CHRISTMAS AT HOME AND ABROAD IN 2021

     While the Mainstream Media is busily instilling in Americans a Yuletide spirit of the cheerless gloom that their Masters behind the Great Reset hope to make the New Normal, we've managed now to make it to a second Christmas since the Putsch. Most Americans have already forgotten the spectacular Christmas pageants held at the White House during the last Administration's term, even though it was less than five years ago. 

     But Americans preferred going back to their lives of drug-fueled drama, mass-hysteria, and internacine hatred and so, the first Christmas of the New Order is marked by relatives turning away family over the Loyalty Vaxx, artificial price inflation, and fake shortages and incessant scoldings from the Intelligentsia. The Junta kicked off the celebration of the most famous Birth in history by approving over-the-counter abortion pills. They've been celebrating the Advent of the Prince of Peace by threatening atomic war. Meanwhile both the nominal Head-of-State and his surrogates have been encouraging further division and segregation based on one's loyalty to the State; and the Pentagon is advocating turning its weaponry on American Nationals. Millions of Americans are facing job loss as the purges begin ramping up. The cities of Chicago, New York, and Washington announced this week even more repressive curfews and home detentions. 

    Not to be outdone, the rest of the Anglosphere and their satraps in the EU have been accelerating their repressive measures. Despite things like bringing back Secret Police Forces to enforce mass-segregation of the Disloyal and unleashing brutal suppression of protests, the EU has sent their official Goodwill Ambassador Riccardo Simonetti to promote the new spirit of the Christmas Season.

    Which is why I say that we who live in so-called 'Western Democracies' should make the most of this year's Christmas Festivities, because at this rate we're unlikely to have too many more future opportunities to do so. 

    Meanwhile, though, it's not all doom and gloom because some countries and cultures still respect Christmas. 

RUSSIA:

SYRIA:

CHINA:

IRAN:

   But let's not forget, we are the 'Exceptional Ones.' 

     Spite all of these jerks: have a mask-free, friendly, and fun celebration with a good dinner and lots of presents and decorations. Christmas stands for Peace and Joy and everything else the Elites hate. 

AMERICAN MASCULINITY IN DECLINE, PART II

     During the last two weeks, there was considerable excitement---mostly in the Catholic circles---about a case going to the Supreme Court which had the potential to reverse Roe vs. Wade. The case to my mind, seemed suspect from the beginning. Why would the Republicans be pushing this issue after nearly 50 years of doing absolutely nothing? The case fizzled out, essentially; but it lead to the Junta approving the sale of over-the-counter abortifacient pills. Always follow the money. Big Pharma's got another windfall, and fetal-tissue traffickers like Planned Parenthood can cut down on their overhead costs. It's also quite noteworthy that the Regime approved this move within a week of the holiday honoring both the world's most famous Birth and the world's most well-known Mother. If nothing else, the leaders of the New Order are big on their symbology. 

    Contrary to what the clucks in the Manosphere like to say, the Rise of the Abortion Industry (and Radical Feminism in general) is a result of the Decline in Masculinity which began infecting the West during the last half of the last century. We were discussing the first stages of the decline in the previous article, and we saw how a weakened and degraded generation of men promoted Radical Feminism; which women of the 1950s through the early 1970s regarded as mostly a fringe movement. 

   Despite today's dogmatic Settled Science, the position of power that modern women find themselves in is not a normal condition. Women haven't come to this position because of some mythological neo-Marxist proletarian rising of consciousness; nor is it because of what the Red Pills claim about some equally mythological 'Feminine Imperative.' The Feminine Instinct is ultimately to give herself to a Male strong and secure enough to allow her to build a safe and stable home. What's commonly termed female rebellion is always reactionary in nature. Whenever we see feminine assertiveness against masculinity, it's against male weakness---not strength---that they are actually protesting against.

   Revisionist historians like to point to World War 2 characters like 'Rosie the Riveter' and pretend that women became aware of their own 'power' and independence from men. Nothing could be further from the truth. Women of the late 1940s in general were relieved that the war was over so that they could go back to homemaking again. 

      The same Social Scientists who noted the decline in postwar masculinity also noted that the levels of dissatisfaction among women with the problem was also rising. Before 'No-Fault Divorce' became normative US law, the American divorce rate was already climbing well into double-digits throughout the 1950s. In 1952, psychiatrist Frank Caprio wrote: "Today, 34 out of every 100 marriages end in divorce. Divorces mean one thing: more broken homes which, in turn, jeopardizes the security of the children of tomorrow. Psychiatrists will bear me out when I say that the number of neurotic wives whose psychosomatic complaints can be traced to sexual frustration are legion." 

      Concomitant to those trends, America began to experience an increase in sex crimes. J. Edgar Hoover noted as early as 1947 that "the most rapidly increasing type of crime is that by the degenerate sex offender." Benjamin Karpman, the leading authority on sex crimes of that day wrote that, "Exhibitionism is the most commonly reported offense: comprising between 20-35% of all cases," and noted that most offenses of the time were of this passive-aggressive nature. Of the cause of this particular crime, Karpman further stated that "Exhibitionism may be a compensation for phallic inferiority or psychic impotence. Exhibitionists often suffer from inferiority, inadequacy, and impotence. They need to demonstrate their masculinity and potency...Most are quiet, docile, and submissive; they have made few attempts to adjust heterosexually." Lowell Selling pointed out the same year that "The exhibitionists usually believe that their potency is declining." So much for all the romanticization of the 50s and 60s males as masculine archetypes. 

     In the 1945-1975 period, the reaction of women to the decline in masculinity was also apparent in popular culture. Women of the late 40s to early 60s had a strong tendency to Escapism, which was manifested in the rise of television dramas especially those featuring strong, adventurous, and heroic men. Hollywood films were romantic adventures featuring knights, pirates, and other fighting men who typically were also strictly monogamous. The mid 60s to early 70s, the attitude of women took on a certain air of Desperation. There was an unmistakable sense that finding a worthy husband was a major concern for many of them. Pop culture directed at women then mostly centered on relationship struggles. The more fantasy-driven genres began taking on surreal tones of women in highly unusual circumstances holding marriages and relationships together.

     The reason that women began to embrace Radical Feminism during the 1970s and 1980s was less ideological and more reactionary. In individual relationships, women will always push back against weak men. The first instinct of a female is protection of her home, which she'd rather defer to a man but will step into his place if she feels that she has to. Secondarily to that, her devotion to the man leads her to try and shame him to assuming his masculine responsibilities. In the wider social field, the rise of Feminism in the 70s and 80s was that same dynamic played out on a larger scale. 

     If American men then had stood up for themselves and had even a shred of self-respect left, things like legal abortion and no-fault divorce never would have become two defining aspects of our culture. In historical hindsight, it's difficult to comprehend the suicidal course that men of that generation seemed to have willingly followed. We know from tradition that God's First Commandment to the first man was to "maintain the Garden and defend it," which was followed by the creation of "a helpmeet" and the two were tasked to "be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth." And so we see the traditional beginnings of the Family as the basis of Civilization. We also know from (real) Science that men not only have an instinct to obey this tradition, but that they also have an instinctual fear of insignificance, inferiority, and failure. It is not a natural thing for human beings to go against their own instincts.

     It's no argument to blame women per se, because they've only done what women always do: "Whither thou goest, I will go," and followed the men over the cliff. In spite of all of the contemporary virtue-signalling about empowered women, they're still doing the same thing that their mothers and grandmothers did during the 70s. The only difference is that women then were trying to recall potential men back to a sense of responsibility whereas today, women have largely given up and sunk to the levels of modern men. If we continue at this rate, there will be no gender distinctions left within a decade. 

   What was really an undercurrent of a problem among men during the 50s and 60s became overt in the post-Vietnam Era. WW2 servicemen returned and were celebrated as heroes. Korean War servicemen returned home and were treated with indifference. Vietnam War veterans were treated with contempt. For those of us who grew up during the 70s, 80s, and 90s, the Vietnam Veteran become a symbol of the antihero to whom many of us who rejected the growing cultural Misandry and demasculinization. 

   But the mere fact that traditionally masculine archetypes had become antiheroes was in itself a testimony that the tide had turned against us. Heroes of film and literature were men operating outside the Letter of the Law---typically over the interference and objections of weak, pandering superiors. That was the perfect symbology of the State of American manhood during the 70s and 80s. It was even reflected in the political divisions which really first manifested at this time. In the 70s we had Gerald Ford---a premier legal scholar, war hero, and former star athlete---against the likes of effete degenerate a la Jimmy Carter. The 80s saw the Election of a robust Ronald Reagan as president alongside the conniving, compromising George Bush as vice-president. Ford and Reagan were both so thoroughly hated by the Mainstream Left that they became somewhat like political antiheroes, even to this day. 

    The rise of the antihero showed that in the period roughly from 1975-1990, there was a strong feeling among many men that something had gone radically wrong. Men were in fact being marginalized by weaker men who wouldn't have been able to compete in a fair and normal society. Corporate America in general wanted more women in the workplace because they could be paid less and would tolerate workplace environments that self-respecting men would not. Big Pharma and the Insurance Cartels liked Abortion-on-Demand. Larcenous Divorce Lawyers found a quick dollar in No-Fault Divorce. And American men? They were freed of the responsibility of supporting families. In fact, it was only the responsible, traditional men who suffered from these changes. They were the ones who got edged out of their careers, stiffed for unfair alimony and child-support burdens, and lost control of authority over their own offspring. 

   This has brought us to the point where we are today. The weakness of postwar men produced another generation of men unprepared and unable to function as men in a socially useful way. The best of the younger men have a sort of malaise about them too; most of them have learned useful occupations and try to cope with from which they are alienated as best as they can. One gets the sense from talking to most of them that their philosophy of life is deeply Fatalistic. Most of this class of men have a level of personal satisfaction and self-respect, but it exists side-by-side with a hopeless view of the future. 

   Others sacrifice their self-respect and go along with the New Normal. A large percentage can't cope and turn to violence, narcotics, perversion, and end in either suicide or a violent outburst. Then the ridiculous Red Pills enter the mix and compensate for their latent homosexual tendencies by doing a lot of peacocking and blaming women for their failures. 

   As we mentioned before, this is not a sustainable social situation. If anyone doubts this, they should spend some time reading the opinion pages in a few foreign news outlets. The Russians, the Chinese, the Moslems, and even resurgent elements in India, Turkey, and Japan---all societies far more virile than we are---sense our weakness and are circling the Anglosphere like a bunch of sharks that have smelled blood in the water. Nature abhors a vacuum and Nature is never cheated; and if we don't start turning boys back into men again, Nature is going to step in and do it for us. The question is: how do we do it?

 

AMERICAN MASCULINITY IN DECLINE

   During the Summer of 1945, President Harry Truman announced to the nation that the Second World War had officially ended; and that the menace of global Fascist tyranny had been neutralized. The task of rebuilding and returning to normal lay ahead. Truman reached out to the Allied Powers who'd shared in the mission to help rebuild. The international situation was still very unstable; but the general mood of the nation was upbeat. While in the midst of a severe economic downturn, the attack on Pearl Harbor destroyed most of military capability; but we'd come together, rallied, and came back to win a two-front war within four years.

   But somewhere between then and now, the American people collectively lost it. The cracks in our society began showing not long after the war. It first really became apparent during the Korean War. Military veterans of WW2 remarked that the quality of personnel had declined radically from just a few years before. In 1950, the American Army was in full retreat: the North Koreans had beaten us down to a mere beachhead and were poised to push us off the Peninsula. Had General MacArthur not come out of retirement to execute a brilliant military maneuver, it would have concluded in a massive defeat. 

   Social scientists and medical professionals also saw ominous signs. As early as 1948, psychiatrist Theodore Reik published Masochism in Modern Man, were he noted a sharp increase in masochistic and submissive tendencies appearing in postwar male subjects. "It is important to note" he writes, "that masochism as a perversion is rare among women while it certainly is the prevailing perversion among men... it is the most frequent and the most significant sexual perversion in our society and as such determines the sexual behavior of innumerable representatives of our civilization. The masochistic attitude is of still greater importance because it proves the possibilities of cultural utilization of the deviation."

    Throughout the 1950s and early 1960s, the weakness of postmodern men was becoming alarmingly apparent. To their credit, the Mass-Media of the day tried to counter it with heroic cultural archetypes. The patriot, the Western hero, the soldier, policemen and detectives, secret agents, and astronauts were---along with the strong modern family man were held up as ideals. But the ideal and the reality were becoming widely separated. Advertisers noted that the primary audience for these shows were American women. They were obviously seeking what they didn't find in their own lives. Psychiatrist Frank Caprio noted in the 1950s that: "While modern man is more sex conscious than ever before, he is still a sexual ignoramus...many men are egocentric and uninformed and are anything but 'God's Gift to women'. Their ignorance {and indifference} towards the average woman's emotional make-up and of the proper sex technique is colossal."

    Postwar social scientists saw especial concerns here, because most of them had spent the war itself engaged in research of the psychological and social conditions in Axis countries. It really became apparent through these studies that nearly all of the Axis leaders were perverts and sexual degenerates of long standing. Some who dug a little deeper learned that other totalitarian and radical movements had the same tendencies well-represented among their own leaders. There was a strong consensus that sexual dysfunction and attraction to authoritarianism had at least a statistical correlation. But even more troubling was the fact that the same weaknesses and degeneracy among the American male population manifesting in the 1950s and 1960s were noted by European scientists during the 1920s and 1930s. Wilhelm Stekel, who lived in the heartland of where the Nazi Movement began, wrote in 1927 that among German men: "Sexual inadequacy is increasing to an alarming degree and impotence has come to be a disorder associated with the rise of modern civilization (i.e. the situation in Weimar Germany after WW1)...The percentage of relatively impotent men cannot be placed too high. In my experience hardly half of {postwar German} men enjoy normal potency."

    

   When the U.S. entered the Vietnam War, the problems noted by military leaders in Korea had become infinitely worse. In WW2, American military units were characterized by effective teamwork; in Vietnam the responsibility fell mostly on the individual soldiers who able or willing to do the work. Needless to say, this had a terrible effect on morale and discipline. Domestically, this was made even worse by widespread Draft evasion and an open revolt among American men against anything even remotely resembling traditional masculinity. Men compensated for their growing effeminacy by advocating for 'free love' and shirking familial responsibilities. The archetype of the American became a slovenly, self-centered, drug-addicted loser sponging off society and giving nothing in return. 

   By the 1970s, American women joined in the general decline. Most of them until then had rejected Feminism which was always promoted by the defectives among their gender. By then though American men had sunk to the point where they were willing to let women take over their social responsibilities. We've never recovered from this decline and it's highly unlikely that we will. It's interesting to note that modern so-called 'Conservatives' look back to men of the 50s as role models while modern so-called 'Liberals' find the 60s male appealing. They are really two sides of the same coin. 

     It's difficult to decipher exactly what led to this decline. The wars we fought that we fought between 1898 and 1945 cost about 400,000 of our best men dead and another 880,000 wounded, as well as another 80,000 missing. That's a huge toll to take on a nation's best men. Consider that 3/4 of these numbers were from World War II alone. Unlike previous warfare which consumed a lot of cannon fodder, modern warfare calls for the sacrifice of the best and most able men. The conditions that Stekel had described in Germany likewise occured after the Germans had lost a whopping 15% ---about one in six---of its young men during WW1. 

   Another factor to consider is that family men who served in WW2 were absent from home on average of from 3-6 years. That's about double the time absent during the wars with Spain, WW1, and some of the other conflicts of the period. During the 1898-1941 period, even a professional military man was rarely away from home on the battlefront for longer than six months. The situation during WW2 left a lot of children de facto fatherless during their most formative years. We can well imagine that the transition from extended military service to traditional family wasn't very smooth for many of these fathers. 

   While an interesting theory, it doesn't tell the whole picture. The fact is we didn't see anything like this kind of an impact on the generations who followed the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the Mexican War, or the US Civil War earlier. Those wars were not only costly; they were fought mostly on American soil and impacted the average American even more than the later ones did. In fact, they seem to have had the opposite effect and produced men even more virile and robust than before. 

   Other possible explanations include other environmental factors such as the proliferation of narcotics, less healthy diets, environmental pollution, etc. Those aren't sufficient explanations however. As noted in the psychological abstracts, the decline effected men much heavier than women in the 50s and 60s; and it really wasn't until the 70s and 80s that women were taking on the same defects. Actually, even during that period, it was mostly reactionary and it's been from the 90s and later that we've seen a parallel rejection of femininity. If the causes were organic, it would have impacted both genders simultaneously---which is not what happened. 

  Another theory is that masculinity declined through defective education. The Long March of Cultural Marxism seized our institutions mostly through the schools during this period. But this explanation, too, is inadequate. Just like Radical Feminism, Cultural Marxism could have been stopped if it had met with even a shred of resistance. Instead, American men mostly capitulated to it and even encouraged it. Actual Communism is friendlier to traditional masculinity than the latent homosexuality of the American 'woke' Left is today.

    What is responsible for the decline and fall of American Masculinity? All of the theories proposed so far are doubtless contributing factors, but none alone actually explain the root cause. It would be interesting to consider opinions on the subject, because understanding the fundamental cause is a first step towards fixing it. Looking back to our ancestors' examples isn't enough at this point. Younger men can't relate to it and the sociopolitical infrastructure doesn't support it. Nonetheless, it's a problem that can't be ignored any longer. As of this writing, 1 in 8 American men under the age of 30 are clinically impotent and about 1 in 6 identify as not exclusively heterosexual. Suicides and narcotics overdoses rank higher than most diseases and accidents as a cause of male mortality. Recent studies indicate that high percentages of American men don't believe in God or believe that life has a purpose, have no interest in starting families or raising children, and consider work of any kind meaningless. It's obvious that we can't sustain this kind of a decline. But how do we find our way out? That answer is not so obvious. 

   

10 MORE SHOPPING DAYS 'TIL THE BOMB

       Admittedly, living in a society where living under the threat of potential atomic war and annihilation was something the two generations (i.e. the WW2 and Boomer generations) experienced more than I did. I graduated not long before the Soviet Union collapsed. The threat of The Bomb was something I remember mostly from childhood. Yes, we were taught what the Air Raid Siren meant and where the fallout shelters were. My uncle had a white helmet marked 'CD' and we were taught that they were there to help us in an emergency. There were regular tests of something called the Emergency Broadcast System on television and radio. 

     Growing up as a child in area where tornadoes, blizzards, and the occasional factory or railway disaster made the news with some regularity, it was hard to understand what 'emergency' could be more serious than that: none of these things were ever mobilized for such mundane catastrophes. As a child, it's somewhat difficult to wrap one's mind around the idea of something more of an emergency than that.

     Children, of course, have an underdeveloped conception of reality. Unfortunately, in our postmodern dystopia, adults are having a difficult time with the concept as well. The Bomb has made it's way back into public discourse. Last week alone, some stupid Neocon said publicly that the US should not rule out the use of atomic weapons to curb the alleged 'imperial' ambitions of Russia and China.

    After the Junta seized power in 2020, it was inevitable that war would be somewhere in the scheme of things. History teaches us that when megalomaniacs take over powerful nations, their first impulse is to conquer other countries that stand in the way of world domination. Usually this happens around the same time these regimes have run out of domestic resources to plunder and have a perpetually angry populace looking for a scapegoat. Not to mention that when this Regime has a stated goal of global depopulation, an atomic warhead or two is a rapid way to meet this objective. 

    Aside from the fact that neither West Ukraine or Taiwan is worth defending (even by their own citizens), the idea that the US and it's NATO lickspittles are capable of winning a nuclear war with anybody is so delusional as to be laughable were it not so serious. The Bomb isn't just something one drops and solves all of their problems. Much of this stupidity stems from the hubris generated over our recent history of militarily pulverizing small and relatively defenseless nations after hysterical media campaigns had the Ameroboobs worked into frenzies that, unless we intervened immediately, Serbian or Syrian panzer divisions would be rolling through the streets of Chicago and Baltimore. Haitian and Panamanian Expeditionary Forces would be landing on our shores at any moment: and even Iraqi or Libyan bomber squadrons could have free control of our skies!

    Neocon idiots have discussed deploying on these countries too before. But we've apparently reached a stage where these clods have started believing their own propaganda. Both the Russians and the Chinese have warheads capable of reaching North America; as well as dozens of US/NATO bases well within their range. And the fact is that the United States is utterly unprepared to prevent any of that from happening. We have had no significant upgrades in domestic missile defense since the 1990s; and no Civil Defense programs to speak of since the 1980s. How many of us know where the nearest fallout shelter is? The average Russian or Chinese does. 

    Our atomic offensive capabilities too are in disarray; and the situation has become so bad that President Trump ordered upgrades. But it was Orange Man Bad; and the Scamdemic/Color Revolution sidelined most of those projects. Even the Junta seems to have grasped that Trump was right and lately has been putting the Pentagon to work analyzing the situation. Sadly, they seem to be operating on the idea that stopping the Russian or Chinese can be achieved with our outdated technology---largely because they are hopelessly ignorant of the capabilities of either of those two nations. 

   Effects of an atomic war---which incidentally haven't been studied for many years---estimate that one-half to three-fourths of the US population would not survive. None of these deficiencies have been discussed by the hired Corporate Media which is puffing off this rather serious threat with no more concern than they have for rising gasoline prices. What bodes even worse for us is that the average Ameroboob doesn't even see the danger. Walking around in a drug-induced stupor, he's looking for any target whom the Media tells him to focus his rage.

   How great a threat is Atomic War? The state of Denial and Unreality which most Americans are living in makes it a real open question. The political leadership here has degenerated as much as society in general has. We've had a few shock-jocks on the Right who've pompously declared that we should turn Iran and North Korea "into glass." Typically though the Deep State scum---whether Left or Right---beat their chests and talk tough, but slink away whenever a major power stands up to them. 

   The real danger here is that the seeds of nuclear destruction is being planted in the Ameroboob mind as a legitimate policy weapon. During the Cold War, the threat of The Bomb insured negotiations. Nobody wanted to launch the First Strike because the Retaliatory Strike would mean Mutually-Assured Destruction. But that's not what's happening here. These psychopaths are apparently assuming that a First Strike is not only justifiable, but that other atomic powers wouldn't dare retaliate. The International Bully has made a fetish of projecting his own power and duped his supporters into believing in his invincibility. Clinton, Bush, and Obama may have slithered off when faced down and the Junta still might do so. But that doesn't mean that future generations who've been raised on the Might Makes Right philosophy is going to exercise the same level of prudence. When you have majorities in Western nations who have no qualms about turning the police and even military loose on any group whom they've convinced themselves are a "threat;" it's highly unlikely that they be squeamish about committing atomic massacres. Nor will they have any misgivings about accepting the casualties and sacrificing more of our freedoms for temporary emergency measures. 

    Make no mistake either that the Elites don't want a major war. They've been priming the population for World War 3 for decades. The so-called 'War on Poverty' the 'Drug War' the 'Gender Wars' the 'War on Terror' 'the Race Wars' and the paramilitary rhetoric and actions surrounding the Scamdemic have put the average Ameroboob's mentality into virtual perpetual State of Emergency. No American under age 30 or so has lived in a culture where we haven't been under some kind of 'Emergency' Laws. It's all a big VR or LARP to them; more daytime drama IRL. As for the Elites, they could care less about casualties. They'll make a fortune building back better and cheap labor can always be imported or outsourced. Nobody though is going to be able to cheat reality this time; although I expect they'll give it a good try. 

THE DIRECTION OF THE MAJORITY

       So, there appears to be another 'revolt' breaking out in Academia. An open letter, signed by 911 prominent professors of Mathematics condemns the recent attempts by the Junta and others to abolish Advanced Mathematics in schools. 

     “We are deeply concerned about the unintended consequences of recent well-intentioned approaches to reform mathematics education, particularly the California Mathematics Framework. Such frameworks aim to reduce achievement gaps by limiting the availability of advanced mathematical courses to middle schoolers and beginning high schoolers...Subjecting the children of our largest state to such an experiment is the height of irresponsibility… While the US K-12 system has much to improve, the current trends will instead take us further back."

     There's much truth in this statement. However, there is another issue of concern. Where exactly were all of these concerned professors when Humanities Departments were being purged to make room for more 'inclusiveness' like CRT? They didn't seem to care when Science Departments were being hijacked by Big Pharma and Big Tech to get 'settled science' behind their NWO Agenda. They weren't complaining when competent Administrators were being forced out and replaced with political hacks. They had nothing to say about students and faculty forced out over the phony Mask Mandates and the Loyalty Vaxx. Now that the 'New Normal' effects them, it's suddenly a problem. 

    If it sounds as though I haven't much sympathy for them, it's because I frankly don't. It's like about 90% of the other problems that we face in America today. Americans are outraged about it all but most of our problems are of the American people's own making. Certainly, the people didn't formulate or execute the Cultural Revolution now sweeping over us, but they went along with it all. The Elites were aided and abetted by the combined greed, selfishness, apathy, and sheer stupidity of the General Population. 

   This was a matter that came up again at a recent article on InsanityBytes blog. I don't disagree with what she said, but I did take an issue with it in the comments. It covered a topic we'd written about previously. She said the following:

   "I think we really have to lower our expectations. Most people are dealing with the stress of life and just trying to provide for themselves and their families. They genuinely don’t have time to do research, to fully understand what is going on within their government. They are pretty much voting for brands and quick sound bites. They are good people. It’s not their fault they don’t understand who the oligarchs are or even what an “oligarch” is."

   This intrigued me because it's the kind of thing I would have said up to about a year ago. What's changed? Well, simply the fact that what we suspected was happening behind the scenes for the last 30 years have now become so blatantly obvious that there are two things I can't bring myself to believe, namely 1) that the majority don't know what's going on. 

   I believe that we've reached this point not because people didn't know, but because they didn't want to know. I was involved in a debate on a 'Conservative' site recently where parents were claiming adamantly that they had no idea about the Leftist takeover of public schools. I flatly asked how they could not know: which drew down a torrent of wrath but no explanation. Rarely is an explanation forthcoming. The Public Schools weren't doing any of this in secret; I saw it happening back in the 1990s. 

   That's just one example. The other point I've come to doubt is 2): that Americans are basically good people. That may have been true a few years ago, but the events of the last 18 months have shown the majority of Americans to be composed mostly of chiselers, cowards, and opportunists who'd sell out their neighbors and even family if they thought there was even the slightest advantage to themselves by doing so. 

   I recall sometime during the Obama years a radio talk show host asking for calls from people connected with the Military, FBI, CIA, etc. about why there was no resistance in any of these organizations to the direction that Obama was taking us. The general consensus was that these organizations had a large contingent of people who'd follow whatever orders they were given; along with another group of mostly older personnel who were simply biding time until they could retire. "There are mechanisms to complain and effect change" I recall one caller saying, "But the general understanding is that nobody is going to have your back if you try and there are plenty of others willing to take your job." This phenomenon has long been the case in other professions: Academia, the Corporate world, the Media among others. Americans have had a fairly strong recent track record of looking the other way and going along to get along. 

   IB also said that: "I think I’ve spent a great deal of time trying to forgive those who have betrayed me, dropped the ball, collapsed into a soggy heap when they should have had my back. The only good thing about all that, is that it has brought me closer to the Lord. He was the ultimate victim of our cowardice and betrayal, and He still gave up His life willingly for us." There is truth in this also; and many times I've said Forgive them for they know not what they do. Which is an appropriate response when those who've failed us didn't understand what they were doing or grasp the consequences of their actions (or inaction). 

  I still feel a level of this for younger 'woke' people. This unfortunate group has never known any better. They don't---and frankly can't---understand why Freedom is important to those of us who actually lived under it. They've never known anything but life in an authoritarian structure where Security and Surveillance were normative social values. It's understandable that their solution to our problems is simply replacing the leadership with another just as autocratic but differently focused. Likewise they've imbibed a strong dose of the hypocrisy prevalent in the older generation, in that they have no concept of Absolutes or Reality; and believe that these things are simply matters of Consensus.*(see note).

  It's an entirely different matter for those who knew better and let this happen. I'm sorry to say it, but my ability to forgive is simply exhausted. We've come to a point where the Regime is sanctioning the overt destruction of our cultural heritage; and are openly discussing further plans to restrict our human rights even further. Pundits have actually been floating the idea of Concentration Camps with inhumane treatment for those they consider disloyal to the Great Reset. Does anybody seriously believe that those who passively let the Regime close their churches and businesses would lift a finger to prevent this from happening? I don't. On the contrary, I think the average American would enthusiastically push his neighbors into the gas chambers if he thought it would benefit him personally. 

        The fact is that we, collectively speaking, are in a very dark place. The Regime is not going to back down. In fact, they are encouraging further division, hatred, and scarcity of resources to get us to turn against each other even more. We have to understand that we are not only dealing with a failed State, but a failed Society as well. We have to respond by redoubling our efforts at the local, community, and familial levels to operate outside of the 'New Normal' if we hope to survive at all.

    

*Note: I thought that this statement might need some further clarification. Young Americans have grown up in a social milieu where platitudes about freedom and morality were preached but rarely practiced. The Hypocrites excused their behavior by saying that they were just being "realistic." Many young people have rejected the platitudes of their elders but held onto the cynicism and methods that they used. The marked intolerance of the 'woke' is a result of that way of thinking. A good example is their attitude towards traditional families. They grew up in a world where it was touted as an ideal, but nobody ever actually practiced it; hence they reject the ideal but see no problem with forcing acceptance of nontraditional arrangements. Those who want a return to traditional families are seen by them as naive and foolish because it's realistic to accept the sexual anarchism they've always known as normative. That same method of reasoning underpins their opinions on nearly all sociopolitical issues.

      

HOMOSEXUALS CHARGED IN MURDER OF 9-YEAR OLD

    Opinion polls in the United States are something I've learned to disregard, along with things like political campaign promises. For example, witness how many polls show that Americans have the lowest trust in the Media of any developed country. Yet, the American Media leads the American people around by the nose with relative ease. They sell the most absurd ideas as easily as they sell consumer goods. Elections reflect the will of the people. A flu outbreak is a global health crisis. Mandatory masks work. Weather changes portend global catastrophe. Systemic racism exists. Countries smaller than most U.S. States pose threats to world peace. Abortion is a safe medical procedure. Outsourcing and Inflation are sound economics. There's not a shred of evidence to support any of these claims, but that doesn't stop Americans from flying into hysterical outbursts and surrendering their freedoms and culture at the drop of a hat. Act first and think later is the new American Way.

   The Whacko Left Wing ridicules people who religious faith as credulous; yet they're usually the first to latch on to anything hired academics and corporate propagandists tell them is Settled Science. It doesn't matter if what these hirelings say contradicts decades of actual science or not. There's no debate in Academia any more; science is simply a consensus and anyone who questions the official narrative faces consequences from social and economic ostracism to imprisonment if their reason or conscience tells them otherwise. A prime of example of this phenomenon began during Obama's 2nd term with the push towards homosexual 'equality.' Decades of progress in Biology, Medicine, and Psychology were simply nullified by Judicial Fiat and no one today is allowed to question any of it.

   It was well-established prior to 2014 that homosexuality contains within its very nature a proclivity towards violence. Crime statistics on this subject apparently haven't been collected since this time. Older statistics show that this particular demographic has murder, rape, and assault numbers far higher than the so-called "binary population." Serial killers and mass-murderers too seem to represent diversity in this occupation as well. But, like the so-called AIDS Epidemic, homosexual criminality disappeared from public view in the name of Political Correctness.

   Human nature doesn't change, however. About a year ago, Oregon State Police recovered the remains of a Jane Doe stuffed in a duffel bag and thrown into a garbage dump at rest area in a state park. The girl was recently identified as 9-year old Haley Coblentz, who had not been reported missing. As it turns out, Haley lived in a very progressive household with her two moms: Shawna Browning and Lauren Harrison. These two Representatives of the Rainbow Way had since relocated to Michigan where they were captured by the FBI and are awaiting extradition to Oregon. 

   

      According to an interview with Haley's biological father, Shawna Browning was pregnant with Haley at the time she became involved in a Lesbian relationship with Lauren Harrison. They stole his truck, his money, and possessions and embarked on a road trip a la Thelma and Louise before turning up in Oregon. Haley was never enrolled in school and her two moms spent much time on the streets panhandling and otherwise sponging off society. Such is the glamorous, high-rolling lifestyle that Hollywood depicts of the LGBTQ Community.

     Oregon is a very tolerant State itself, and is no stranger to high-profile persons involved in homosexual violence. Prominent DNC official Terry Bean, former Portland Mayor Sam Adams, Portland Resistance leader Micah Rhodes, are among several Oregonians involved in violent same-sex affairs. Oregon currently has the highest per capita number of registered sex offenders in the United States. 

    When the high violent crime rate among homosexuals is permitted to be discussed these days, the Whacko Left always falls back on their default excuse that these people are somehow victims themselves of 'institutional discrimination.' What they really mean by that is that this demographic has a long history of violating the laws of Civilized Nations and were routinely punished for it. According to them, not punishing them would lead to less crime and violence---which is like arguing that drug addicts' behavior would change if they had free access to more narcotics. What they overlook is the fact they are talking about a pathology and not a mere lifestyle choice. 

    Homosexuality pathologically involves strong elements of Sexual Neurosis with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. A lot of modern confusion about this has come about because of Media lumping in Transgenderism with the Gay Agenda. In homosexuality, the sexual dysfunction predominates with OCD as a secondary characteristic while in Transgenderism, OCD predominates. This is why transgenderism was much easier to cure through psychoanalysis, because it is a less-deeply rooted problem. Now that all of this has been in nomine solum 'legalized', it is also the reason why the rates of suicide and depression have skyrocketed among transgenders. Transgenderism is based on impulse and impulses typically cannot typically be sustained indefinitely. 

    Before there was a semi-official blackout of scientific research on the subject, all medical and psychiatric experts understood the pathology behind homosexuality, though not all agreed on its causes or treatments. A symposium of psychiatrists held during the 1960s found that fear of the opposite sex was present in 75% of homosexual patients compared to around half of heterosexual ones and around half of them also reported "rage" as a typical reaction to stressful situations. All of this denotes a strong indication to emotional immaturity---a fact not lost on social scientists of the day. 

    "The homosexual has never learned to bond in a healthy way with the opposite sex, and consequently fails to bond with society as a whole," wrote Erich Fromm. Wilhelm Stekel explained that homosexuals fall into "psychosexual infantilism; they attempt to gratify the erotic cravings of their childhood or infancy. Many of them have never been psychologically weaned from their mother's breast." And Clara Thompson: "A very important determining in the development of homosexuality is the child's awareness that his sex was a disappointment to his parents, or the most important parent, especially if their disappointment leads them to treat the child as though he were of the opposite sex." It is absolutely no wonder therefore that our Culture's demasculinization and the rise of single motherhood is leading to the astounding rates of sexual aberrations among the young. We can blame Hollywood all we want to: but the reality is that the problem starts in the home.

    Frank Caprio expounded on this in further detail. "If the sexual instinct, or libido, reaches its highest goal of development---namely, heterosexuality---then that individual may be regarded as normal. However, if for various psychological reasons, the sexual instinct fails to achieve maturity then the person is more apt to seek the kind of sexual gratification in keeping with his immature sexual development. It is for this reason that the majority of psychiatrists are in agreement that homosexuals are, for the most part, sexually inadequate, neurotic children at heart, love-starved and frustrated. They are inclined to fear the opposite sex. They are considered abnormal only in the sense that their sexual behavior represents a regression into childhood; an escape from the biological responsibilities assumed by one who is heterosexual. They are narcissistic insofar as their own pleasures come first, irrespective of what others think about their conduct. Many of them have no scruples about seducing adolescents whose lives may be seriously influenced by a single homosexual experience."

    And from this standpoint, we can see why crime and violence---especially against children and legal minors---are so deeply prevalent among this demographic. It also ought to show us why allowing their access to children and young adults is an extremely dangerous policy. As Freud observed early on, children normally go through a phase, the Latency Period, where homosociality is normal. Younger people in their early teens are still gaining sexual experience and forming attitudes and exposing them to perversions---carried out by perverts on their same emotional levels can do serious damage. The narcissism and lack of empathy which Caprio describes is characteristic of most violent criminals in general. Sensible laws like those still enforced in Russia were normative in the United States once: and there today as well as here then these types of crimes are rare. 

    But try and explain any of this average Ameroboob and you either get a blank stare, or a torrent of insults copypasted into their vocabularies by the Mainstream Media. Our steadfast refusal to accept Reality is costing younger generations both their mental health and, in some cases, their lives.

 

   

     

      

WHY THE WOKE MILITARY

      Despite decades of the Pentagon's policy of deconstructing masculinity, forcing out real soldiers, incorporating the Gay Mafia, lowering recruiting standards, and outsourcing military contracts to WEF-connected organizations, many Conservatives recently noticed that the Military has been taken over by Deep State ideologues. Characters like General Milley have been running the Pentagon and setting their policies for decades, by suddenly there's plenty of fake outrage about because---just like our failing schools---nobody knew they were being corrupted.

     

    The current controversy centers on the Junta's Defense Minister, Lloyd Austin---whose last actual military assignment was preparing for the orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan. Despite the fact that all but two Republican Senators voted for Austin's confirmation, Austin is facing some ineffectual political blustering harsh criticism for mandating the Loyalty Vaxx be taken by all military personnel. 

    So far, only the Oklahoma National Guard has shown much resistance. Austin brushed off their protests stating that "unvaccinated state National Guard members will see a withdrawal of federal funding for “payment of duties” to those who refuse the vaccine...no credit or excused absence shall be afforded to members who do not participate [in] drills, training, or other duty due to failure to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19.” 

   Currently 92% of our brave men, women, and xhes in uniform have submitted to the Loyalty Vaxx. This number shouldn't be surprising given the Military's recent history of submission to some of the most humiliating treatments that fiendish Leftist activist minds could devise. 

  Now many are wondering why the Regime would be 'weakening' our Military. The fact is that they are not weakening the military, they are repurposing it. Defunding the local police and encouraging lawlessness is the first step in the new paradigm, purging the military is the second. In other words, the transformation is deliberate to make our military a tool of domestic enforcement. They can still provide technical support and hire foreign mercenaries for their international conquests. The military's future mission will be to replace the police and enforce the Great Reset.

   The reason that most Conservatives don't see this obvious linear progression is because so many are still in denial that a Color Revolution---many years in preparation---has already occurred. They still insist on clinging to the delusion that Elections or Court Decisions are going to save us; or despite all evidence to the contrary, that those in uniform will stand true to their Oaths "to uphold and defend the Constitution." The Elites are already moving into Phase II of the Great Reset and creating a national paramilitary enforcement squad is part of the long-term goal. 

   If anyone doubts this, consider that some countries even deeper down the Great Reset's path are already employing military forces this way. The French Government yesterday deployed troops to Martinique to enforce the Loyalty Vaxx. The brutal and fascistic Australian Regime has been using military personnel to enforce curfews against its own citizens. The Canadian Military recently was caught using its resources to promulgate Scamdemic Propaganda. 

   The Elites were experimenting with deploying military technologies on civilian populations before the 2020 Putsch. The Clinton-Bush years saw dramatic blurring of the lines between military and police functions. The Drug War and the War on Terror were the preliminary steps to the COVID Crisis which is completing the transition to a fully-militarized Police State. 

   

    But trying to explain any of this to the average Ameroboob is as futile now as it was during any of the earlier 'crises.' What we need to do is be aware of the growing threat and understand that this is the future of 'policing' in the US. The Military is going to become the enforcement arm of the Security Forces which are being erected upon the carcasses of Federal Police agencies like the FBI.  The Parallel Societies which we hope to create will need to be armed with this knowledge to avoid legal issues with the Regime. Above all, we must fight the temptation to follow others in their denial of the reality of the situation.