Daily News

IN CASE YOU HAVEN’T HEARD, THE WHIGS ARE BACK (SORT OF…)

I've scarcely withheld my feelings on this site toward the radical socialism creeping through Dummycrookery, and the just plain kookery of Republithuggery. Bottom line: I'm bi-partisan: I loathe the Dummycrooks and Republithugs equally, because in the final analysis, they are but one party with two differing philosophies on how they want to rob us of our few remaining freedoms. For those reading this site outside the USA, it may seem an irrelevant point to talk about American politics, its nauseating character, and the nauseating twits in both parties (just think Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Boehner, Sarah Pain....and let's not forget the very definition of the stink of corruption: the Bushes, the stench of power mad pragmatism: the Clintons, and the just plain power mad sleaze: [think Lyndon Johnson here, or Barmitt Obromneyack]). But as America slides into increasing illiteracy, cultural barbarism (think American Idol here or those silly "reality" shows, or the wretched music we export to the world), and unfettered imperialism, when it falls apart, it could well take western culture with it.

But to abandon the invective hyperbole for a moment, and to be serious, the disenchantment with both political parties is deep. We have in the United States essential a party of the Left that talks like it's on the right, but when it comes to actual action, has done essentially nothing to roll back the radicalism of the party of the Far Left in terms of policy or programs. We have no genuine party of the center, much less the right, unless one numbers the Libertarians on the right. Hence, during the last presidential (s)election here, when our choices were Barmitt Obromneyack or Barmitt Obromneyack, I urged those fed up like myself simply vote "no confidence."

In case you haven't heard, however, there is a trend that began in ca 2009-2010 to revive precisely that center and to give it actual political representation.  In this case, there is what appears to be a semi-serious effort to revive the Whig party in the last two years. In the context of the theatrics of the last presidential selection, the fall in voter turnout(reflecting voter turn off) and more recently, in the context of the theatrics of the "fiscal cliff" while the derivatives issue and bankster fraud continue unabated, here's a story from 2011 that bears mentioning, and watching;

3rd Party Rising: The Modern Whig Party is Back With A Vengeance

Home Modern Whig Party Service and Solutions

Yes, you read that right...the Whig party...the party that gave us such stellar presidential luminaries as  Millard Fillmore, Zachary Taylor, and if you know your history well enough, Abraham Lincoln, who left the party to jump to the new Republican party.

What arrests my thought here is first the very definite perception that the two parties of the USA, the party of the Left and of the Far Left, have abandoned the center, while the party of the Left courts the radical religious right in this country, leaving  the centrists remaining in both parties out in the cold. It is this perception that the new party is designed to fill. Whether it will be successful or not, it is a clear signal that the long term political landscape is shifting, because the culture is shifting. It also indicates, perhaps, a growing disenchantment within the ranks of the party of the Left at the insider establishment that seems to be running it solely for its own power and profit (think Karl Rove here). Many would also opine that the party of the Left has to somehow lose its association with Evangelicals in order to regain its appeal to the center, a sentiment with which I would wholeheartedly concur; after all, would there really be as large a Libertarian movement if  this party had not made this unwholesome marriage of conservatism and fundamentalist evangelicalism in the Reagan era? I personally doubt it.

But there is a second factor that arrests my thought, and that is the clear indication in this article that the new Whiggery was initiated by disgruntled members of the military who are fed up with the way both the Left and Far Left parties have handled military affairs... in other words, this is a kind of "grass roots military revolt..."... Or is it? Could it be something deeper?

Maybe... I doubt it, but maybe. Time will tell... if the party survives, and actually begins to attract big money beyond its apparent numbers, I would tend to be skeptical. But it remains a possibility, for it was take the most blind and deaf oligarch not to realize that their standard smoke and mirrors games run through Dummycrookery and Republithuggery are losing votes and voters... people are too cynical of most government and corporate institutions, not to mention the two parties.  The center just no longer cares, really, which Barmitt Obromneyack wins, because neither one represents it.

Hence the idea of a kind of modern Whiggery is arresting. There are no grand principles here, such as inform, and in some cases, radicalize the other third parties by wrapping them in dogmas of their respective political faiths to be defended at all costs. There is a kind of broad cultural conservatism here, mixed with a healthy blend of Libertarian principles of individual and local government freedom. And there are as well some things that would give the modern conservative pause.

Nonetheless, it's one more indicator on the political landscape of the deep cultural crisis America is now in. Whether the Modern Whig party gains any traction or not is, therefore, in the final analysis immaterial. What it represents is growing disenchantment... and if the recent proclamations of Their Majesties Obama, Reid, Pelosi, McConnell and Boehner are any indicator, the next four years will look like the last 12, on steroids.

The disenchantment, if not Whiggery, will only grow. For me? I am not jumping on any political bandwagons, but this one may be, like the seeds planted by Ron Paul, something to watch closely.

See you on the flip side

 

43 thoughts on “IN CASE YOU HAVEN’T HEARD, THE WHIGS ARE BACK (SORT OF…)”

  1. In case you haven’t already heard, the Government spends millions of dollars on the ‘get out the vote campaigns.” On the surface of this it sounds right and very democratic but I believe the government’s intentions for funding such drives is much more devious?

    If only 10% of the eligible voting population actually turn out to vote then how can the government decare or even claim itself a democracy? It cant and people would catch on.

    So 48% percent vote for Hussan and lets say, 47% vote for that fellow who belongs to the Moron, ophs, Mormon Faith.

    That only leaves 5% of the population deciding whose the next President!

    So what’s five percent of only 50% of eligible voters who do drag them selves to pull levers. I believe its much lower than 10%.

    I am getting a bit mixed up here in the math. One cant easily rig or persuade say a 100 million people through propaganda but one most certainly rig a million in one state.

    Polarize each state left and right then find one swing state and eliminate a hundred thousand voters dirty tricks AND give or take a few more dirty tricks AND have your voting inspectors own the programs for electronic touch screens (paper trails don’t prove nothing) and RIGGING an already RIGGED GAME is a piece of cake.

    The Libertarian Party is almost useless!

    In some ways Baudrillard’s insane suggestion is for the masses to just let the system IMPLODE itself in his theories of Fatal Strategies. Anyway, the Masses could give a good defication who is the next president. Maybe they know more than us wise guys, ha, ha by just continuing opening their flip-top beverages!

    1. I meant to write 5% of the half of the voting population who do vote or What is 5% of 50%? 2 and a half percent elect a president. ( we should have a Parlimentary System but looking north to Canada but I don’t think that would do much good?)

      Which reminds me Emanual the new Mayor of Chicago cut the library budget by I believe 50% (axe man and we thought David Stockman was bad?)

      His intellectual flunkies told him there was a 10% decrease/reduction in readership since say, 1960. Sounds justified right? WRONG! In 1960 lets say 100 million 20% of people read or about 20 mil. In 2012 300 million people and only 10% read BUT 10% of 300 mill is about 30 million people or now or today 10 million MORE people read than in 1960.

      Don’t let the politician justify cuts on the backs of us poor readers and wage fake LITERACY CAMPAIGNS!

      Liars’ Poker anyone?

      1. Um, huh?

        Obama won the Electoral College, that’s how the US system works.

        Popular vote elections, say for US Senate seats, are regularly decided by less than 5% one way or the other, even if there were 97% voter turnout that would still be mostly the case.

        Are you suggesting that voting be a legal requirement? Are you suggesting that popular votes must be won say by at least 20%? Are you suggesting a parliamentary system for the US, where the party in control can pass all sorts of crap? Not that that’s never been done here.

        1. Actually, Parliamentary systems have a great deal of public accountability because far more of the public (in a mandatory system-and some non mandatory ones) are participating in the formation of the policies.

          Public opinion of 60% of a country, or 90%?

  2. Cultural disassembly is the order of the day. The velocity of change is such most youth have no idea of the classics, let alone John Wayne or Lucy. The goal is to disenfranchise the current & coming generations from the past. It’s kind of a collective “driving” or brain washing, with new software being down loaded daily. George Orwell – “Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.” Indeed!

    There’s also a current article posted to the CBC – “Scientists explore the illusion of memory,” suggesting that, “Every time someone recalls a memory, it’s a chance to change it.” Wow! Under a guise of palliating trauma, they’re suggesting memories are an “illusion.” So too does this imply the past (history) is also an “illusion,” our “memory” & perception of it malleable to change or an insertion of new “soft ware.” This also implies, the testimony of witnesses in today’s court rooms were & are nothing but “illusions.”

    CBC Article here…
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2013/01/03/health-inside-your-brain-memory-illusion.html

    As for homogenized milk, this is the food end of a political ideology that promotes a global Corporate Culture of uniformity & conformity to Corporate Preogatives supported by mass media in the training of a barely functional ignorant, reactionary & compliant flock, sent running to & fro by the technological equivalent of barking dogs. The memes are both insidious & powerful, but still, not altogether unnoticed or unobserved.

    This evening, a teenager who had just been to a movie starring the cultural disassembler Barbara Streisand, quipped it was social engineering. So, in spite of all their efforts & ominous book reminders like “The Dumbest Generation: Why Not To Trust Anyone Under The Age of Thirty,” there’s still room for faith & a cautiously guarded hope. They don’t have them all! Yet!

    1. Robert Barricklow

      Questioning.

      Provoking.

      Agitating.

      This has become the attributes of modern “art” today. This is what our discoure has become, compelling us not merely to depict anxiety, but induce it, awaken us to the invidious conditions of the dystopia in which we live today, so that the engine of progress does not make tools of us all.

  3. Edited…

    What is a Cartel if it is not a “Non-Competing Community of Like Interests?”

    Wasn’t it David Rockefeller who said, “competition is a sin?” Could one then describe Rockefeller to be a “capitalist?” To the contrary, Cartels destroy fair market capitalism & agglomerate economic power to the few at the expense of the many. Neither were National Socialism nor Russian Communism forms of socialism, but rather, both were flip sides of Finance Collectivism – Both centralizing power over the means of production in the state. The ideology of Social”ism,” tends to convey a false impression of the principle of social justice, which makes Social”ism” an obfuscation of the principle.

    Truth of the matter is, a Globalized Bankster Cartel tends to Collectivize both the economic & political terrains under the dominion & control of interest bearing debt, so this economic system is actually anathema to both social justice as well as fair trade capitalism, which to date has been poorly defined. Indeed, there are two “Ccapital”isms,” one that agglomerates Capital into the hands of a few, for a control OF the many, and another which affirms labor & the fruits of labor as the capital belonging to the man in his own right.

    Bankster CAPITALISM, which is a form of Corporate Collectivism, would claim, nefariously, that wages are a demand or a call upon the wealth or capital of another, primarily the Land”Lords” or Corporate Owners, whereas fair market capitalism affirms all labor creates its own wage – that wages are neither a demand nor call upon the wealth or capital of another.

    The form of Ccapital”ism” in principle & practice, that upholds a demand of labor upon its wages as prior & superior to that of capital, is social justice. That which disingenuously purports to promote social justice while defining labor as a cost of doing business or a liability to production & to capital, is Old World Feudalism or Corporate Collectivism, & is in fact an economy set on a false predicate, & predicated upon social INJUSTICE.

    This is the inversion which has been put in motion ever since the founding of the constitutional republic – a republic that rejected the predatory pretense of Malthusian economics. Indeed, the first motto of liberation espoused by the American colonists was, the unlienable rights to “life, liberty & property,” not happiness. Indeed, if a man have no right to his own property – including an ownership of his labor & its fruits, then each of the first two are forfeit. The word “un-lienable” means of course, that the state is prohibited from placing a lien against the life, liberty & property of any law abiding American citizen. And of course, American citizenship, both natural & naturalized, was defined by state, not Federal citizenship. Federal Citizenship is Corporate not natural.

    1. Robert Barricklow

      Another great post Elm!

      Federalized citizenship can only simulate the “true” citizens, born of The Declaration of Independence.
      The Federalized citizens are the forgery.
      Those of us that live by The Declaration of Independence, are the serious citizens; exposing the “Federalized” swindles, that must be exposed.

      1. John Quincy Adams described them as “those things which appear to be but are not.” This is Legal Fiction/Pretext & “Color-Of-Law.” At a basic level, Legal Fiction obfuscates to Capitalize upon common perception.

      2. Robert Barricklow

        Just a note.
        Gerard Depardieu is in the news. It looks like his greatest role has been – as a French citizen. A lot of these “in the news” people are, in fact, “transnational citizens” of the NWO. In fact, two member of this said class, Clinton & Rubin, were heard quipping/Nation-States, so quaint.
        I suppose the next step up/or down/or ?[depending on your viewpoint], would be the “breakaway citizen”.

    2. “a non competing group of like interest”..aka the breakaway civilization.

      The old money rich people I have met are all very pleasant, decent folks, on the surface anyways…the stuff going on in hollywierd is another story…. they brought us bye bye Miss Armenian pie after all. Cant say they hide there intentions.

  4. soo hard to digest when the information is soo layered .the original charter of either party would be aok if walking the walk…my core issue is the premise of illusory epiphenomenom or material view of consciousness.. it seems to have diverted the idea of free will and the idea of inalienable rights of the individual.even co-opted scientific research.what ever or wear ever reality exists; the mystery should be embraced .neither side of the dog and pony show entertains the premise of self…the borg may even have an argument—not–

  5. terminally skeptical

    Forgive me if this carries racial overtones though I can’t help but wonder if exhuming the name of a former party from a different era is wise given the changed meaning of the word wigger (I know, missing an “h” but phonically relevant). After all as per the urban dictionary definition there is nothing elevating about the word and could even detract from the cause.

    **********************************************************************

    There are two fundamentals that drive the media. One being “all the news that’s fit to print” (says who?) and the other being market forces. If a third party (The Whigs) were to grow to considerable size would the media still practice their familiar policies of blackouts on the candidates and their platform or would they acquiesce and give them airtime and let them into the political discussion arena based on their sheer size. Could the purchasing power of ten million of voters be denied a collective voice in the media because their political mission is contrary to the powers that be?

  6. I find most political discourse extremely confusing. I think the reason for this is that labels such as “left”, “centrist” and “right” , “liberal”, “moderate” and “conservative” no longer have any meaning except in the narrow context of a few social issues (abortion and gay rights, for example). What does “grass roots” mean? What are “common-sense” solutions? What is “social progression”? It would help if political writers use vocabulary that corresponds with what they are trying to say. I understand the need to state a political philosophy in general terms, but not to be so general as to be completely vague. It is illustrative to compare the Whig platform with the green party platform (http://www.gp.org/committees/platform/2012/) in terms of the specificity of the language.

    1. Please note. The gay rights movement is not a “social,” but a political anti-social movement of disassembly focused upon political power.

  7. Robert Barricklow

    This is a corporate government,
    oligarchial in nature.
    The scholar who has really nailed this is,
    Sheldon Wolin, in his book:
    Democracy Incorporated/Managed Democracy
    and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism.
    (read: a “new” form of fascism)

    It is not only in the U.S., but is a growing worldwide cancer; sponsored by the likes of the international bansters’ cartel & their sinister metastasized sequential “currencies” infecting & threatening life on Earth.

    1. How about “Finance” or “Bankster induced Feudalism?”

      Bankster or Finance Feudalism pretty much covers the seat of the fire. Like they say, “where there’s smoke there’s fire,” & maybe a few pyromaniacs.

      Problem is, long before fog nozzles were introduced, firefighters used to blast the interior of smoke filled buildings with high pressure streams of water, resulting in a disproportionate degree of water rather than fire damage. Fog nozzles, a recent innovation, enabled breathing apparatus equipped firefighters to enter buildings, locate, & then direct water at the seat of the fire, primarily using a fog rather than a straight stream nozzle. This new practice resulted in far less damage whether by fire or water. Wasn’t it Thoreau who wrote, “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root?”

      Anyway, the jist of the story is, Interest Bearing Bankster Currency is the “seat” of both our economic & existential problems, which is Pirate Finance or Bankster Feudalism – an Old World Odor, having wafted over the sea to what was once thought to be a “new world.” A control of currency is seminal to all political & economic outcomes. The moral & ethical currency & intention of America, has been hyjacked & turned against the people & the high ideals of the constitutional republic.

      See also, Psychological Warfare & “The New World Order: The Secret War Against The American People,” by Servando Gonzalez, who identifies the “secret” in plain sight government of The United States.

          1. Robert Barricklow

            He[The Bubble and Beyond, June 2012] and John McMurtry[The Cancer Stage of Capitalism, April 2003] are “the economists” I focus on.
            Both are not only “in the zone”, BUT “out of the box”, a quantum attribute essential, in today’s upsidedown/insideout world.

          2. Robert Barricklow

            The Above was “April 2013” NOT 2003.
            It’s an updated 2nd edition.
            And while I’am at it; what’s best about these two economist, is their Passion.

  8. I would agree with Yaj. However, I would characterize it as corporate socialism. Rather maybe a social facism or even a corporate patriotism act. All kidding aside the corporations are definitely absorbing all that they can suck from our current government.

    1. Even though I agree with Haj to a point I wouldn’t go as so far as to say I would question Dr. Farrell’s entire body of work. Even the best minds among us make mistakes. After all we are human. I can imagine that one that investigate all of this filthy corruption can’t help to be emotionally effected in some way. Releases of tension will come out language. Especially on a personal blog.

      1. You have a point, but it’s those kind of claims by FoxNews, Limbaugh and the John Birch Society (which Glenn Beck is mostly simply quoting) that make all of those characters immediately suspect.

        Also some weeks ago JPF misidentified the contents of the US Bill of Rights in exactly the same manor that Glenn Beck and Co do. And then when JPF was called on the error, he tried to make the mistaken claim that those rights spelled out in the Bill of Rights would some how exist simply because of the Declaration of Independence. (No the freedom to say critique Obama or to worship whichever or not would not exist in this country without the Bill of Rights–and that’s huge mistake to argue otherwise.)

        So claims of Obama’ radical socialism need to be called out as inaccurate–particularly when they’re trending.

        Link to actually radical socialist website: http://www.wsws.org. (And many of the facts they cite are still more accurate than Glenn Beck.)

        1. Ok help me out Yaj, for I am not understanding you. Are you saying that the rights in the Bill of Rights would not exist unless they were spelled out in it? In other words, do you think rights are inherent to mankind, or are they grants from government?

          1. Granted, I’m unfamiliar with the background of reference here, but it seems as if Yaj and JPF may be experiencing a semantic disconnect over the verbal employment of an “-ism”. So it goes.

            I’m more interested in where this has arrived…

            Does the Bill of Rights undercut an ideological premise of the Declaration of Independence?

            If we declare certain rights as “inherent and inalienable”, and then proceed to codify them into law, haven’t we implicitly demonstrated a doubt that they are inalienable?

            Free speech is fettered by the obligation to reference a permission slip.

            This is neither here nor there, of course, I simply found this little thoughtcave to display quite an accessible example of the potential extent of the effect of Print Culture (and the perceived primacy of printed language) on human consciousness.

            Cheers.

          2. It would be nice if somehow those rights were inherent to being human.

            Unfortunately that’s not the case (eg people are prosecuted for speech in many other parts of the world–including France, Germany and Canada.)

            So yes it it the US Bill of Rights that grants those rights to people in the USA.

            That those rights are not part of being human is wrong, but it is a fact of history and today.

            I’d wouldn’t exactly call the Bill of Rights part of the government. It is however a subset of the governing constitution. Government is a distraction–and frankly as you well know the US government has abused these rights, see Wilhelm Reich and Dinshah Ghadiali.

          3. Joseph, Justice Black (might have been Douglas. The mind gets foggy after 70 lol) spoke in one of his opinions about Natural Rights and it had the tenor of what’s found in the Bill Of Rights. I don’t think these present Supremes, both dems and reps appointees, would take this approach. It is whatever is good for the corporations, the little guy be damned. I don’t know if this adds anything or not to the conversation.

            db

          4. This is how Legal Pretexts work. In “Legalization” resides a transference of authority. The three fold path to suppression & control is this… 1st, neither legal nor Illegal, like hemp for instance. 2nd, make hemp Illegal at the behest & by the initiative of Corporate Interests. 3rd, make hemp Legal in desired by the feudal landlaords by licensing which is permission & a transference of authority to an Agency like the FDA, that works covertly for & in concert with the very same Interests or Land”Lord’s” who “inspired” its Illegality in the first place. I believe the fly in the ointment was Dupont.

            Further, Legalization comes with “acceptable” vs unacceptable forms of many foods or substances, like raw milk vs pasteurized milk for instance. Pasteurized yes, raw milk no. Why? Because the real thing is always a reminder & an embarrasement in the face of the real thing. Similarly, vampires hate the light of both truth & life. Agencies like the FDA seek to operate under a pretext of virtue – for the public good etc., wherein false flags are often perpetrated against healthy food & criticism of the detrimental effects of processed & adulterated food covered up & obfuscated.

            It’s the same with the embarrasement of fascimile money in the face of real money – the first an interest bearing debt instrument conjured from nothing, the second a wealth based medium of exchange. The two are “diverse species” – one a demand upon labor & wealth into the future, the latter a call upon a repository of labor & wealth accumulated from the past. Banksters create nothing other than debt, therefore like parasites, Banksters must siphon wealth from those who do create & produce wealth.

            There is an eclectic film online – “Corporate Vampires,” by Rich Zubaty. Many have been “bitten.”

            Further, as an aside, the anti-patriot “Patriot Act” – a thing which appears to be but is not, is the new anti-American point of reference for “Homeland Security” Border Control Officers. This ostensibly removes or displaces previous Border Guards from under the authority of the Bill of Rights & Constitution, & embeds them under an entirely foreign set of Legal Protocols.

            But of course, the slight-of-hand perfidy has been carefully couched in euphemisms like “Homeland Security” & “Patriotism” but tasked with a destruction of both. This is the “art” or “craft” of concealing darkness in light, bondage in liberation & causing a people to submit to their own destroyer.

            Lawful government is founded to protect rights which already exist by virtue of one’s birth, otherwise why have a government in the first place? The natural rights to life, liberty & property cannot be defined by government, only violated or upheld. Similarly, there is only immoral or moral & Legal or Illegal. What Legal Fiction does, is presumably gift usurpers & controllers to do Legally that which is most often forbidden morally.

          1. if researcher/author Liam Scheff (author of “Official Stories”- a very interesting read) has any credibility, he stated in a recent interview that Roosevelt often vacationed in an area that was normally infested with mosquitos but the bugs were irradicated by DDT spraying and Roosevelt’s poisoning/paralysis was caused by DDT

          2. Robert Barricklow

            In Webster Tarpley’s new book:
            The Real Pearl Harbor Conspiracy/
            Progressive Press he goes into this operation in detail.
            If you google it; you find radio, video, articles on it, as well as the book.

  9. any news on the federal reserve charter that expired on the winter soltice of last year?
    or does congress not bother itself with such trivial matters of the secret cabal that runs the money printing presses and America into the ground?

  10. Sad to see an “educated” person call the policies of Reagan, Obama and Clinton “radical socialism”.

    Those kind of preposterously inaccurate claims get made in Glenn Beckistan regularly. And those who make them can’t really be said to have read or thought much about the subject of socialism, and frankly it would call into question any and all books by the claimant.

    This has nothing whatsoever to do with there being things really disturbing about each of these presidencies. But at the core, many of those abuses are about strengthening a corporatized state and weakening regulations of those corporate abuses. That aint socialism.

    1. Although I believe Joseph only referred to the Democrats, I would still have to agree with you. Americans, especially the rightwingers, seem to equate any policy that either might help someone, or that does not send the message “you’re on your own” with socialism or communism.
      Politicians and political institutions have been bought by Wall St. and the big cartels . How could this ever be socialism? It is fascism, plain and simple. Maybe Americans think fascism only comes with brown shirts, they’re wrong, nowadays it comes with a suit and tie.

      1. “Maybe Americans think fascism only comes with brown shirts, they’re wrong, nowadays it comes with a suit and tie”-

        or as Sinclair Lewis stated in “It Can’t Happen Here”: “if Fascism ever comes to America it will be draped in a flag and carrying a cross”

        1. The brown shirts were drunken street brawlers. Some 160 Freicorps (freebooter) units roamed throughout Germany following WWI, becoming a law unto themselves. These units later became the brown shirted Storm Troopers who blugeoned political opponents from “below,” while the Party manouvered from “above.”

          The seldom referred to unit which formed a nucleus of the Nazi movement, was the Rossbach Organization led by Captain Gerhard Rossbach. Rossbach is identified as an early gay partner of SA Chief pederast Ernst Roehm, one of Hitler’s earliest supporters.

      1. Bingo! Right as always my fellow Terra Australin.

        Let’s have a look at American foreign action:

        Bomb small countries
        Force them to ‘rebuild’ in ‘American’ systems
        Spread ‘culture’ via mass media to the rest of the world-egardless of if they want it or not
        Spread home grown religion to the rest of the planet-regardless of if the the rest of the planet wants it or not
        Manipulates world economy to suite foreign policy
        Prosecute foreign peoples under American ‘law’ outside of sovereign territory (via covert action or manipulative ‘treatise’ of extradition)

        Hmmmmm…….I remember a European nation doing the exact same things about 70-60 years ago

        That country employed ‘left wing’ social control measures with ‘right wing’ racial/economic theories……

        Sounding familiar?

        Its called……starts with ‘N’………any more clues needed?

        Was dominated by large weapons companies
        Was dominated by large chemical companies
        Didn’t get on that well with Russia

        Any more clues needed….????

        1. Too right mate,

          If it smells like a Nazi,
          sounds like a Nazi,
          looks like a Nazi,
          then it probably is a Nazi.

          Welcome to the Fourth Reich, please check your humanity in at the door.
          Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein (elected) Fuhrer.
          Proudly brought to you by the office of the 1000 year plan.

Comments are closed.