I am a little confused about the current liberal/leftist zeitgeist. Is it really the pacifist, social egalitarian ideology it is made out to be, or is it really a cabalistic collusion promoting some occult doctrine?
Ever since Pierre Leroux and Marie Reybaud pinned the term “socialism” to an embryonic sort of egalitarian marketing campaign in 1827, men and women the world over have claimed it to be the only morally acceptable political philosophy. The French bunched these social zealots together and made them sit on the left side of the États généraux, a primitive gathering of thieves and other rogues. It was since the French revolution that those from the left, i.e. Socialists, have been struggling for their cherished cause.
Propaganda by deed
The struggle has always been a violent one; in 1881 Narodnaya Volya, a left-wing group, killed tsar Alexander II and developed the concept of propaganda by deed.
The Nazi Brownshirts and the Italian fascist Squadristi (of the 1920s and early 1930s) were a bunch of street hoodlums who liked nothing better than to pass on their message (mainly to the ‘bourgeoisie’) with fist and gun. Using the Brownshirts and Squadristi model of tolerance and humanity, the left continued to spread the gospel of liberalism and social justice through propaganda by deed.
In 1970, two left-wing cherubs, the Bohemian Andreas Baader and the left-wing journalist Ulrike Meinhof decided that what the left was missing was an army to further the cause and enforce propaganda by deed. Their enforcement involved 296 bomb attacks, arson and other attacks between 1973 and 1995. Their Red Army Faction was still active as late as 2015 when Ernst-Volker Staub, Daniela Klette, and Burkhard Garweg confused an armoured security van for an ATM.
The Italian Red Brigades, the French Action Directe (AD), and the Belgian Communist Combatant Cells (CCC) also enforce their leftist views through propaganda by deed.
Ernesto the friend
Che (friend) Guevara, that nice doctor from Argentina whose revolutionary saccharine stare adorns many a leftist’s tee shirt also firmly believed in furthering the leftist message through physical intimidation and death. I wonder why the mere mention of his name today makes young leftists drool with admiration.
The good doctor was perhaps more in love with violence than Revolution; or was Revolution the best way to guarantee him violence and action? Who knows, but Che's motto was: "If in doubt, kill him." And, Che killed so many people in his revolutionary career that Humberto Fontova said that he was "a combination of Beria (the Stalinist sadist) and Himmler".
The left-wing has never abandoned propaganda by deed. The “Social Movement” is now so widespread that the western world is roughly divided between left and right protagonists. And it is the left that is more inclined to violence, still.
The left is actively adopting more and more “causes” that it is prepared to fight, and kill for. They have, for example, appropriated the entire ecological argument and regularly defend it with violent protest. Recently they have adopted “Globalism” (whatever that is) and they are burning, looting and killing to eradicate the earth of this affliction.
The current generation of enforcers have not abandoned propaganda by deed. The new crop of leftist activists are no less dangerous than their illustrious predecessors. Thomas Eberhardt-Koester and Andreas Blechschmidt have not yet planted any bombs but their followers are clamouring for the death and destruction of all of those who do not agree with them.
A wolf in sheep’s clothing
Everyone knows that the German National Socialists (Nazis) glorified irrationalism and had a profound political commitment to violence. And we are now witnessing a replication of these two positions by International Socialists.
They grab the moral high-ground and perpetrate their so-called principles through a combination of indoctrination and violent action. Although they do not wear brown shirts, the vast majority of journalists and main stream media are faithful to the cause. These same devotees fan the flames of violence at every opportunity through cleaver subliminal messages.
The leftist “storm troopers” ATTAC and Welcome to Hell now provide sensation and entertainment. And the press refuses to make the connection between the ideology and the violence perpetrated in its name.
Believing that the social viewpoint is the most humane and moral way to live is a dangerous mistake. The growing violence and genocidal leftism is set to eclipse even the Islamic madness.
I have been wandering in the desert of objective reality for so long that I have holes in my socks and I still have the feeling that we have been in hell since the birth of socialism in 1827.
Politicians are dishonest, deceitful and underhanded. The different “scandals” that are bubbling to the surface like air logged turds in all of the so-called democracies attest to this fact. Oh, some will cry, not everyone is dishonest; there are some rotten apples but they are in the minority. Hahahahaha.
When they are not outright dishonest and corrupt, they use the system to their advantage – and therefor to our disadvantage. And in my book, that is downright dishonest.
Politiclowns have fine-tuned the system so that they can derive maximum benefit from a system that they not only control, but one that they create by making those very laws and rules from which they benefit. Then they defend themselves by holding the “democracy” banner on high. This charade no longer fools anyone - not even the lowest educated or the most politically naive. Except the politiclowns themselves – they arrogantly believe that they are above the law, or at least above the common (voting) man.
And politiclowns the world over cannot for the life of them fathom why we no longer believe in them. Just shows how far removed they have placed themselves from those that they have sworn to serve. The ivory tower has turned into the tower of Babel. The politiclowns, through the media (main-stream as well as social and alternate) still hammer away in self-righteous dignity about how good, how honest, and how necessary they are to making our lives a better and safer place. Hahahahaha.
The media has also not realised that the public at large mistrust them as much, or perhaps more, than the politiclowns.
So here you have a bunch of racketeers (and in many cases, outright criminals) feeding total bullshit to the public through the media sewer. They do so thinking that they are fooling Joe and Jane Voter, and become indignant when we don’t swallow their bullshit.
The problem is that they have rigged the game in their favour. There are no checks and balances built into the system. And if there once were, they have slowly and unobtrusively been removed from the system. Politiclowns, contrary to what they tell you, are answerable to nobody. Yes, you read that right – NOBODY.
Ethics, to a politiclown means “do whatever you want but don’t get caught”. And as long as you don’t embarrass the head honcho too much you will suffer no consequences. Daddy will get the highly-paid lawyers and consultants to draft a “press release” or organise a “press conference” in order to explain away the mal. Talk about preaching to the choir.
No politiclown that has pushed the boundaries of legality or has gotten caught in some sort of “affair” will voluntarily admit it before it appears in the media. Proof, if such is necessary, that they are fundamentally dishonest.
So how do we change this, you may ask? You force them to change the system so that they become responsible for their actions and that they become answerable to the public. And I don’t mean that they use the age old political snake oil remedy of apologising and promising to change their ways. No fucking way.
Politiclowns must be made to present a plan or program of what they intend to achieve during the year – and then present tangible proof that they have actually achieved what they have said they would achieve. And if they don’t perform, they should be disqualified from their function. There should be no place for mediocracy in government.
Politiclowns should be forced to adhere to an ethics charter. Any deviation from that charter must mean immediate disqualification.
To distance politiclowns for temptation, all forms of lobbying should be illegal. Why? Because lobbying is influence peddling at the highest level. It is the very basis of political dishonesty. Why? Because it is only the rich and influential that can afford to pay for the services of a lobbyist. You the common voting man/woman can only drop your frillys and take it up the brown exit. The pharmaceutical and agro industries are a prime example of just how influential lobbyists are and how the politiclowns are so readily willing to fleece us, and poison us, because big business said so. And don’t get me started on the banking system!
So, you have two options; sit back and accept that politico dishonesty is normal, or start to use you power to change the things that will bring the power back to you. That is the very definition of democracy – the rule of the people by the people.
And not by a thieving, lying autocracy.
How interesting to see the madia, under direction from their politiclown masters, trying to make us believe that we are bad citizens. But then I tend to lose sight of the fact that madia is by definition, the vehicle of propaganda d’excellence. And since the “compassionate liberalists” (also known as “politico-sentimentalists, “bleeding hearts” or “the enlightened”) currently hold the reigns of mainstream madia we are mostly subjected to their views on everything. Since they are fervent believers in their moral superiority, they believe that anyone having a differing belief is wrong and should be converted through indoctrination.
I believe (at my own risk and peril) that the problem is that we are hard-wired to link emotions to moral judgement. This is really scary because if values are emotionally grounded, then all of our moral conflicts cannot ever be resolved. Cross cultural research has shown that just about every value that one group cherishes is rejected by another group.
Good-bye world peace.
So, you rightly ask, what has that got to do with populism?
I am a dyed in the wool cynic (my only redeeming quality) so when politiclowns use the term as an insult toward those who think differently, I immediately get suspicious. Suspicion begets curiosity, so I started to try to understand this phenomenon.
According to the internet God, Wikipedia, “Populism is a political style of action that mobilizes a large alienated element of population against a government seen as controlled by an out-of-touch closed elite that acts on behalf of its own interests.”
Since most people, politiclowns and their elite cronies excepted, feel alienated from the political power fest, they can reasonably be labeled as populists. Feeling alienated is an emotion. It is therefore linked to our moral judgement.
Interestingly Karl Marx thought that estrangement of people from aspects of their Gattungswesen ("species-essence or moral values") is a consequence of living in a society of stratified social classes. “The alienation from the self is a consequence of being a mechanistic part of a social class, the condition of which estranges a person from their humanity.”.
Democracy, especially economic democracy, has created this stratified social structure where a small elite rule over the masses. This has awakened our suppressed political emotions.
Can you see the light?
Deftly leapfrogging your outrage and (dignified) offense, I will get back to the point I was trying to make;
Populism is a euphemism.
Everyone is dissatisfied with the current political (and social) zeitgeist. The politiclowns, being mortally afraid of this situation, have ordered the madia to go forth and indoctrinate the masses with the message that populism is wrong, and that anyone supporting it is bad. That is, you and me! The politiclown elite think that we are all bad and they are good. And we, the popul(list)lation think that they are inept idiots. See the euphemism yet?
Our moral judgement is firmly anchored in our emotions, and our emotions tell us that the system is wrong. We are therefore in conflict with the system, but this is no conflict of morals, the game is rigged; it is plain hegemony. So, before you turn sentimental and misty eyed in front of your preferred politiclown, remember that they don’t give a shit about you. Remaining in governance is the holy grail of every politiclown.
And if you think that voting for a “populist” politiclown will change anything, you are either confused or delusional; they are just another version of the same comic strip.
Industry is working hard to provide you with “things”, to keep you fed, healthy, entertained and mobile. They only do it because you want it, and not because they love making things. Stop buying and they cease to exist. How much simpler could it be?
Industries across all sectors and geographic regions, except maybe North Korea, only exist because you, the consumer, buys the things they produce. And because industry knows that you are feeble-minded they use “marketing” to con you that their things are absolutely necessary to your survival, and you respond like a Pavlovian dog responds to a bell.
In order to produce the ever more complex things that you find irresistible and essential for life, industry must dig up things, burn things and transform things. Doing this is generally very messy and causes great pain to mother earth. How much simpler could it be?
Because you buy things, industry makes money; the most powerful psychoactive device ever invented. Money is also highly addictive; therefore, industry’s greed knows no limits, and you the follower of fashion, continually feed their addiction.
You, the consumer, know very well that industry is raping the planet to provide you with your indulgencies; that industry is raping your wallet to provide you with your little extravagances.
In order to keep up with population growth, industry must extort nature to provide more, mostly finite, elements so that industry can produce ever more things.
How much simpler could it be?
Money is not only addictive, it also highly contagious. The mere thought of it fuels a desperate desire to accumulate more and more, so that it can be spent on buying things.
Humankind defines itself through possession of things; the more you own, the greater, smarter, stronger you perceive yourself to be. So, you continue on your quest to collect more things and more money, without regard to the consequences of your desire.
As long as you feed the beast it will grow until it devours your planet, and you cease to exist.
How much simpler could it be?
Yesterday, I accidently watched a program on National Geographic about an enviro-masochist who travels the world (in carbon guzzling contraptions that fly through the air) with his television crew to document the ravages industry is causing to the planet. A noble, if futile, endeavour. Everyone is painfully aware that we are destroying our planet. We don’t need another television documentary to tell us what we already know. And the great paradox is that if you are able to watch his film, you are contributing to the problem.
What we need is a (humane) way to kill the techno-narcissistic zombies devouring things and chasing the illusion of wealth. What we need is a (humane) way to stop unbridled reproduction of human beings. What we need is to stop thinking that we are smarter than nature, and get back to living simply in harmony with her. What we need is to rid ourselves of our addiction to things, and to define ourselves by the good we do to the earth and its inhabitants.
How much simpler could it be?
The modern economistificator steadfastly believes that the remedy for any problem is growth. Everything must grow, markets, money supply, debts and of course, populations. These geniuses assert that growth is the motor of prosperity. And through complex smoke and mirror acts they entice the ignoramus credulosus into their utopia. Laws are made to promote growth. Growth becomes the only statistic that unites left and right. Growth is the drug that appeases the political mind; the opium of the omnipotent.
One cannot argue with “experts” because they hold the upper hand, they know everything, and you know nothing – that is why they are “experts”. Another problem with arguing against “experts” is that you have the burden of proving them wrong. So, being a fearless sceptic, I have decided to take up the challenge; to disperse the opium clouds and to reveal the truth.
Allow me a small comparison before I bring in the big guns. If you compare your life to that of your father's, you will notice that in the grand scheme of things conditions are near identical; you work the same hours, maybe more. You have the same holidays. You have a similar standard of material comfort (a washing machine, a car, heating, a beer when you want one). Your father retired at 60, while you will have to work to 67. A “doubling” in the size of the economy has not given you (and the vast majority of people like you) any major advantages in terms of free time or choice of what to do with your life.
So, the fundamental question is why do we need a growing economy when such major changes have little effect on real people’s lives? Even in poor countries, growth has failed spectacularly to alleviate poverty.
The experts will have you believe that economic growth is absolutely necessary to keep the wheels of modern life turning (in the right direction). But I think it is just plain econo-politico bullshittery. We don’t need economic growth. Economic growth will not solve the fundamental problems of human behaviour.
Growth will not make you richer, growth will not alter the fact that some will always be much poorer than others, growth will not reduce the incentives to cheat and steal and growth does not make people more charitable and good natured.
Growth is the primary cause of our environmental woes. Further economic growth will undoubtedly exacerbate these issues and reduce living standards.
There can be only two reasons why economic growth is necessary; people want to own more ‘stuff’ so they drink the Cool Aid and live in stress while waiting for financial nirvana, or because elections are won or lost on the state of the economy, and no politiclown wants to lose an election.
So, economistificators dispel growth theories from their assholes so that Politiclowns can win elections and keep the economistificators in a job.
While these shenanigans have been going on, nobody has noticed the adverse effects of perpetual economic growth – not even the “experts”.
When I inadvertently removed my rose-tinted glasses, I could not help noticing that the world is now in an irreversible state of Obesitas Economicas.
Obesitas Economicas (don’t bother to Google it, I made it up for the occasion) is an economic condition in which excess economy (money, things etc.) has accumulated to the extent that it has a negative effect on our, and our planet’s wellbeing. It increases the likelihood of various states of disorders, particularly uncontrollable debt, unemployment, stress related problems, poverty and political constipation. The earth suffers more from growth than humans, probably because the earth does not want to own things, or to go on exotic holidays.
Obesitas Economicas may preventable through a combination of social change and personal choices.
We need to stop pandering to the Economistificators and their lackeys, the Politiclowns. We need to stop believing political promises of a better future, the marketing genie and Playboy magazine. We need to realize that the possession of ‘stuff’ does not define us as humans.
Things go on, until they can’t.
If you believe the current zeitgeist, then colonisation is what destroyed cultures, plundered wealth and exterminated or enslaved entire continents. I don’t. I believe that colonisation was good for the countries and people touched by it. Running around waving the banner of shame at all whites just does not cut it for me. Blaming the colonialist for all the mal of the continent is just plain idiocy.
Consider this; if say, Zimbabwe, was not colonised by Britain, then it is reasonable to think that the Shona would still be living in their traditional manner; that is to say in round mud huts with thatched roofs. Brick and mortar buildings were introduced by the white devil.
They would eat millet, sorghum and cassava and hunt antelope. The colonialist brought them organised agriculture, maize, wheat and beans.
Cooking arrangements consisted of an open wooden log fire. Stoves, pots, pans, cutlery and fine porcelain came in the trunks of the colonialist.
The clothing of the day was made from hides. Textiles and weaving techniques was brought to them courtesy of the whites.
Sanitary arrangements consisted of squatting behind a bush. Toilets and toilet paper was also courtesy of the colonialist.
Governance was by a hereditary chief who would be responsible for the distribution of land, for appeasing the territorial spirit guardians, and for settling disputes. The colonialists brought order, bureaucracy, police and military techniques.
Care of the sick was the domain of the witchdoctor. Whites brought surgery and effective medicines.
The Shona could not read or write, they had no schools. The colonialist brought them this precious gift.
Their economy was based on trading and barter of food and hides. The whites introduced money.
The abundant Gold, Nickel, Coal, Asbestos, Copper, Iron and Silver under their feet would be totally useless to them and their lifestyle. They had not the slightest idea how to extract and process these minerals and turn them into “wealth”. That would need the knowhow and experience of the colonialist.
So, the colonialist brought with him civilisation. The natives quickly adopted all of these life changing wares and ways, with passion and zeal. They adopted our manner of dress; no colonialist ever forced a black maiden to cover her breasts. They adopted our lifestyle, toilets and schools. Then they forced us to “liberate” them; to give them their independence from our evil ways.
Once we were gone, they accused us of stealing their resources but they never considered that those minerals had been useless to them and their lifestyle since their ancestors started walking on their hind legs. Never did they consider giving their useless rocks as payment for entering the civilised world.
We did not destroy their culture, we improved it. We did not exterminate them; they were doing that quite well on their own. The colonialists did not invent tribal wars and ethnic genocide; they were there long before any white man set foot on the continent.
We were not the first to take them into slavery; the Egyptians and Arabs had been doing it for centuries before the colonial era.
Modern Africa has suffered more under its own leadership than it ever did under colonialism.
I say this; stop complaining about the colonialists.
If you don’t like what we brought you, go back to your tribal ways. Throw away the trillions you have stashed in our banks, dress in skins, eat banana’s and shit in the woods.
A fraudulent tailor who’d sold the emperor a suit of non-existent clothes was thrown out of the empire with a warning never to return. Because the emperor of this new empire was an art lover the scammer decided to become an artist.