I think this is because people who like to read it, do so by just reading the emails the site sends out. To repeat, you are not getting the post if you don’t click through to the site and see what the post is talking about. And this one will be the same. A few words about an event, and the event can only be seen here on the site, or at RAIR, by looking at the video.

The event was maybe 150 people if I am being generous, marching up Elgin St. on Saturday, March 15th 2025 protesting the actual genocide of religious minorities in Syria.

There are a lot of angles I could take on this issue. And I am hoping that readers to this site will add their own observations about the attitudes of some of these groups towards other religious minorities in the region. Even ones that don’t exist within Syria.

But the three ways this post will deal with it for the moment are:

A: An actual genocide gets practically no response from most people, and a tiny one from those affected. like Christians and Alawite Muslims.

B: The left, which has been occupying campuses and other locations for years now, creating chaos and violence and destruction everywhere and attacking Jewish targets claiming to oppose a non-existent genocide of the ‘Palestinians’, are no where even near this protest.

This must not be looked at as hypocrisy, but as a very conscious preconceived strategy to achieve a very specific outcome by the use of selective magnification and minification/diminution to replace reality with state narratives, and enforce those narratives.

C: When the Arab Spring happened, (an Obama euphemism for the reestablishment of an Islamic Caliphate starting from Tunisia and ending in Syria), the plan was to start a major war with all non-Islamic powers as Sunnis see it, in order to bring on the end of the world in a Syrian city called, Dabiq. Those same jihadis, I don’t even mean in terms of the ideology, but some of the same individuals from the Islamic State/Al-Qaeda/Al Nusra front/Muslim Brotherhood are now in control of Syria and consequently Dabiq.

So we must do what none of the media is doing. Pay close attention to events there, as they will, not may, but will, attempt events that will bring on the end of the world. It is their eschatology and greatest ambition. And Islam, exactly unlike Christianity, believes that the end of the world must be brought on by human, and not divine action. That Muslims are the agents of “Allah”. While Christians believe that the world will end and Jesus will return. but while there are nebulous signs which more or less are always happening, there is no way to know, or more importantly, to cause them to happen.

I don’t know if Judaism even has an eschatology.

The protest seems to have had at the head of it, an Eastern or Syrian orthodox priest, going by the vestments.

At this point one might start to understand that whatever you see when you pull back the curtain, is probably another curtain.

Posted on by

It looks like Frank Zappa may have understated his case.

Finding examples of the multi-curtain theatre works is a lot easier than I thought it would be. But to illustrate the point, let’s start with a prediction based on nothing but the hopefully quotable statement in the title.

We are being regularly told about the stunning abuses of public money in the US by DOGE. Certainly the same thing is true across all COMINTERN countries such as Canada, the UK, Germany, the EU in general, the UN and so on. To make up a representative example, DOGE might reveal that they have discovered two hundred and sixty million dollars earmarked to teach gay turtles how to put on a version of Hamlet as a trans person in Bububu Tanzania . And that fictional example is really a pretty mild exaggeration of the DOGE headlines.

With zero data points to support the following statement at this point in writing, and going purely on the model in the title, itself informed by a couple of decades, actually a lot more than a couple of decades of observing how nascent communist governments and polities operate, the following hypothesis is presented:

None or next to none of that money was ever sent to those ‘charities’. In fact they may not exist at all.

Or if they do, they were created as a beard for which to pretend to send money. In all likelihood, the idea was to get people outraged about the nature of the recipients of the high amounts of cash and not look any farther. In fact, the money was likely used to find the invasion of Western nations by millions of people from Africa, especially the Islamic Maghreb and Islamic nations who are hostile to Jewish and Christian culture, and Greco-Roman Civilization, and intend to work triple shifts to bring it down. In fact, paid to bring it down.

Documents have been floating around Twitter showing that illegal migrants, and I mean illegal in a proper way, as opposed to simply redefining what constitutes an immigrant by rewriting the definition of an invader as a “migrant” or “Asylum seeker”, are being given very large sums of money to get here, and to settle in Western nations. They do not seem to have to work, and they do seem to live a pretty decent lifestyle and drive cars. Also both Canada and the US admitted that the illegals crossing the borders did not have to take the mRNA injections, like all the citizens of Western nations did. One can fairly safely assume the same for the UK, Germany and the rest of Western Europe.

This money was clearly printed for this purpose. But it had to be disguised as it might be too easy to spot the strategy if the budget read ‘3 trillion dollars to house and feed illegal Muslim migrants to the West”.

So what we see here is one arm of the Cloward Piven Strategy being synergistic with another.

As you may recall, Cloward-Piven has three main stratagems for making the US (and any other proper republic_ communist. 1. Print so much money it causes predictable problems like inflation and lack of confidence in the currency. 2. Open borders and flood the nation(s) with millions of people hostile to the local people and culture. 3. Grow the civil service massively with the main purpose being to oppress the actual cultural and legal citizens of that nation.

How that might look could be hiring 80,000 IRS agents and arming them for some reason.

It is expected that people will stop looking when they see the outrage-bait in the names of the places the money is alleged to go to. Maybe someone has flown over to Ireland and looked at the books of such projects as a DEI Musical in Ireland, or a Trans Gender opera in Columbia, etc. etc.

Here is a Tweet which actually speaks directly to the use of USAID money for the purpose of funding the invasion and destruction of Ireland. Interesting that they are this forthcoming on the matter. But it doesn’t address the likely reallocation of funds for the absurd and ‘woke’ projects which we think is taking place for this purpose. And as I search for the insane projects, data points that support the  hypothesis are actually appearing now.

There is a second axiom which one may wish to add to any analytical processes they use to understand what is actually going on when listening to the dialectical explanation from nearly all media to one degree or another. And that is that:

whenever someone tells you that a thing cannot happen because the law says, and rules are, and the procedure works like this…

they are either people with poor observational skills or they are trying to live in a safe past where there was predictability based on the rules a nation used as the central doctrine of its law and culture. This site predicted 2 years ago that Mark Carney would be the PM without getting elected to Parliament, or by any of the normal means a person becomes PM. Now at this point some people will take a post hoc view of this and explain how this happened such that it is still procedurally normal somehow. But the same can be said of all the unprecedented and tyrannical acts that have happened in Canada for decades now albeit far less subtly since Trudeau became the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Parliament of Canada, or if you prefer, General Secretary of the Workers’ Party of Canada”.

Before each new Tyrannical measure during Covid, anyone who dared suggest what the Trudopian state would do next was called a conspiracy nut. Then after he enacted the exactly predicted measure, the same people would claim it was lawful and a needed policy.

The basis of this second axion was the reversing of process to result.

In a “democracy” or real republic, processes and procedures are established in law such that the outcome maintains the public’s rights and the state’s powers remain limited. And perhaps more importantly, that the procedures determine the truth of a matter to the best of their ability and if truth cannot be established, the matter is dropped as in the case of a criminal court. But in a communist polity, institutions operate dialectically. The process to outcome is reversed. The state decides what outcome they want, and then adjust the process to give that result. And with that understanding, no pouring over Canadian law books or history of politics in Canada was needed to know Carney would become the Supreme Leader with little to no scrutiny by the media, or any typically normal method of getting to that position. The Prorogation of Parliament for the purpose of installing Carney was clearly not procedure and John Carpay made an excellent case that it was in fact illegal. And he is likely right. But Canada no longer operates that way. As we said, the method/procedure to outcome, or Socratic Aristotelian and even Kung Fu Tze (Confusion) paradigm has been reversed.

So moving to at least what may be potential examples, we have two cognitive tools with which to arrive at a more likely prediction for all things political, (which increasingly is all things), the first is that behind every curtain is another curtain, the first revealing something the public will likely be content with as sufficiently outrageous to not pull back the second, and that the method of Socratic civilization, to establish rational processes for truthful and beneficial outcomes has been reversed , such that the outcomes are pre determined and the processes to arrive at them are adjusted before the fact, to give the desired outcome for a communist state. Perhaps an evil version of a posteriori thought, or an ab initio manipulation. It is Evil because the outcomes are always destructive to the public and civilization. Especially at the level of rights.

1. Brian Lilley. The curtain hides another curtain

2. CBC in on the Carney con. This is an example of both axioms. Carney pretends to remove the carbon tax when really he is moving it to another level of the producer to consumer chain, which will likely lead to higher taxes but not called a Carbon tax. It will also have tax on the tax. Carney has said to a closed group of people in Ottawa’s affluent Rockcliffe Park in a talk he gave last fall, that he intended to past Net Zero to Negative Net Zero. I’ll let other people work on what that means.

The second axiom is where he signed an OIC to remove the tax, but that isn’t, as the unobservant are saying, how an OIC is done. Carney is replicating the American system of executive orders which does not exist in the Canadian system, at least de jure. So his critics are saying that this order in council is invalid because he is using powers he doesn’t have.

We would argue that he is making powers up, and they will be enforced, so he does have them. And once it is established that he has executive powers like the US president, and no one squawks too much because we all want the carbon tax to go, his next batch will be profoundly bad for Canadians, and there will be no way to stop them, because he did one, and everyone accepts then that he can. And of course, the police and RCMP do what they are told. So yeah. he signs the cheques so to speak, so he can take these powers for himself as he sees fit. Read the images below the CBC video.

3. Here is a near perfect example of a guy who is paradigmatically locked to a system that was dismantled in all but name many years ago now. In a very real way, we could call this man controlled opposition, even if he is fully committed to our side of the ideological issues. His inability to see what is actually happening based on how he thinks things are supposed to work, makes him an agent of the enemy.

The National Post offers this article which has a brief nod to how unusual this Order in Council is, but not detailing that it is not Canadian procedure, and goes on to explain that the motive is probably to take the main sail out of Piere Poilievre’s campaign, mostly about removing the Carbon tax. But it does explain how Carney is doing with the Carbon tax what a three card monty dealer does with the queen. Maybe that’s how he got his last name.

4. The New York Times has now moved to showing us the second curtain on Covid measures.

Yet in 2020, when people started speculating that a laboratory accident might have been the spark that started the Covid-19 pandemic, they were treated like kooks and cranks. Many public health officials and prominent scientists dismissed the idea as a conspiracy theory, insisting that the virus had emerged from animals in a seafood market in Wuhan, China. And when a nonprofit called EcoHealth Alliance lost a grant because it was planning to conduct risky research into bat viruses with the Wuhan Institute of Virology — research that, if conducted with lax safety standards, could have resulted in a dangerous pathogen leaking out into the world — no fewer than 77 Nobel laureates and 31 scientific societies lined up to defend the organization.

So, the Wuhan research was totally safe and the pandemic was definitely caused by natural transmission: It certainly seemed like consensus.

We have since learned, however, that to promote the appearance of consensus, some officials and scientists hid or understated crucial facts, misled at least one reporter, orchestrated campaigns of supposedly independent voices and even compared notes about how to hide their communications in order to keep the public from hearing the whole story. And as for that Wuhan laboratory’s research, the details that have since emerged show that safety precautions may have been terrifyingly lax.

The article goes to great pains to show how the lab leak theory was suppressed, although fails to mention the NYT role in that suppression. But near the bottom you get to the illusion painted on the outside of the second curtain. The real problem is Trump, RFK Jr. and his “anti-vaccine” stances that they claim, killed a child with measles. At best this article is what chess players would call a gambit. They are sacrificing a Knight to try and get at the King.

POSTSCRIPT:

Those familiar with the machinations Trudeau used to install Mark Carney to the levers of power in Canada may wish to look at this relatively recent video of JT somewhat in this light of this article.

 

Update and video on Helen Grus case

Posted on by

We focus on the Helen Grus hearings because it is one of the clearest and most accurately recorded examples of how a once civilized process of determining truth in order to set the correct outcome based on rule of law and Western values has become a dialectical process of ritual destruction of anyone who’s work or statements threaten state narratives.

The case against Helen Grus was in fact dialectical from day 1. The charge in a Republic style nation would never have been made, because no crime was committed, or even breach of procedure. The process itself violated a large number of fundamentals in terms of how an objective process to find facts takes place.

Illegal means were used by the state and state enforcers to gather incriminating evidence, which was not found in any case.

This is an important issue, and speaks to the nature of the machinery of state as it is today, as opposed to how it was, or was designed to be. Please watch this video below, and check out the detailed description at RAIR.

The RAIR link also has a link to the history of these hearings for those who want more detail.

Trudeau’s classical communist misdirection: War on climate change means sacrificing food and shelter security

Posted on by

The video below has been edited slightly from the longer one put below it. But the idea is intact. Trudeau is amplifying a global climate crisis which does not appear to be even remotely happening, to justify more and more authoritarian measures which will impact our general wealth and well being.

We have been making many allusions to 1984 recently, but hey. If the shoe fits…

2:38 version without cuts at the key points

https://twitter.com/PopeSeabass/status/1858890974283395366

In 1984, a war which may or may not even be happening, is most certainly being used as a distraction for the public in order for them not to question the degree to which they are oppressed.

The following excerpts are from Goldstein, the alleged counter revolutionary leader within 1984’s book

The war is waged by each ruling
group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make
or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society
intact. The very word 'war', therefore, has become misleading. It would
probably be accurate to say that by becoming continuous war has ceased to
exist.

[...]

“The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact.”

When reading things like Rules for Radicals, one thing jumps out. A great deal of Frankfurt School tactics appear to be extrapolations and abstractions of baser Marxist thought. Especially Critical Theory. Lots and lots of Marxist tactics heaped upon us all today is at its essence, critical theory. Homophobia, Transphobia, climate denialism and so on are all mere abstractions on ‘racism’, itself a critical theory attack on Western Civ. After all, in pretty much every other nation and culture in the world, racism as it is defined by the left isn’t just ubiquitous, it’s actual policy. Just ask any white or black man in Japan. Or China. And anyone from the wrong tribe in Africa etc. etc. This was abstracted into an actual crime by the marxists, but for the denizens of the West only.

In this example, the argument is that the war on Global Warming is an abstraction of the perpetual war described in Brave New World. That it is a tool of control of oppression of the non-elites. That Trudeau can say in his usual clumsy direct-indirect fashion, that people should prioritize the climate, meaning the ‘fight to stop global warming’ over their own shelter and feeding their children. War you see, is peace.

Unfortunately the left appears to also be ramping up an actual kinetic war, the effects of which are verifiable for the moment.

But that information is all over the place and until we have something to add, there are many links in the comments and of course on Twitter about what Russia will or will not do, and is or is not doing. Also lots about what NATO is or is not doing, and probably most of that info is utter rotten tripe planted by more sides than we are likely even aware of and for purposes that are not always clear.

But Trudeau’s constant appeal to fighting climate change to justify every authoritarian bill and policy he puts forward is transparent enough to have some real certainty that it is what it appears to be if you look behind the curtain just a tiny tiny bit. A stammering, informal, ‘I’m just like you’ tyrant who fully intends to pull the temple down on self governance forever in every way he possibly can, and using every critical theory attack he can muster up. And most obviously, the utter scientific nonsense of “climate Change” from human produced, CO2.

A short and partial list of common (marxist) terms and a translation to reality

Posted on by

This is a post i have wanted to make for a long time. A Marxist to English dictionary, even if its only half a page. The point of it is to understand how to do it much more than just exposing the specific terms we chose as exemplars. Understanding the principles and methods of Marxist dialectical terminology is critical if you want to have any chance of seeing outside the Matrix.

Communism is not much more if anything at all, than a system for attacking and destroying Western civilization at every level at which Western Civilization operates and exists. More than we are even aware of. Every aspect of our nature from our forms of reasoning and cultures as well as all institutions and professions which support our systems. From medicine to engineers, pilots to teachers etc.

Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals is an excellent manual on how to use orthodox Marxist methods adapted to the early 20th century. And a lot of those methods can be said to be a subset of Critical Theory.

At one level, critical theory is really simple. It is just criticizing everything about the West. Dishonestly, partially honestly, meaning spinning a real thing into something totally other than it really was to make the West, and especially the US look bad, or even honest criticism in an emergency, so to speak. Meaning when a narrative attack isn’t available. But in nearly all cases, Critical Theory is about a fictionalized version of the target and then a critical theory attack on that fiction.

It is because of this that we noticed that the media would sustain a rabid feeding frenzy over any non-white person killed by police either due to no fault of the police, like with George Floyd, or where the person who was shot richly deserved it as they were in the process of committing a violent crime. Even more importantly, that when a person who could be labelled as a black person was killed by police for reasons that were likely genuinely racist, there was little to no media and certainly no major protests or riots.

And this is 100% sensible when one understands that the idea is not to make the system better, but to destroy it altogether. 

When people protest a real problem there is a solution that makes things even better than they were before. But when the problem is synthetic, the solution the rioters want, defund the police etc. is the only option on the table.

Therefore, when we look at the way we are forced to look at race relations now in the West, and particularity the USA, we can see and understand it as a product of :

Critical Race Theory. A critical theory attack on the West by attacking people of European ethnicity, or “white people” as guilty of any number of things for which they have no connection and in many ways no-one ever was guilty as the history is usually partly or fully fictionalized. Certainly the context will be adjusted for the best effect of the Critical Theory attack.

The communists now in control of the schools are becoming more bold now and use the term, Critical Race Theory more openly. But that is what it is. A branch of Hegelian dialectics as interpreted by Marx and refined by the Frankfurt School tactician, Alinsky. This process of abstracting and expanding Marxist methods of attack on the West continue to this day. And the people fighting for the West for the most part do not understand the nature of the attack, and spend all their resources arguing the reality behind the critical theory attack, if they even get that far. In other words, arguing the surface specifics of a given narrative’s claims, while the critical theory attack does its damage.

As we often say, with the left, the point is never the point. The Revolution is always the point.

[I think I first heard that from Diana West but she may have been quoting someone else]

Let’s have a look at a few more terms:

Multiculturalism ~ Critical culture theory.

Like BLM is a marxist expression of critical theory by creating a dialectic confrontation between black and white people with the intention of destroying both ultimately, but ‘white’ people first, Multiculturalism is exactly the same. Bring in people from different cultures. Pretend to the host country that bringing in different cultures really just means interesting new recipes and sophisticated new arts and entertainment. But the reality of Multiculturalism means giving special protection to people from outside the host country to ‘protect their cultures’ while removing basic, even fundamental rights to the citizens of the host country, such that no opposition to what is taking place can happen without the objector being either directly guilty of a crime such as ‘hate speech’, or adjacent to a crime such as ‘racism’ where ‘racism’ while not always and not in all districts is specifically a crime, it can be dealt with by removing additional rights such as social media use, access to banking or even the right to use of a credit card or even accepting credit cards. So while not a crime, it is indeed punishable.

This happened to Robert Spencer for factual and unimpeachable explanations and descriptions of Islam that make Western peoples aware of it as a threat doctrine. Which it is. In case you haven’t noticed. But in all cases, the term, “multiculturalism’ is one deceptive click away from Critical race theory. The use of fictionalized race history and relations, or truthful ones but spun or cherry picked for a political outcome, rather than information. And the outcome is destruction.

Critical Culture Theory is tearing the west apart and down everywhere. And it has moved to pure oppression in the UK.

Climate Change ~ Critical Climate Theory

This one required an extra twist. It required moving from science as a method of understanding the universe, to scientism, where Marxist politicians tell you how the universe works. It is a gnostic cult of the White Coat. Science is never done by consensus. Politics and religion are, and in the case of communism, even that consensus is imposed from above. With Global Warming/Climate Change, we saw experts we never heard of, explain a consensus in the ‘science’ which has ‘already been done’ to explain why the measures being taken to ‘combat climate change’ cannot be questioned. You know, cause so many scientists agree. Real scientists, ones who explain their methods and publish their research get cancelled. Anyone who wants to see an excellent example of this should watch The Cloud Mystery. This is a short documentary by two Danish scientists who actually have a hypothesis on climate and temperature, and then prove it with data going back to Galileo’s first use of the telescope to study the Sun. Then watch the linked video of an explanation on how a Frankfurt School 2nd generation member, Jurgen Habermas, created the framework around which a small minority can impose their will on the majority using ‘consensus’ for political purposes.

Below, a truly amazing example of how Canada’s CBC COMINTERN broadcaster does exactly this. They make any refutation of Critical Climate Theory into hate speech as per Habermas. Have a listen after watching the linked video on Habermas.

But what makes it critical climate theory is its use to destroy Western industry. Communists picked the one marker that all industry in the world produces, CO2, and claimed it is a pollutant and claimed it as an existential threat to the World. Unless it is produced in China, North Korea, or anywhere else already socialist/communist. Then it is not to be mentioned. Like all Critical theory, it is meant to be destructive to Western Civ. And this one is majorly destructive. After all, if it was a real threat the people agitating over it would meet on Zoom and not fly private jets all over the world, and purchasing multi million dollar beach front homes for themselves where they themselves had saiid would be deep under water already from “global Warming”. And we would be building nuclear power plants as fast as we could. Even people who have real or exaggerated concerns about the safety of modern nuclear energy plants, will admit that the risk is not an existential risk to all life on Earth as they claim climate change to be. So in other words, it is a fake problem with real solutions that are avoided, in order to get the solutions they want, which is our destruction.

SOGI (Sexual orientation and Gender Identification) also Gender affirming Care ~ Critical Sex theory.

Destroying how people think of each other in terms of sexuality is a major victory for communists. After all, without reproduction, we go extinct. And yes, that is a victory for communism by some interpretations of communist theory. There are leftist groups across the West now that actively and openly seek human extinction. But as a rule, just for white people. Or more accurately, anyone who supports Western Civilization of any race or colour, as they will be labelled as white people and treated as such or worse by the left. Larry Elder as one clear example.

To the point though, destroying people’s ability to reproduce using drugs and surgical mutilation is a bonus. The main purpose is to destroy how Western people view each other sexually. This one deserves more than its own essay. It deserves a book.

Some point form proofs though, are that China made an official announcement, and passed a law, that no effeminate men can be seen  on TV. In other words, Critical Race Theory is a destructive dialectical weapon against the West and China needs to protect itself from it in case it comes back home. Like Covid.

Below is a truly excellent video on the communist origins of Critical Sex Theory:

DEI ~ Critical institutional theory, or Critical Merit Theory

The whole purpose of DEI is to destroy all the institutions we have. Stephen Coughlin feels it is primarily to destroy our military capability. And it can and it will. But it has already destroyed many other professions. The Merit principle is one of the absolute supporting pillars of Western Civ. The idea that the person best suited for a job and best at it, gets the job, not only enables things to be done well, but advances all of our sciences and arts throughout the history of Western Civ. One can spot quickly the number of positions in leftist governments that use DEI hires, or what we used to call, “Affirmative Action”. An older term used as a disguise for Critical Merit theory. This is not to say that people other than white males are incapable. In fact it has nothing to do with white males. DEI is about making sure the people picked for important and responsible positions are incapable. They would definitely pick a white male for a job requiring training and coordination if the person they picked had advanced Parkinson’s and Alzheimers. In fact they picked one for President of the United States.

The Merit principle also is the best example of actual fairness in human history. Everyone understands when someone who has worked harder, is more dedicated, more talented or simply better at a job gets the job. It was the replacement of nepotism. In fact some historians argue that Lincoln was actually shot by a man who felt that he deserved a well paid and prestigious civil service job by nepotism and was passed over for someone of greater merit. Out of resentment, he shot Lincoln. DEI manufactured the idea that all who are good or accomplished are oppressors, and therefore not deserving. That achievement is cheating. Taking responsibility is privilege and so on. Over the course of the revolution in the West during the past 10 years or so, we see countless examples of Critical merit theory. From Math is Racist to reading to your children is racist.

Harm Reduction:

This is the idea that creating an environment where illegal powerful narcotics can be used with zero legal repercussions and even facilitate its use, resulting in exponentially more addicts, fatalities and resultant crime from the use of these substances, somehow reduces the harm to the users and society as a whole. It is named dialectically as are the others in this list. A case could be made that providing the actual narcotics free could actually reduce harm, as it ends organized crime interest in the purchase and sale, and also guarantees the user a known purity, usually meaning no overdoses. But what the “harm Reduction” policies do is the exact opposite. Harm reduction keeps organized crime at the centre, while eliminating the cost from a legal point of view to the addict. It even removes the shame of it. The results are obvious. EVERYWHERE “Harm Reduction: has been implemented, the number of users has skyrocketed and the real and measurable harm in deaths, serious disease from drug use and prostitution and crime have all risen to the point of destroying entire urban areas.

“Diversity is our Strength” is the dialectic attack on United We Stand, divided we fall. because the intention is to make us fall by division. 

This is only a partial list. Comments are welcome with other phrases used as disguised attacks on us all.

Quick observation about yesterday’s protest against Israel on the Hill in Ottawa

Posted on by

We here at VladTepes believe neither should be a crime, or in fact even is a crime in any sense that was true until recently. The fact that only one is, might be worse than if both are. But the fact is in a free society, neither of these should be a crime at all.

Maybe the thing to do is, spray paint an Israeli flag on a pride crossing, and let the Muslims stamp all over it. That way it won’t be a crime. For that matter, those of you with aging or unsafe cars, maybe put an Israeli flag on it and park downtown, then the Left and anti-Israel muslims can justify an insurance claim for you.

Of course the truth of it is that law doesn’t work that way anymore. You would be liable for any damage to their weapons that the attackers got trying to wreck your car at this point.

Three brilliant and short videos by Counterspell Group which make clear the nature of the enemy’s thinking and effects

Posted on by

This is a post worth bookmarking. The Counterspell group do an astonishing job of explaining the complex simply, and in short form.

Dialectics: Its meaning and origins:

Then, watch this:

Lastly, on Plato’s Republic:

Three incidents of antisemitism which show that communism is implemented by the culture as much as by the state

Posted on by

The first one is a minor but meaningful incident in Australia. While it was resolved by the company and very well, it does not mean that it never happened, or that there is no meaning in it.

Here is a link to a story about how a girl working at a print shop in Australia refused to laminate something for a guy because it had Israeli or Jewish content.

Without doing too deep a dive into this, its likely this worker abused a company rule that allowed them to avoid pornographic material that would be offensive to them in order to justify refusing to laminate this gentlemen’s page. The company did exactly what it should have done, and more. But the question is, how did we get here. How did we get to a place where people can’t show a Jewish heritage or support of Israel, wear a trump hat, or show support for any counter-narrative position without people on the street or with whom they are working with, then feeling justified in whatever measure they may chose to take against you?

Communism it seems, has been implemented via the culture. A Jewish person may not feel comfortable ordering take out when the restaurant staff or delivery person has their name. What might they do rather than just refuse service? Or anyone famously conservative for that matter. We no longer have a trust based society. In fact, we clearly are moving from a de jure society to a de facto one in the sense that it doesn’t matter what the law says when calculating the consequences of expressing a view.  Or even belonging to a group to which others would impute your views onto you and then punish you for them.

The second: A mohel, or a Rabbi specifically trained in how to do circumcisions as Jewish ritual was arrested and jailed and denied bail in Ireland. Keep in mind, Muslims also do circumcision as religious ritual. Not aware of any arrests of their practitioners. And if one imagines that in Ireland they are not doing this also to women with relatively untrained people, they are living in a myopic dream state. This site is full of examples of this having been discovered, right up to where the media stopped reporting on it.

Man in court charged with circumcising child in Dublin

A 47-year-old man has appeared in court charged with circumcising a child at a house in Dublin two days ago without being a registered medical practitioner.

Jonathan Abraham, with an address in London, was remanded in custody.

The judge refused bail on the grounds of the seriousness of the charge, the potential flight risk and the nature of the offence.

Mr Abraham was brought by detectives from Blanchardstown before Dublin District Court.

He is accused of performing a surgical procedure – the circumcision of a male child – without being a medical practitioner.

The offence is contrary to section 37 of the Medical Practitioners Act 2007.

Detective Garda Megan Furey said that she arrested Mr Abraham at 10.15pm last night at Blanchardstown Garda Station and when the charge was put to him, he made no reply.

The court was told that gardaí went into a house in west Dublin on 30 July after 1pm with the consent of homeowners and Mr Abraham was there dressed in a white doctor’s style coat, wearing blue gloves, with medical implements nearby.

Det Gda Furey said that a very young child was naked on a changing pad and a circumcision had been carried out on another child.

She objected to bail. She said he had flown into Ireland at 12pm and had a return flight for 7pm.

Defence solicitor Tertius Van Eeden said that Mr Abraham was a rabbi and a member of the oldest Anglo-Jewish society that governs the practice and procedure for circumcision.

He said he was a mohel, a person trained and allowed to carry out the practice in line with the Jewish faith.

Read the rest at the link above. And whatever your views of this practice are, the issue is the selective enforcement against the Jewish community it in a way that has broader political implications. This kind of enforcement has a word, dia dia something.

Meanwhile in Canada: The hate crime arrests in numbers by a Toronto Police chief.

The concept of hate speech and hate crimes is anathema to a republic. Crime is crime. Motives is up to the trial to determine and punishment is up to the judge to determine based on those motives and the damage done. The notion of thought crimes gives ultimate power to the state and the state will use it in the interests of the state and at the expense of the people. It will be enforced dialectically. We already see that with gangs of communists, college LARPers and Muslims calling for Jewish blood on most Western city streets with a university, and no charges or even statistics recorded. But should anyone say anything that counters the revolutionary narratives, well watch the UK. Here is a link to PJ Watson with a few examples of how the same politicians spoke about violent minority riots in 2020 and the ones this weekend. If they can enforce on reality this diabolically, then what can they do with thought and speech crimes. Hell telling us all what we meant by what we say started as early as the 1960s when words started to be banned for some groups because of what they told us we meant as if we didn’t know why we used those words.

That started a trend in which the entire language became the patented property of the left. You then had to mean what they said, and you better not say it.

As the revolution is not quite complete, or because the above video serves it in some way that isn’t immediately obvious, we see that hate-crimes are still phenomenally more against the Jewish community than against any other group, on top of it being generally protected by the state. Ezra Levant did a great job of demonstrating that with the arson of a Jewish school and several school busses used to bring Jewish kids to school in Toronto. in the past month. The media and police denied the nature of those crimes and the police went so far to specifically deny arson of the Jewish school claiming it was just a homeless guy with a hobo-fire went awry. The Media managed to avoid any mention of the school busses being next to a Jewish school and having Hebrew signs all over them. They only mentioned, the two media that did mention it at all, CTV and City News, that the busses were parked next to a discount grocer.

Since we now know for a fact that this is how it was reported and recorded, at least initially till Rebel found the facts, we can then safely ask, how many attacks on Jewish people, Christians, white people by communists and Muslims are not reported? Once you know the state and the media lies to you, you actually know a great deal. But coming to accept that is difficult.

Demonstration Explainer video of dialectics in under 1 minute by Keir Starmer

Posted on by

Had to add this

Important: Interview with Trevor Loudon on Russian communist philosopher and “Putin’s brain”, Alexander Dugin

Posted on by

A lot to say about this. First of all, it will annoy and frustrate many of our regular readers. This is not the intention. A fuller understanding of the forces at work in the world is our intention.

The RAIR article on this video can be seen here and is a solid representation of the interviewee’s meaning and intentions.

This article is our own specific examination of this material, and an attempt to put it into the greater context of the materials we use to understand the complex nature of the information battle-space which commands our attention, and forms our views of events.

A few notes in terms of Trevor’s statements on the state of the war between Russia and Ukraine: it is hard to believe that anyone that we would get to read, actually KNOWS what is taking place. This site tends to rely on this particular analyst for information on the state of the war between Russia and Ukraine as he has proven to be reliable consistently in terms of locations, wounded and dead and advancement or retreat of forces for either side of the conflict. Therefore, we tend to look at the claims of casualties in the following interview with uncertainty as to their accuracy. Not to diminish Trevor’s interview in any way whatsoever, and perhaps he does have insider knowledge on the war statistics, But that is not the focus of this piece. Alexander Dugin is, and his dialectic of MAGA Communism.

Trevor’s statement of who is best to run the world is entirely correct.

Because the USA has enjoyed total global naval dominance for some time now, the entire world has gotten richer, more peaceful and more advanced.

This is because pirates and hostile nations can no longer threaten international trade on the oceans. And where people are not doing as well as other places is usually because of the dominant philosophy of that region, and usually some form of leftism.

The problem with US global hegemony is that the USA is rapidly devolving into a communist state. And in many ways, already is.

Concerning Alexander Dugin though, this is Trevor’s direct area of expertise. And we have little doubts that he is in the bullseye on this one.

Check this Twitter thread by Stephen Coughlin on a related matter.

Full text:

There’s the old adage that you cannot tell your friend that his wife’s cheating or that his baby’s ugly and keep the friendship. The same thing for people who bit too hard and too long on favored active measures. But there you have it, actually the graphic below. It follows classic Russian Active Measures efforts. Note the four levels of activity. 1. At the top of the AM food chain is a Russian government service like the GRU or FSB. They NEVER engage in direct contact with their assets. They create the entities that do.

2. Entities like RIAC, Strategic Culture, and Global Research are sponsored and staffed by a Russian government service.

These are the entities that make contact with their operatives who are recruited because they’re disgruntled, fired, bruised egos, down on their luck, etc.

3. Then you have Russian media like RTV and Sputnik interview the operatives along favorable lines to establish them as voices.

4. And finally, you have pseudo-populists blast the disinformation into target audiences to normalize the information while sensationalizing it.

Stephen indicates above what organizations are knowingly or unknowingly enacting the, let’s call it the Dugin Dialectic, intended to mobilize the anti-woke patriots against the woke communism we are now all aware of, for the purpose of creating “a more masculine, Stalinist communism” or as it is called in the US, “MAGA Communism.” yes, all will be explained in the video. But those who follow Stephen Coughlin’s work or James Lindsay or TIK History will know that dialectics in its simplest form is about smashing together opposite concepts in order to destroy both. We see that with the Trans movement in spades. A male or female that undergoes surgery becomes a monster, not the other sex. This is the real intention. MAGA Communism can be seen the same way. A dialectic created by Dugin to destroy the MAGA movement in order to create a communist state using the people we refer to as MAGA by appealing to their contempt of, let’s call it left, or ‘woke’ communism.

To explain the terms “left communism” and “right communism,” let’s look at chapters 3 to 5 of Postmodernism Explained by Stephen Hicks. This book is available free as an audio book on YouTube fortunately. 

You can skip to this segment for a brief look at left Vs. right collectivism, although his excellent look at Nazism and the state of Germany before Hitler’s rise to power is later on in the book and is truly an excellent read/listen.

One can think of pre-WWII Germany this way.

Picture a triangle that is 40 feet high and with the bottom two corners 2 mm apart. From even a short distance away, it would look like a straight line. The bottom left is Soviet or international communism. The bottom right corner is national socialism. The differences are Lilliputian to the people observing from the top of the triangle. We can call those classical liberals, or most of us reading this site. People who believe in a republic where the state power is limited and dedicated to protecting the rights of the individual. The bottom two points of the triangle are different in determining how collectivism will be sorted out and the nature of the details of how the state power will operate, (which is absolute in both cases). They called National Socialism “Right wing” because it allowed for some minimal private control of the means of production. But it was still far left by the standards of an individualist oriented person or society.

The immediate pre-Nazi years in Germany saw street battles between ANTIFA acting for the international socialists, and the Brown Shirts acting for the National Socialists. But when the Brownshirts won those battles, the ANTIFA had no problems changing uniforms and joining the Nazis as both factions wanted to destroy the individualists at the top of the triangle. Again, that is all of us reading this site, generally speaking.

Another way of looking at this triangle might be say, how Islam would view itself compared to Catholicism V Protestantism. Some of Europe’s most bitter wars was fought between these two groups yet they would seem identical in all ways that matter to Islam.

With an understanding of dialectics, Trevor’s thesis in this video makes poetic sense. Communist thought constantly creates opposing groups or uses existing groups and makes them oppose each other for the purpose of destroying the existing order (along with both groups) and moving the culture and society to the left. (Again, meaning more state control.)

To be clear, the left means more government control and power, and less individual rights, and ultimately no individualism at all. Communism will not stop until we are all dead, certainly in one way or another such as spiritually, culturally and in terms of identity, and even actually physically dead, or, we are for all intents and purposes, a kind of insect that clones itself and like aphids, is as related to all other aphids as it is to its own direct progeny, and living and believing whatever narratives the COMINTERN demands we accept that day.

The more International term for what could also be called The Dugin Dialectic, is “National Bolshevism”. What the Christchurch Mosque shooter claimed was his affiliation. And it does dovetail with the interview we did with Brad Johnson in 2019 explaining the motives the New Zealand self described National Bolshevik had when he did his attack. While Johnson focuses on his retaliatory intention against the Islamic mass murder and conquest of the Balkans, and all of his claims are clearly true, there is another layer to the Christchurch attacker’s motives. And that is his Duginist influence.

Loudon explains that the symbol of the Dugin movement is the Black Sun. The banner of National Bolshevism. This is also one of the insignias of the Nazi Ukrainian military unit, the Azov battalion, although their use of the symbol is more Nazi than Duganist one can bet, seeing as how they are fighting Russia.

Here is a section of the cover page of the Christchurch mosque shooter’s manifesto. The Black Sun is clearly at the centre of his graphic.

Screenshot

Here is the interview with Trevor Loudon on Dugin and his movement to usurp the patriot MAGA movement as an agent for communism:

 

The only other element I wanted to add to this was teh Stephen Coughlin session with Sam Dubé from a month or so ago. This is a 3 hour plus presentation by Maj. Coughlin but taken with these other materials offers a pretty large and complete tapestry of understanding of the matrix we live in now. It is we think, sufficient to see the plays as they happen and before they happen ,as opposed to stressing over apparent contradictions or inability to recognize the thing inside the wrapper because the wrapper claims to be something other than what is really inside. In other words, the names for things is generally to sell you on the thing itself, which is dialectically opposite to the name.

Think, ‘Trans-affirming care” for ‘the state plans to sterilize and neuter your child and it is a crime if you try and stop it’ as one example.

Looking forward to any thoughts and comments on this interview and thank you all for checking out this site.