BLOODY SATURDAY REMEMBERED AND THE FUTURE OF THE WEST

      One year ago today, a paramilitary squad of stormtroopers from nobody knows where swooped down upon and routed a group of workers and citizens killing, injuring, and taking prisoner an unknown number of them. Dissidents had their assets seized, their property confiscated, children were torn from their homes. Protesters were hunted down like animals---what the fate of many of these captured is also unknown. This didn't happen in China or Cuba. It happened on our Northern Border, with our 'Government's' wholehearted approval (if not its actual complicity). 

    Earlier this week, Canada's Rump-Parliament ruled that the Trudeau Regime Administration did not commit any acts worthy of censure during the so-called 'emergency.' Big Surprise. Trudeau and most of his confederates are known operatives of the World Economic Forum; in fact, not only is Tiananmen Trudeau himself in the WEF's 'Young Global Leaders' club, his second-in-command Chrystia Freeland is on the WEF Board of Trustees. The Trudeau Family---like their 'sovereigns', the British Royal Family---are deeply connected with dangerous cult leader, Aga Khan. 

    Since this blog was founded, we have maintained that the two gravest threats to Civilization are Western Neo-Liberalism and religious cults. The struggle for Civilization always has been impeded by variants of these two tendencies. Authoritarian rule rests on a self-appointed 'Elite' backed by paid academics, hired flatterers and unprincipled armed mercenaries. The danger such systems face is that the population might realize the Equality of Man before God and begin asserting their Rights. Thus, leaders of false cults (and not infrequently corrupt officials of mainstream religions) work with the Regimes to mislead the public into accepting the evils of their Governments as morally righteous actions. Benjamin Franklin's maxim "Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God" is reversed; as we saw in the case of Canada where Churches have not only not resisted Trudeau's tyranny, they've fully gone along with and encouraged it. As for Aga Khan, he's practically become Canada's Patron Saint. 

    Lest we imagine. however, that we in the United States aren't only a few steps behind our neighbors to the North on the Road to Serfdom, we would draw your attention to a recent poll alluded to in our last article. Polls in America always should be treated with a measure of suspicion, however after examining this one in more detail, it---sadly---appears to be legitimate and based upon sound methodology. 

   According to these numbers, approximately 57% of Democrats, 63% of Independents, and a whopping 90% of Republicans agree with the statement "The only way our country can solve its current problems is by supporting tough leaders who will crack down on those who undermine American values." Four supplementary polls reveal that over half of these respondents actually mean that they favor Authoritarian Dictatorship and not merely a decisive leader. 

   The implications of these trends should cause us all to take notice. The researchers noted that "Anti-democratic statements are embraced by members of both U.S. parties, but more commonly by Republicans. For example, around 90% of Republicans would support tough leaders who crack down on groups that “undermine American values” – in whatever way the survey respondents define those values. More than half of Democrats take the same position.

  "Perhaps even more notably, nearly half of citizens who strongly support the Republican Party and over a third of those who strongly support the Democratic Party endorse the view that it is acceptable to 'bend the rules' for people like themselves to achieve political goals. This echoes other research that has found Americans, on both sides of the political aisle, are willing to sacrifice democratic principles and practices if it means their political party wins elections."

   This certainly puts America's rather passive acceptance of Electoral Fraud into some perspective. There's hardly any doubt among anyone cognizant of the facts that at least a high percentage of Democrats and the Left not only agree with bending the rules, but actively doing so. The worrisome thing is the high percentage of Republicans who believe in it. What these numbers show is that some of the alarming trends we saw in 2022---and described in four articles beginning here---are not an illusion, but have become deeply entrenched in the party system. 

   What we're witnessing here is a radical departure from Trumpism (which was really closer philosophically to Reagan, Nixon, and Eisenhower) towards the variant Deep-State Republican ideology of the Bush Machine. It's not without reason we've always referred to the Alt-Right as Alt-RINOs. The Bush brand of 'Conservatism' is based on Elitism and disregard for the Constitutional Rule of Law. Trump's ability to achieve positive goals came from the fact that he enforced the laws---i.e. made the Constitution work, Obviously, people who engage in rule-bending for power and profit don't like to see laws enforced; and it's no coincident that many of the hucksters driving the so-called 'New Right' are Never-Trump special interests from the 2016 campaign. 

   To put this in perspective, note that only about 10% of Republican and GOP-supporters strongly disagreed with the question:  "If political leaders believe that a news organization is attempting to undermine American values, they should take action to shut down that news organization." Ironically too, this coming from the same group complaining the loudest about Cancel Culture. Cancel Culture is indeed evil; but numbers like these prove that too many aren't opposing it on grounds of violating the 1st Amendment: their only real problem with it is that it is being directed at the wrong people. 

   The real antidote to both Cancel Culture and Woke-Left Media bias would be to enforce antitrust laws against the Media Cartels. If 90% of the MSM was diffused between 50 companies like it was in 1980 compared to the 6 conglomerates which dominate it today, we'd have information instead of narratives again. Unfortunately, practically nobody on the Right is even discussing this. Instead, they seem infatuated with the likes of Elon Musk doing hostile takeovers of existing monopolies and simply turning the 'narrative' in a different direction. 

   With the recent memory of Bloody Saturday still fresh in even dope-addled American minds, why would there be such a clamor for a strongman here? The article touches on two points, both of which fundamentally are correct. They note at first that this attitude is not recent---although today's numbers are higher. "About two decades ago, an important study found that roughly 1 in 4 Americans supported leaders who are uncompromising and take decisive action. These people said they would also prefer non-elected experts to make decisions." The study to which the authors refer was conducted at the University of Nebraska in 2009, at the end of the Bush term. That date alone is nearly self-explanatory. Based on my own memories, about 1/4 Americans applauding and supporting Bush's unprecedented shredding of the Constitution sounds about right for the period. This was roughly within a decade of the Oklahoma City Bombing, the Columbine  Massacre, another disputed Election, and the September 11th Attacks. Of the latter, Pew Research notes that

   "Just as Americans largely endorsed the use of U.S. military force as a response to the 9/11 attacks, they were initially open to a variety of other far-reaching measures to combat terrorism at home and abroad. In the days following the attack, for example, majorities favored a requirement that all citizens carry national ID cards, allowing the CIA to contract with criminals in pursuing suspected terrorists and permitting the CIA to conduct assassinations overseas when pursuing suspected terrorists...It was clear that from the public’s perspective, the balance between protecting civil liberties and protecting the country from terrorism had shifted. In September 2001 and January 2002, 55% majorities said that, in order to curb terrorism in the U.S., it was necessary for the average citizen to give up some civil liberties. In 1997, just 29% said this would be necessary while 62% said it would not."

   More recently, we saw similar support for suspension of Civil Liberties during the COVID-19 Scamdemic. The numbers since then were predictable, as we mentioned in a recent article: "We saw in 2020 a foretaste of how Americans will behave in an atmosphere of mass-hysteria. They've shown then and since that at least half will have little reluctance to turn on their neighbors or even family at whatever 'emergency' our overlords have ginned up. The 'war mentality' that's been sown in the American psyche since Bush 41 unveiled the New World Order: aside from the endless literal wars against so-called 'enemies', Americans have been bombarded with drug wars, gender wars, tobacco wars, wars on terrorism, wars on climate, wars on drunk driving, wars on extremism, race wars, etc: liberally punctuated with outbursts of Russophobia, Sinophobia, paedohysteria, fears of immigrant 'invasions' and 'health emergencies."

   This is not by accident: it is completely by design and part of The Strategy of Tension which the Deep State has been cultivating since at least 1990. This is also known as The Culture of Fear, heavily promoted by the scum in Big Media. The method and purpose of such tactics is to sow a mistrust of one another and of the world at large, to increase child-like dependence upon authority figures. Here again we see the interaction of totalitarian ideologies and the practices of cults. This is natural since our Deep State's psyop program was developed by the founder of a cult. 

   The Strategy of Tension is the second---and main---reason for the growing acceptance of Authoritarianism. This article itself recognizes the basic premise. "The key to understanding these views, we believe, is a desire for protection. Many Americans view those in the other party as existential threats to the country and closed-minded, dishonest, immoral, and unintelligent too. All this coexists with growing evidence that more people are willing to support political violence under certain circumstances. Many citizens prefer leaders who are willing to undermine democracy if it means protecting people like themselves from groups that threaten their values or status. Although most Americans do not subscribe to these beliefs, a substantial portion of the country does."

   Psychologists who have studied the effects of abuse in relationships on a personal level understand that trauma induced on a national scale can cause many of the same types of Post-Traumatic Stress on a larger level. Dutch psychologist Bessel van der Kolk wrote that: 

   "In child abuse or spouse battering, this mechanism is accentuated by the extreme contrast of terror followed by submission and reconciliation. When such negative reinforcement occurs intermittently, the reinforced response consolidates the attachment between victim and victimizer. During the abuse, victims tend to dissociate emotionally with a sense of disbelief that the incident is really happening. This is followed by the typical post-traumatic response of numbing and constriction, resulting in inactivity, depression, self-blame, and feelings of helplessness. Walker describes the process as follows: "tension gradually builds" (during phase one), an explosive battering incident occurs (during phase two), and a "calm, loving respite follows phase three). The violence allows intense emotional engagement and dramatic scenes of forgiveness, reconciliation, and physical contact that restores the fantasy of fusion and symbiosis. Hence, there are two powerful sources of reinforcement: the "arousal-jag" or excitement before the violence and the peace of surrender afterwards, Both of these responses, placed at appropriate intervals, reinforce the traumatic bond between victim and abuser. To varying degrees, the memory of the battering incidents is state-dependent or dissociated, and thus only comes back in full force during renewed situations of terror. This interferes with good judgment about the relationship and allows longing for love and reconciliation to overcome realistic fears." This is of course a pattern which both cult leaders and aspiring dictators employ. They create the surreal dichotomy of being both the source of the Trauma and the protection against Traumatic experiences. We hear much today about school bullying: what's often overlooked is that juvenile bullies often form gangs around them composed of other victims of bullying who've identified with their tormentor and become loyal to them. Most grown-up bullies---who seem to drift towards positions of authority---do essentially the same thing in their respective social milieux. 

    Van der Kolk also explains how narcotics play a part: "Freud observed that early memory traces can be activated by later events that cause partial reliving of earlier traumas in the form of affect states, anxiety, or re-enactments. Patients generally had a poor memory for traumatic childhood events, until they were brought back, by means of hypnosis, to a state of mind similar to the one they were in at the time of the trauma. In the past few decades, these notions have gained scientific confirmation with the discovery of state-dependent learning; for example what is learned under the influence of a particular drug tends to become dissociated and seemingly lost until return of the state similar to the one in which the memory was stored. State dependency can be roughly related to arousal levels. For example, state-dependent learning in humans is produced by both psychostimulants and depressants: alcohol, marijuana, barbiturates, and amphetamines as well as other psychoactive agents... Disinhibition resulting from drugs or alcohol strongly facilitates the occurrence of such reliving experiences, which then may take the form of acting out violent or sexual traumatic episodes."

    It's not without reason therefore that the Deep Statists both in Canada and the US also encourage the breakdown of family, faith, and community, as well as promoting the consumption of narcotics. 

   This is why it is extremely important for those of us on the Right not only lay these facts out to the general public; but it is also highly important that we expose and call out the same tendencies within our own movement. The fantasies of various pundits notwithstanding, a Right-Wing dictatorship is no improvement over a Left-Wing one. No government that disregards the Constitution and holds that Rights are unequal is going to amount to anything positive.