The Great Reset: How We Got Here

Herein is a collection of videos and resources that assist in explaining how we arrived in 2020 at the point that we were susceptible to a Color Revolution, poised on the verge of a Civil War and many now clamor for a Great Reset. Many otherwise intelligent people have been deceived, confused and absolutely wrong this year, never seeing the forest for the trees, unable to see that all of the troubles, chaos, and issues were related and all pushed us toward the 'need' for a draconian solution.

Analysis of current trajectory toward a Great Reset

Ten part series that details much of the organized effort by communitarians, communist, socialist, and their allies progressives to move the West and the world toward a naturalistic, centralized, and ultimately authoritarian system. 

This is a must-see, Yuri Bezmenov was a KGB propagandist and defector. He lays out in this video the methods used by international communism, to subvert and supplant governments in the West.

Do you remember those 'crazy' Birchers? It seems they too were not wrong.

The following is a promotional/propaganda video from the World Economic Forum. They are not even hiding their goals anymore. All of those 'conspiracy theorists' that called out Davos and the Bilderberg Group were not wrong about at least this portion of their agenda.

Speaking of conspiracy guys - here is one that called out the plan and objectives of the globalist for thirty years (with shocking accuracy). This loud, obnoxious, and over the top guy got many of the players, events, and circumstances of 2020 right, the folks he has called out are saying the quiet parts out loud now. Give him a watch, if only for the entertainment value. He was not wrong about everything and was right about a lot.

Christians ought not worry, this was all prophesized. You ought to take an honest look at your church, your heart and your own discernment. Almost all of the major denominations proved themselves to be tragically flawed in 2020, falling for pieces and parts of the deception that has brought us here. If your pastor twisted scripture to tell you that a communist and racist organization was worthy of support (BLM) or that this was all just a moment and that trusting the authorities was wise, then they failed to lead.

Stop listening to those flawed and often false preachers, they were deceived this year and deceived their flocks!

Perhaps also, if you see this all now as the manifestation of Biblical prophecy, I would suggest you not jump too fast on the hope of a rapture in the near future. What if all this plays out slowly, and we and subsequent generations live through the emergence of an all-powerful government? What if it takes a hundred years for this to fully play out? We were promised persecution (hated for his namesake) for being true followers, not prosperity. We still live in this world, we still have responsibilities.

What is going to be will be. Politics cannot stop this all, if God wills it we perhaps could slow it down, delay it for a few generations. Evil is on a timeline, it knows its time is limited. It has polluted all of the institutions we are supposed to be able to trust (media, education, religion, and government). A vast swath of our population lives each day under a polluted worldview. Many wolves wear sheep's clothing in places we expect otherwise. The very best we can do now is to take care of our own.

Covid and the Color Revolution

In mid-late February, many watched foreign news services concerning the status of China and the Coronavirus outbreak in China and wondered if this was ‘the big one’.  When a totalitarian regime locks down a city of millions, literally welds people into their homes and builds emergency Army hospitals and somehow, despite their hold on internet services, footage escapes – wise people wake up and notice.  I recall the chatter in various places regarding low cloud cover that appeared to have source from smokestacks near the quickly built hospital – crematoria were the conjecture.

I took it all seriously.

Then I watched with growing anticipation, and perhaps some anxiety, the situation with the Diamond Princess cruise ship (and others). I recall seeing an interview with an MD, an infectious disease guy, that visited the ship. He stated he had never seen a more dangerous situation, in terms of quarantine and controls. This was clearly not news to anyone that has even casually observed various ‘outbreaks’ on cruise ships over the years. The close quarters seem to make them rather like petri dishes.

We all watched, and then, despite the fact that most of the passengers were older and in what would seem high-risk categories, the infection rate was not outrageous and the fatality rate was low. That was a moment of clarity for me, the first time I thought the China story was odd.

I am not going to argue from facts and data here. I have not bothered to go back and find the various stories and links, things that any of us that watched this closely will recall already. My arguments here are from reason, what does common-sense tell us about what we have seen. In the aggregate, if we look at the big picture, our reason and common-sense tell us already that something is odd. Common-sense has served humanity for centuries when it was impossible to parse all the facts down to finite levels of detail. It is sufficient now.

Things that ought to make us wonder:

  1. Low infection/fatality rate in vulnerable populations on cruise ships early on.
  2. From March to June, people went on Spring Break (we were told that was apocalyptic), to big box stores, and more WITHOUT MASKS.
  3. We were told mask would actually make it all worse.
  4. We observed verbal gymnastics as government bureaucrats explained the criteria for counting COVID-19 deaths, and we recall how those criteria changed.
  5. We saw a spike of deaths, many in nursing homes in New York, only to learn later that some bizarre things went on. (see this young lady’s research, here)
  6. We were told that nobody could talk about therapeutics, we were told to “trust science” but only some scientists apparently. (more here)
  7. At one-point, Brix told us that if we did everything perfectly, 200k people would die and if not 2 million would perish.
  8. Of the 210k that have died WITH COVID, current CDC statistics demonstrate that a small percentage die with ONLY COVID. Most of those deaths were old people with other serious problems.
  9. 99.8% (mean) of everyone that gets COVID survives just fine. The Flu appears to be about 99.991%. We see it as infectious, but it is not the Zombie virus, and we all are beginning to know that.
  10. Despite all of the hyper emotionality related to ‘super-spreader’ events, the media has never said a word about mass protests, unless they are related to lockdowns.

Here are the current CDC stats for COVID, bear in mind, not all counted in these numbers are people that died exclusively of COVID, many had other conditions.

0-19: 99.997%

20-49: 99.98%

50-69: 99.5%

70 & over: 94.6%

Taking a gander at those numbers, and the other things our eyes see, common-sense informs us that none of the lockdowns make any sense. Perhaps they never made sense. Humans have faced viruses and sickness throughout history. How is a virus that has such a high survival rate different? Why was 2020 different? How many people have had their lives and livelihoods ruined over this? How many people avoided going to regular doctor visits for fear of the ‘rona and as result cancers and other maladies have gone undiagnosed?

More things to ponder:

  • What of all the talk of Fauci, the NIH, and the Wuhan lab - and why is Bill Gates touted as a virus expert now? Good things to ponder, here is a thread.
  • You have likely heard of Event 201, the exercise in the fall of 2019 put on by Gates, the NIH, and others to practice for a pandemic. Have you also heard of CLADE X? (see more)
  • What if some of those videos that came out of China could be shown as fake, you know the ones with dead people laying in the street, would that make you take notice? (Look here)
  • Remember how as early as April progressives and radicals were building the narrative that in-person voting was so dangerous (this was just before they began ignoring mass in-person protesting) (see thread)
  • Did you know the WHO is a bunch of nefarious clowns? (read all about it)
  • Lastly, why does nobody mention China and their gain of function research at the Wuhan lab anymore? (link)

The cost of all of this is something we have not yet fully reckoned. We will likely never fully know the cost, but if we are honest, we know down deep it was huge. Do you recall when Boris Johnson initially planned for Great Britain to protect the vulnerable and work toward herd immunity? He was literally shut down. Do you recall when Trump wanted to close the border and take precautions but carry on? The media and the opposition party screamed bloody murder. (remember all that in January, we do)

We were told to trust the science, but epidemiologists working in Africa have long known that quarantines often do not work and sometimes have negative outcomes. A lockdown of this scale has no precedence, there is no data. it was not based upon science, rather a public policy guess.

Many of us recall the spat of academic papers that appeared and then disappeared claiming that COVID-19 had aspects of bioengineering. That was both odd and disconcerting, more so because it all was quickly suppressed. Here is one you may still read, "SARS-CoV-2 Is an Unrestricted Bioweapon".

And what if, as generally happens with viruses in the wild, this has become less deadly over time? Do all the panic and economic devastation and political posturing still make sense to you (view a thread on this topic)

I wrote back in April that the reaction and overreaction to this virus looked very Saul Alinsky-like. The fear generated in the population enabled the government to do things previously unthinkable. We learned in 2020 that our inalienable rights are contingent upon the whims of even the lowest elected officials, and sometimes unelected bureaucrats. The massive payouts, the massive debt, our initial attempts at universal basic income (UBI), our flirting with modern monetary policy (MMP) – all unimaginable in 2019. In a real sense, we moved much closer to a central, all-powerful socialist state in 2020, a larger jump than the New Deal and the Great Society.

China benefitted from all this. Some experts have claimed the virus was bioengineered. (article here) We now know it is not nearly as deadly as China portrayed and let escape in videos. We know that corporations want to return to the old trade model. The Democrats likewise. The democrats and China benefitted from this virus. Talk about election interference...coincidence?

Common-sense tells us that none of this made any sense. The virus is real, a lot of people get sick, some die but it is not what we were told, it is not at all what we are told. Americans know, or should know that this was all wrong.

Yet many do not. Almost all of our subsidiary institutions that we are supposed to be able to trust have failed us this year. Academia, the media, organized religion – all went along without objection, often leading the charge of absurd emotionality.

If we look around the world, we have to wonder the following:

  1. Why have the homeless in the US not been stricken?
  2. What of Africa, South America, and India? Why no large outbreaks?
  3. How did China get back to work and back open so quickly?
  4. Why is the bulk of the extreme lockdowns and the crisis focuses primarily in Five Eyes nations FVEY (Australia, Canada, Great Britain, New Zealand, and the U.S.)?

The Five Eyes fact is especially disturbing. Parts of Australia are undergoing draconian government actions, arrests, restrictions, etc. New Zealand locked down a nation because four people in one household tested positive. The U.S. shut down the world's most vibrant economy, and has not let up? Why is the virus so selective?

If you can come to the realization that nothing about Coronavirus and our reaction made any sense then the next question that is obvious is why, why now, why at this point in history? Beyond the fact that the overreaction advanced socialist objectives, why has this overreaction affected only the FVEY nations?

Some suggest this is related to a globalist inspired color revolution. It is the Five Eyes nations that stand, or have stood, against a growing Chinese peer-competitor status and perhaps even hegemony. The populist and nationalist position of the Trump administration is anathema to those that stand the most to gain from globalism. Trump is as dangerous to that agenda and perhaps Sanders was, and we see what the Democratic party did to keep Sanders off the ballot (twice). BREXIT and a popular reaction to centralization were dangerous to globalism in Great Britain. These sorts of things cannot stand it seems.

Given the facts, given what our innate senses, our common-sense, tell us about 2020 and COVID, given the lockstep fashion in which the media has never questioned the narrative, in fact, they are the chief purveyors and perhaps creators of said narrative, given what we see we now; something is rotten in Denmark.

It is not only possible, but it also seems likely at this point, that all of this COVID response was contrived. That it is all related to a larger effort to conduct a soft coup, a color revolution in the U.S. The riots, the unrests, the unleashing of hate and angst, supported fully by one party and excused by the media – all seems related now.

If true, if this is a color revolution, it will end poorly, likely in violence.

 

If Democrats would use the FBI and CIA to illegally spy on a presidential campaign, do the things they did to Bernie to keep him on the sidelines, spend four years undermining effective governance, yearn for the day that relations can be restored with their idolized totalitarian capitalist welfare state of China AND openly support violence, looting and arson on American streets, is it a far stretch to consider that they would support an all-out color revolution attempt and use an infectious but not extremely deadly virus (perhaps one designed for this purpose) to help that cause? If they have used the intelligence community once for illegal activities is it inconceivable that they are now using intelligence assets in all FVEY nations to cement power?

It is plausible, more so than a mere coincidence! (Color Revolutions Explained)


Many of the links with research are from 'L' (@SomeBitchIKnow) follow her. She is amazing at digging for and aggregating bits of information. The conclusions and assessment are my own and do not necessarily attach to her take on all this (they should but I cannot speak for her).

I also realize, only recently, that some Q folks hold to this theory. I am not one of those folks, I did not get my assessment from them, this started to smell fishy to me in April. I will say, that just because many Q folks ask similar questions does not negate the theory. They are not wrong about everything, they perhaps just sometimes fill in too many gaps in their analysis. 

The “Trump and GOP Senators Deliberately Infected with COVID Theory”

It is hard to know what to make of the sheer number of reasonable people that are coming out on social media and stating how odd it is to them that Trump and so many GOP senators and campaign folks are all getting COVID now, just before the election. It is almost as if they already believe there is a color revolution going on. I realize full well that Congress spoke this week and told us that theorizing about theories is not acceptable when they condemned Qanon. Much of the leftist world celebrated and reminded us that of course, a cabal of pedophiles does not run the world, Putin does! Only some theories about conspiracies are acceptable it seems.

But what to make of reasonable people questioning the timing and circumstances of Trump and others getting the 'rona? One easy explanation is that they were in the same place at the same time. A counter-argument is the Trump travels all over, sees thousands of people - why now.

Eccentric entertainer Alex Jones predicted on March the 13th 2020 that before the election, 'they', would either infect Trump with Covid-19 or tell him that he was infected and then 'they' would ensure that he never left the hospital, essentially assassinating him. In this case 'they' are the folks running the color revolution.  Those were pretty wild things to suggest several months ago - in October, it seems there are regular people willing to consider such depravity is possible.

Here is the key thing to take away - the fact that enough people have seen enough odd shenanigans going on (lies in the media, contrived violence, mass deception) to even make it feasible that one could ponder something as dark and nefarious as the above having occurred is enough to tell you how bad this is - it is almost like a 'social signal' that informs us that we collectively know something is up, we cannot know all the facts, but we know somebody is out to harm us, we sense it and see tell-tale evidence.

Heck, before 2020, I thought all the talk of 'the CIA killing JFK' was humorous. Now I go back and watch one of his later speeches where he warned of dark and secret forces at work and I wonder, could those 'whackos' have been right all these years.

Here is another take - if you think folks questioning the timing of these infections are 'nuts'. Wait and see what happens if Trump recovers quickly. Mainstream media will claim it was all a hoax. I had a relative ask me today if I thought Trump really had COVID. He may be bombastic, he may be very 'New Yorker' - but he does not appear to be a man that would fake an illness and look weak, this is not in his nature. Just wait though, for the National Enquirer (I mean NYTs and CNN) to suggest this was all a hoax that he was ever sick - it will happen!

This is our color revolution. JFK was right, dark and secret forces are at work and deception abounds.

America’s Color Revolution

It seems the term ‘color revolution’ is popular suddenly. Last evening, I noticed an enormous spike in traffic, all to one article Our Color Revolution, beginning just before 9 pm. It was because of Tucker Carlson, he had Darren Beattie on for a couple of minutes to discuss three Revolver News articles discussing a color revolution in America. (see Color Revolutions Explained for background)

Most people have never heard of a color revolution, that includes the dozens of writers in the punditry class that will now shill formulatic five-hundred-word articles today on the subject. Suddenly they are instant experts on a topic that before yesterday their knowledge was, at best, PowerPoint deep.  They will write  to tell you that this is a crazed conspiracy theory, or that this is all just about one thing “getting Trump”, the approach will represent their bias. Both are wrong, they miss the forest for the trees.

I first suggested to a small group in mid-April that what I was observing in America contained many elements of a color revolution. Otherwise intelligent people scoffed at the idea. In my observation, entirely too much of what occurred related to COVID-19 was simply too coincidental. There is no space to get into that here, there is clearly a virus but too much about the reactions by governments was too synchronized, too ‘unprecedented’.

I will say this, without real evidence. I am fairly convinced that the US would not still be experiencing lockdowns in September if the BLM protests and riots and defund the police movement did not begin in May.   Why?  By May many Americans were getting not a little bit angry at the police for arresting mothers at the park with kids and gym owners and hairdressers trying to work. Americans we not going to tolerate drastic lockdowns for long, our opinion of the police was turning. Queue the rioting and defund the police protests and a large segment of the population that was wary of the police and the government a few months ago is now calling for the insurrection act to be invoked.

Say what you will about those individual issues and the separate motivations – it is undeniably true that there are now people supporting police action, masks, and lockdowns that without the riots this year would have been in the street protesting police overreaction. We have been separated, almost perfectly in classic color revolution fashion.

I will break down how and why I believe there is a relationship between everything in 2020 in a later article. This is more complex than a left/right thing it is not just about Trump, it is not just “Russia and bots”, it is not just ‘Soros’. I have yet to see anyone cover this topic in full details – from tooth to tail – all that try to get lost in the weeds on one of the common assumptions.

I just wanted to post a few thoughts today before all the clueless pundits at the major outlets begin publishing their vaporous pieces of propaganda.

None of this just started, it is part of and enabled (possible because of what I call the Great Unraveling others The Fourth Turning). In order to pull this off groups had to work for years to infiltrate and usurp institutions (media, academic, corporation, government and military – not entirely but just enough)

See all Color Revolution posts

If You Feel Apathetic, Sad or Mad in 2020, It is by Design

Summary: It is clear now, to me, that tools, techniques, and methodologies of state capture and interactive internet activity deceptions are at play in the US in 2020. Below I break down the template methodology of a color revolution.

Color Revolutions explained, all Color Revolution posts

What is the nature of 2020? This is no longer an academic question, not merely a philosophical endeavor. The nature of the thing is key to understanding all of the noise and chaos around us.

In early March, sitting at lunch with a pastor friend he mused that perhaps China had cooked up the virus and then overblown their response to get others to follow. Obviously, we cannot know, even now, if his off-the-wall query was correct. We can know, based upon just plain old common-sense, that everything in 2020 is odd, so odd that it exceeds our tolerance for assuming coincidence.

As we approach a presidential election, the predictable, ordinary, and common chatter of absurd claims litter the airwaves. We have come to accept the absurdity of the election cycle. We have never experienced a period, not in living memory at least, where that level of chatter, magnified one-hundred times, has pervaded our entire culture and public dialogue.  Our 'most trusted' institutions have lifted and shifted from narrative to narrative, often conflicting with previous narratives (but in Orwellian fashion, when the narrative shifts we are told "Oceana has always been at war with Eastasia"). They have done this in a synchronous manner, with only minor degrees of separation between opposing views.

We have essentially divided into three broad groups at this point. On the far 'left' and 'right' many (still a minority) have polarized into deepening opposed points of view. These groups have cemented around their version of their interpretation of reality. The vast majority, folks that were originally highly interested and engaged early on as everything about our world was turned asunder, have become disaffected. Most have grown tired of the constant barrage on social media, current and former 'friends' arguing and bickering. Many are tired of being pounced upon if they make the smallest remark about the major issues of the day. For these, apathy has set in. Most people are tired of the fear, the lockdowns, the political bickering. That is understandable under normal circumstances. None of this looks or smells normal.

In cosmology, scientists are simply incapable of reconciling our conceptualization of the universe utilizing equations from generally accepted laws and theories. When they add up the observed and projected universe, apply various equations and projections, and account for gravity and other things something is missing. Some force or material exerts influence on the system that we have not discovered or proven to exist.  We call this dark matter, much as scientists in previous generations theorized about aether to explain elements in the universe they could not see. We know something has to be there, otherwise, all of our theories and equations are wrong.

I suggest there is something akin to 'dark matter' at play in our current environment. I cannot say, I doubt anyone being honest can say, what the nature of this dark matter is. Many people theorize about who and what this is, the theories are many and diverse. None of that is the point. We have little evidence to depict the 'who'. We do not know if there is one group or many, if they are ancient or new, organized and structured or simply an amalgamation of simple common interest. What we can know, is that we observe something outside of the norm is at play.

Let me explain.

I have come to the conclusion that this year appears to have many of the elements one would expect to see in a color revolution (or state capture if you prefer that term). I was hesitant to come to this conclusion, it is a dark and depressing realization. I did not arrive here readily. I have suspected, questioned, suggested openly for others to dissect and perhaps argue against the idea but I have not been certain up until this point. I know what I know, but it is not my point to ask you to believe my conclusions based upon that. I will merely present the 'cosmological equation' and ask that you consider if there must be something more.

 

Color Revolution and State Capture

Color revolutions are much more than a catchy title applied to popular movements that share certain aspects of their nature. In every case, these revolutions occurred only because of support by organizations and entities external to the 'organic' movements on the ground. The United States has played a significant role, overtly and covertly, in every color revolution since the early 2000s ( a practice that was not out of step with many of our clandestine operations since WWII.)

Marisol Nostromo (link here) provides a fair treatment of much of what a color revolution is and why he believes the same methods we have used in foreign countries have been utilized in the US. (he attempts to name the nature of it and give 'they' a name, I believe it is more complex than such a simple explanation - but I suspect the parties he identifies are certainly part of the effort)

The term may have its origins in the works of Gene Sharp, who wrote some guidebooks on how to organize popular revolts using Madison Avenue-style marketing techniques. He recommended to the sponsors that rather than confusing or boring the participants with too much political theory, they should motivate their budding revolutionaries with pop culture, using catchy, content-free slogans, logos, and team colors.

Funding and support for color revolution activities in foreign nations always involve non-attribution, much of the funding and support is distributed through third-party non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and is often coordinated through USAID (a component of the State Department that works closely with both the DoD and the CIA).

Likewise, state capture is a real phenomenon, these operations have occurred in developing nations. There is a significant amount of academic work on the issue (search state capture on JSTOR). State capture can and has occurred, via private interests and through private and nation-state partnership (much like color revolutions).

State capture is "a type of systemic political corruption in which private interests significantly influence a state's decision-making processes to their own advantage". Generally, this occurs through pay-offs, blackmail, and subtle threats that usurp the ordinary functions of government for the benefit of private interests.

Combine the historical templates of state capture with demonstrated methodologies of color revolutions and add in the significant advances in interactive internet activities (IIA) then the argument that what is occurring right now is not just coincidence or an accident takes on much more weight.

Color Revolution Phases

Strategic planners in the government love five-phase operations. Color revolutions and state capture is conducted in five phases (not a very creative lot). Visualize the chart above with an objective listed to the right (not depicted) and a concise mission statement filled with action verbs (also not depicted). We cannot know the objective nor the mission statement, that would be conjecture. We can know the lines of effort and the various supporting efforts that always go into these sorts of operations.

Each long block on the diagram is a line of effort (LOE). LOEs build toward the next LOE, they can be sequential or contemporaneous. Some tactics are one-time things, others are 'rinse and repeat' as required.  In a nutshell, this is design methodology, and the chart represents a template design methodology for a color revolution. If you can visualize the flow, horizontally and vertically, building toward an objective, you understand enough about the methodology to read the chart.

Information operations are key to these efforts, propaganda to use a disfavored term. Technology now plays a key role in this, specifically interactive internet activities(IIA). IIA is non-attributed internet activities made to appear to be opposition or support. True IIA is much deeper than mere bots and fake accounts. The nasty stuff targets individuals by their digital profile, it knows who they are and what they think, and appeals to them through attractive personas. As data about us has proliferated building such a profile for exploitation is much easier.  Think of this as targeted marketing to your very soul; there is technology that can do that.

If you step back for a moment about what you personally think and believe about the virus, Trump, impeachment, the protests, riots, and everything else in 2020 - that is hard to do, but read the chart as objectively as possible - then you should begin to have questions. You can see how we arrived, perhaps a month or so ago, at a critical mass of separation and labeling. Friends no longer speaking, families mad at one another, community disintegrating in many ways.

This was accomplished via many methods, I will provide just a couple of examples.

Over information and changing narrative - 2020 has been a continuous news cycle. In December, I thought it bizarre that the impeachment was delayed for almost a month. If Trump was the dangerous criminal claimed, he should have been removed immediately. Instead, we moved it between "WWIII" and COVID. Since then, news has been constant. The newest dire threat warning continual. Stories have changed, the threat has changed, but the pace of the news cycle remained. This was key.

We have been called to action without sufficient facts and told that the official story is the only moral story. This builds division.

Events like the "White Coat Summit", where doctors come out, say things a large portion of the population wants to hear, millions see the video, and then it is banned. People then believe it all has to be true, "they' are suppressing it" many yell. A day or so later, 'they' expose one of the doctors as someone with heterological religious views. This makes those that supported the video publically look foolish. This is classic pride and ego up/down, an extreme form of gaslighting used in interrogations, here applied across society. It is designed to make one doubt their own conclusions and force them to trust the 'authority'.

The mailbox hoax is similar. Thousands retweeted and shared on social media images of mailboxes on trucks and warehouses filled with items that were proven to be old pictures. (this is perhaps not controlled disninfo but rather overeager supporters of a theory seeking proof). The USPS narrative itself, however,  is a deception. Told repeatedly it is building toward greater chaos. Many accept this story without any hard proof and only spurious claims.

We have this year a couple of examples of 'whistleblowers' releasing information, variously supporting the narratives of each extreme. Upon further inspection, these appear to be what is called a "limited hangout", official information released in such a way as to cover up a bigger story. Often, the whistleblower is defamed, therefore diminishing the limited information they released and everyone moves on thinking it was all a hoax.

We have been provided labels to easily identify which side of the created separation we stand-upon. Mask wears versus skeptics, BLM versus law an order types, etc. We have readily complied with this self-labeling. There are too many videos to count of ordinary citizens ready to fight one another over masks. We did this, we gladly put on uniforms of the various false divisions.

Apathy or Doubling Down

We have clearly, in my observation, entered phase four. Some of us, just a few, have solidified on the poles. Most of us have lost the friends we were going to lose through self-identification. Many are now sad, frustrated, some hopeless, and most just tired of all of this. Most just want nothing more to do with it. We are apathetic. This is exactly where we are supposed to be right now, according to the template.

Most of the riots have settled down, minus the diehards in the Pacific Northwest. Most Americans are tired of seeing all of that and pay no attention. In most places, we are getting back to something approaching quasi-normal in terms of the virus. In terms of the template, this is also predictable. Too much lawlessness, too much fear can push people in unpredictable and uncontrollable directions. Ordinary Americans would have to be apathetic in this phase, not taking to the streets. And, in the template, if apathy begins to wane into skepticism, turning back on some of the previous elements of crisis and chaos is always an option.

Summary

That is the 50,000-foot view of the methodology with just some examples of how it has been and is being applied here. You have to step back, divorce yourself from favorite theories. This cannot be just Russia, read my article on that. This has to be something from within, and it probably has to cross traditional party lines. I did not, and will not, mention how I became convinced this is not theoretical. I know only that I was certain before this week and wanted it not to be so. If you apply the template and look at the world as it is, you will also see that 'dark matter' has to be out there without additional 'proof'.

The Very Bad News

If I am correct, there is very little that we can do about this. All of us come into this will our worldviews. Those worldviews will compel us to want to see 'them' as a preferred and customary enemy. That is a mistake.

If I had to guess I would assume that 'them' is a cabal of establishment type politicians and corporate investors/executives that never again want the threat of a populist candidate for president such as Sanders or Trump. Sanders would have taxed their investment income, Trump hurt their profits from globalism. One need only look at what the DNC did to Sanders in 2016 and 2020 to understand how much they do not want an outsider. The RNC's treatment of Trump was more subtle, but just the same. You need to be neither a Sanders nor a Trump supporter to see that they are far outside of the traditional alliance between politics and the corporate world. And even if you hate Trump, you have to admit, he is the first president since Carter not to invade anyone or start a new war and he angered the Neocons by pulling out of Syria. War is a big deal to the establishment on both sides, trillions of dollars ride on that. Eisenhower warned of the military-industrial complex, Kennedy warned of the corruption of the media and 'dark forces'. If I had to guess about who 'they' are, I would suspect we see them on television a lot, in office, in uniform (or recently retired)and behind anchor desks.

But, we may never truly know who 'they' are. If they are successful, we will have a revolution without ever knowing it fully. They will fundamentally change our system just enough to prevent unwanted interruptions. Most will be none the wiser.

That said, there is no 'fighting this'.  If this all goes poorly and fighting occurs it will be a proxy fight, 'us' against 'them' but never against the folks pulling the levers. Fight we might, and we may eventually have no choice to pick a side. It is more likely that our apathy will make that unnecessary. When the putsch occurs, the big crisis that forces a culmination to all of this, most of us will just be happy all the chaos is ending.


The Good News

Clearly, the conditions and circumstances that have made us so susceptible to deception on this scale did not just spontaneously generate this year. When we, generally and broadly, accepted an attack on the existence of the foundational objective truths that shaped us as a people and a nation that was the first, and perhaps greatest deception. That occurred over many years, a few centuries in fact.

Our institutions were not usurped, hijacked, and made either ineffective or tools of the deception only recently. It took an assault on the education system combined with some targeted grooming to turn the fourth estate. Our churches have demonstrated something many suspected, they contain a great illness. Many have so lost their way they were incapable of serving as a permanent thing of culture this year, others are so far gone they aided in the deceptions.

We, as a people have tolerated growing divisions, whether organic or contrived. These divisions were natural friction points that have been exploited this year. We have, through ignorance or avarice, flirted with absurd ideologies.

Considering what we have become and what we have tolerated and what we have given up, 2020 is not that unprecedented at all.

If there is hope, it is not in a political solution, although that will certainly play a part in it. It will likely not be corrected merely by Divine fiat, although God is in control, we have a large role to play.

If you are apathetic or sad and just want it all to end, be careful what you wish for. This is precisely where 'they' want you to be. No people are destined for oppression, but only vigilance and action combined with prayer and perhaps fortune can save us.

Twelve men wrote in 1930 of what they saw of the future, I have replaced "industrialism" with "deception" because the fears they saw eventually manifested into our post-modern deceptions.

“For, in conclusion, this much is clear: If a community, or a section, or a race, or an age, is groaning under [deception], and well aware that it is an evil dispensation, it must find the way to throw it off. To think that this cannot be done is pusillanimous. And if the whole community, section, race, or age thinks it cannot be done, then it has simply lost its political genius and doomed itself to impotence.” - I'll Take My Stand

Our Next Six Months

Saturday update for 15 August 2020.

Cannon Hinnant

A five-year-old boy, riding his bike in front of his house is the definition of innocence. Throughout history, almost all cultures have recognized this. The media may portray this jut as a boy fatally shot.

Cannon

But it is much more than that. We could talk about how different the outcry and reaction would be if this were a black child, shot at close range in the head by a white neighbor. That would be playing into the same racialist narrative that infects so much of the dialogue today.

Cannon was an innocent, in the eyes of God his life mattered and he was innocent of all sin. We do not know what he would have grown up to be. He may have become a drug-addicted, lifetime criminal, a man that abused women, abandoned his children, and might someday die on a street after committing more crimes and struggling with police.

He may have become a saint, or he may have just become an ordinary imperfect man like the rest of us. But he was innocent and his life mattered.

Some will argue that perhaps Darius Sessoms, the man that shot Cannon in the head from close range, was an anomaly, that this is not indicative of the world. That we cannot place blame on an entire class of people because of his actions. I agree with that. We cannot condemn all 25-year-old black men as child murderers. It would be insane to classify an entire class of people as evil!

Some of the same people that would make that argument support groups that want to vilify and attack the police, all of them, as one large homogenous group of evil-doers. Some still would tell us that all white people enjoy white privilege and play a part in 'systemic racism'.  Because they have read, sat in a lecture, or saw some videos on the subject, they might even place me in a category of deniers because I do not even recognize my own 'white fragility'.

There is some hard truth that we need to come to terms with.

All of this hatred and racism that has spread like a real pandemic since George Floyd died on a street (before then really, perhaps back to Michael Brown robbing a store and wrestling for a police officers gun) played a significant role in the death of Cannon Hinnant. I can hear all of the counter-arguments, but on a basic, foundational level, that is absolutely true.

We can say that we 'love' people and want to see justice. But a parent that loves their child does not allow them to do absurd or dangerous things just because the child is upset. A friend does not stand idly by and supports a friend doing immoral things just because their friend feels wronged. Real love comes with other attributes. Real love looks at the total cost and the total benefit of a thing and measures it all against a backdrop of other principles. Real love is not blind support of anything that makes someone appear to feel better.

From the first day that churches, pastors and people that believe they operate from a position of goodwill began posting memes, making arguments, endeavoring to convince others and signaling their support for BLM and the protests (often ignoring the hateful words and violence) I have repeated over and over - this is all wrong.

Black Lives Matter as a concept is correct because all lives matter and we should seek justice. BLM as an organization is horrible. It is impossible to separate the broad concept from the organization and the hate and violence it engenders. People of goodwill and moral principles should have avoided this from the beginning.

There have been more murders beyond Cannon; many more. Some media outlets claim that 'crime has not increased', in an effort to gaslight those that see all of this in its true nature. Many are deceived by such claims, no matter how easily debunked they are.

BLM and the protests, burning, violence, riots, and mayhem have unleashed a general spirit of violence and lawlessness. This has manifested most in the cities and communities with a predominately black population. Those that support BLM had in effect subjected to many black Americans to more poverty, violence, and suffering.

This all has been and is immoral. It is wrong. Those that supported it from a position of  "goodwill" of a concept of Biblical Love that excluded all the other principles in the Bible have been and are wrong.

If this applies to you, you need to repent of your sin and search your soul to figure out what in your life made you so susceptible to a lie of the world.

Here is some truth for you.


 

I responded to a local news article the other day that claimed a minor public figure was among other things a racist. I commented that it was a terrible article and poor journalism because they made no effort to actually support the claim that the person in question was a racist, it was just stated as fact, they had said racist things.

One of the young reporters replied to me with an article from Politico. Politico stated they had 'hundreds of hours' of video with the individual making racist statements and provided a video as an example. In the provided video there were heterodox statements, things contrary to the established narrative but nothing racist.

I replied that the delivery was 'plain', but the points were no different that things Dr. Thomas Sowell has said for years. With that, the conversation turned. I too must be a racist, or a troll, or a parody account.

It is very dangerous that ideas are so easily tossed aside and those that question anything of the popular narrative are branded with a label, a scarlet letter, and dismissed.  These are troubling developments. This is not the same a labeling someone a 'radical progressive', 'liberal', 'right-winger', etc.   This is essentially the same as calling someone a pedophile, a social pariah. (It may, in fact, be worse, there are some that now claim out loud that pedophilia is a sexual orientation)

One of the most profound statements from the Granada TV documentary on the Spanish Civil War (I highly recommend it) was, 'when each side could no longer discuss ideas, violence was inevitable'.

If most of the institutions of society (most of the media, many churches, most of the educational establishment), and many of the unthinking masses are willing to carelessly label others with stigmatic labels that equals their voice and ideas unworthy of being heard - how do you believe this all turns out?

We need to return to civil discussion and an honest usage of the English language. Racism and racist language exists on both sides of the conversation today, but on the extremes. We need to apply the term precisely, otherwise real violence awaits us all.


 

  • Trump claims that mail-in voting will be an open opportunity for voter fraud.
  • Much of the media repeatedly conflates 'mail-in' voting (mass mailing out ballots) with absentee voting (registered voters actively requesting a ballot) in an effort to dismiss Trump's claim.
  • Many on the left claim without funding the USPS cannot handle mail-in voting and predict chaos.
  • Several news articles and snippets of remarks by Democratic leaders predict chaos and even hint they believe Trump will not concede.
  • The NYT reported an exercise during the Obama era where a sitting president refused to concede and a constitutional crisis ensued.
  • Marco Rubio tells us to expect election chaos.

It seems both the Democrats and Republicans completely agree. Are they foreshadowing what is to come? Is this all a singular plan, are they really working together, some claim that? Is it perhaps that both sides see the growing divide and understand what this means (I wrote that in 2018)? Are they perhaps just building a narrative for a future claim to legitimacy/illegitimacy? We cannot know. But it seems they agree that real chaos is coming. Nothing good comes from such chaos.

A New Civil War, an aggregator of news and opinion from both sides is a good place to keep up with opinions across the spectrum. When I wrote America’s Great Cultural and Political Divide in 2018 many mainstream articles on the subject at the same time dismissed the idea as preposterous, no longer is that the story.

You would be wise to get yourself and your family ready - and repent of your sins of omission and commission that helped in some way move us to this point.


 

Interference by Russia, China and others is real. Some of it is easy to detect, while other efforts are more subtle and perhaps more effective. Each side has their prefered enemy, may repeat the narratives, carelessly. We should be wise enough to see all of this for what it is, yet most do not.

The leaked release of police bodycam footage was something of a watershed moment for many. We now know why it was not released, or we can reasonably assume. It paints a very different picture than what was available only on the other angles of Floyd's arrest. I noticed thousands of people, folks that had argued passionately one way prior to the release of this evidence change their outlook. Some began to question why any of the subsequent violence occurred. Others pivoted away from ever mentioning Floyd and making all of this about something bigger (that is rather dishonest).

What is clear, is that none of these events, Micheal Brown, Floyd, and many others that have caused so much chaos were ever what they were portrayed as originally, and many people have come to see that as a reality now. The cases remain complex, but they are not clear-cut cases of racist cops gone wild, murdering innocent people. Honest people, folks of goodwill, willing to look at facts now know this.

ANTIFA and BLM have credibility and the narrative problem now. People wonder if burning, beating, violence, and mayhem were justified.

I will be the first 'not shocked' person when we see some major incident, perhaps even a mass killing, all made to look like (or at least reported as ) a white racist attack. The Boogaloo Bois are real, they are ready for the revolution, marching, and supporting ANTIFA and BLM and they already look like "white supremacists" - they are the perfect candidates to conduct such an operation.


 

I am not even convinced at this point the Democrats are running a serious campaign to win. If I were Joe Biden, I would keep my head down and watch those around me. Nothing would spell 'sympathy vote' more than a candidate being killed "by extremest on the other side". History is filled with that sort of stuff, 2020 is that odd.

Or, as some claim - is Trump just part of it all? He is getting things done the Democrats want that they could never do without many on the right taking to the streets. Think about it...I do not know.


 

China has checked off every action I predicted on 7 June, (those and more; I was probably wrong on the election but spot-on in terms of China and Belarus)

In the midst of election chaos, between November and January (probably late December, early January) I think it is highly likely that China will move decisively and quickly to take control of Taiwan. There is a scenario, that smart strategic planners have worked out, whereby China can accomplish just that in less than a week. It only requires a delayed and confused response from the US.

Such a move, successfully executed with minimal fighting and Taiwain capitulating early because of a delayed US response would fundamentally alter the East Asian balance of power.

Millions more will soon be subjected to the boot-heel of a genocidal regime because we in the US are too busy being absurd.


 

Finally - the entire alignment of many ancillary nations hangs in the balance right now. The proxy war Greece and Turkey have fought in Libya is more than two sides trying to fix something the US and NATO foolishly broke. The peace arrangement between Israel and the UAE has a significant meaning.

Will the Eastern Med/Middle-east, Caucus now realign based upon a new and more natural coalition or will unrelated wars prevail. Will all of this result in a comprehensive peace arrangement? (of later chapter Biblical proportions...)

All are possible. If the peace, initiative expands to the Balkans (Kosovo and Serbia) then Greece, Turkey, and resolves Syria and the Caucus (all interconnected) I will really be convinced we are in the end-times! If is is a geopolitical realignment, I will not b shocked.

I am inclined to think that spheres will simply realign. Russia has a common interest with many that we have a common interest with. We may come to view them differently in a new arrangement. Turkey and Pakistan and Qatar may be out, India in. Israel might be welcomed openly into a coalition with Saudia Arabia, UAE, and Syria. We may come to see Syria as a front in the battle against not ISIS but Iranian/Turkish and Chinese interest. The world could realign over this into the US versus China spheres based upon natural and historical affinities/animosities and the prevailing strategic goals of the primaries.

Universal Basic Income

CNBC, reporting on comments by U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi highlights the first open admission that left-liberal progressives intend to utilize Coronavirus as a pretext to implement some of their most radical short-term objectives. Quoting Pelosi[1], CNBC reported, “Others have suggested a minimum income, a guaranteed income for people. Is that worthy of attention now? Perhaps so.”[2] Andrew Yang included universal basic income (UBI) as part of his 2020 presidential campaign. Yang was quoted as saying, “I’m pleased to see the White House adopt our vision of putting money directly into the hands of hard-working Americans.” Bernie Sanders, in one of his last campaign speeches before dropping out of the 2020 election proposed a scheme to pay every household $2000 monthly.

Willkie in her CNBC article parroted numbers of unemployed in the U.S. at approximately $25 million. She sailed to acknowledge that phase one of the CARES Act included a provision that added $600 per week to unemployment benefits, above and beyond what one would normally qualify for based upon prior income level. Numerous other sources have reported the impact of this fact – individuals make more money being unemployed than working[3], and some are unwilling to go back to work.[4] On the face of it, this is an absurd policy. No reasonable person can make an honest argument in support of a policy that redistributes wealth and pays people more not to work than to work unless the worldview behind the support of the policy leads the supporter to other, unspoken objectives. By any honest account, this is plunder.[5] If we accept the reasonable conclusion that paying people more to be unemployed than they made while working is absurd and the people supporting such are not deficient in mental capacity then we must also accept that something else is at play – it is a straightforward syllogism.  It is also a fact that the same people that supported the boost to unemployment pay in the CARES Act are now suggesting full-blown UBI, we begin to see the greater objective.

Universal basic income, once adopted, would be nearly impossible to rollback. It would be perhaps the most transformative public policy legislation in U.S. history. The implications of control and intrusion in everyday life and control of the economy are wider than any previous move toward centralization. UBI, if adopted, is a great step forward toward socialism. The fact that both of these programs are being slipped in amid a ‘crisis’ seems deceptive. “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit…”( ESV Colossians 2:8). Socialism is a derivative of the ideology of Marxism and the deception being used to implement it is abhorrent. Public policymakers and citizens must be vigilant.


[1] See video of Pelosi's statement, https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1254764438000984064.

[2] Willkie, C. “Pelosi says universal basic income could be ‘worthy of attention now’ as coronavirus stifles economy”, CNBC. 27 April 2020. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/27/coronavirus-update-universal-basic-income-could-be-worthy-of-attention-pelosi-says.html.

[3] See, “Some people are earning more in unemployment benefits than they did while working, leaving little incentive to return to their jobs”, Business Insider, 21 April 2020, https://www.businessinsider.com/unemployment-benefits-may-be-higher-than-wages-for-some-workers-2020-4.

[4] See, “Furloughed Workers Don’t Want To Return To Their Jobs As They’re Earning More Money With Unemployment”, Forbes, 28 April 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2020/04/28/furloughed-workers-dont-want-to-return-to-their-jobs-as-theyre-earning-more-money-with-unemployment/#50054cb06b76.

[5] Bastiat, Frédéric. The Law. United States: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2007. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Law/DZKE3-pV1AYC,  p. 13

Saul Alinsky and Coronavirus

An editorial essay in The Washington Times [1] argues that much of the hyper-crisis reporting and governmental action related to COVID-19 aligns with principles laid out in Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.   Chumley begins her argument by quoting one of Alinsky’s foundational presuppositions, “[a]ny revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future.”[2] She argues that “[t]his is Coronavirus Chaos, exemplified.” In support of that bold statement, she provides examples of America being in full panic mode and willing to sacrifice more civil liberties to gain more perception of security. She argues that the Constitution has effectively been suspended, to the applause of the left and right. Pastors have been arrested for conducting services, fathers handcuffed for taking their kids to the park, public protest outlawed, and individuals drug from public transportation by the police.

Chumley observes that all of this, and more, have occurred in a time when we have yet to understand the real nature of Coronavirus. She observes that even a mere hint of skepticism is met in the public and private square with ostracization and ridicule. This comports well with Alinsky’s foundational presupposition, of a non-challenging attitude by defeated people, combined with later suggestiong toward the use of ridicule. Americans are not allowed to work, to produce and create a livelihood. Quoting Alinsky again she observes that this “shake[s] up the prevailing patterns of […] lives — agitate[s], create[s] disenchantment and discontent with the current values.” Chumley does not suggest that Coronavirus is not real, nor that it is necessarily a creation intended to bring about the consequences observed. She merely points out that the crisis and reaction cycle related to the event meshes well with Alinsky’s radical prescription. Her observation itself is a radical statement, bold questions and observations in a time when the discussion is so limited in the public square.

The Washington Times piece raises numerous questions that policymakers should be asking and framing during this event. Chumley raises two issues that are undeniable facts. First, the progressive left-liberals have held an objective of implementing many of the policies that have so easily entered public policy over the proceeding weeks, the adoption of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)[3] as one example. The second is perhaps subject to interpretation but hard to argue against, much of the behavior of left-liberal media outlets and politicians align with Alinsky’s Rules, it appears that progressives are taking advantage of the crisis, perhaps even exacerbating it, in order to enact policies they might never gain consensus to enact otherwise.

If we ignore the ease that governments across the land have attacked religious liberty, often to cheers of ‘Christians’, as well as numerous other assaults on civil liberties and basic common sense and address just the implications of our adoption of MMT, we find those implications to be profound. One simply cannot put the genie of universal basic income and magic money creation back in the bottle once released. The longer the lockdowns continue, the more ‘stimulus packages’ passed by the Federal Government, the nearer we approach to establishing a universal basic income scheme. Printing money to give to people not producing is contrary to historical lessons, averse to common sense and contrary to biblical teachings (Proverbs 12:24). Public policymakers across the land must take action now to react to Cornovirous in a principled, right-reasoned, common sense manner. The Governors in South Carolina, Georgia, and Tennesee have recently taken the right steps in restarting their economies – others should follow.

Chumley’s interpretation of recent events and her analysis of progressive left-liberals utilization of this crisis to advance their agenda is a cautionary lesson for policymakers. Policies made in a time of uncertainty, when facts and truth are distorted and the emotions of the populace enflamed are often bad policy.

 

Chumley, C. “Coronavirus and the smell of Saul Alinsky”, The Washington Times. 18 April 2020. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/18/coronavirus-and-smell-saul-alinsky/.

[1] One might argue, perhaps correctly so, that The Washington Times has a bias. Other news organizations that disavow the existence of their own observable bias would certainly make this claim in an effort to support an argument that the Times is not a legitimate news outlet. This is an absurd argument, in a time when the entire ‘Fourth Estate’ has abandoned neutrality and objectivity, the Times is as much a legitimate news source as any other.

[2] The Washington Times via, S Alinsky, Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals, Vintage (Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2010), https://books.google.com/books?id=VIH0UbZ8qU4C. p. XiX.

[3] See for instance, “Unlimited Money and No Liquidity: Welcome to 2020”, https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/unlimited-money-and-no-liquidity%3A-welcome-to-2020-2020-04-15.

Coronavirus, Crisis, and ‘Opportunity’

A recent CNN piece that discusses the percentages of black Americans in three locations and the relative population size by infection rate. The article subtly hints at what some, more radical progressive public figures, have been claiming – that there is inequity caused by discrimination therefore the government must provide universal healthcare for all.  This is crisis/problem creation, straight from Saul Alinsky’s Rules.  


A recent CNN article[1] demonstrates the propensity of the left-liberal media to act as sophists[2] executing what one might argue is a direct application of Saul Alinsky’s Rules. Alinsky argued that “revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude”.[3] He also argued that the first task of revolution is to create issues or problems.[4] As the events of coronavirus drag on, we are beginning to see more news articles and discussions of how the ‘crisis’ impact favored progressive issues – this is essentially narrative building.

Yan and Holcombe in their CNN piece discuss Chicago, Louisiana, Michigan, and New Jersey comparing the total racial makeup of each area, and that to the incidence of confirmed COVID-19 infections. For example, the article states that in Chicago 70% of those infected are African-American while that population comprises 32% of the total. Quoting a representative from a group called The Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law the group stated it wants to “ensure that communities of color receive equitable treatment during the crisis”.[5] This sort of piece subtly echoes what more radical progressive elements are saying, it is part of a narrative, creating the problem as Alinsky suggested. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently stated that “inequality is a comorbidity”[6] and that “[w]e need to drop the Medicare eligibility age to [zero] right now”.[7] The CNN article mentioned above lacked context, failed to address other potential underlying causes that might explain the numbers presented and left the reader with one presented solution, ‘the discrepancy must be related to discrimination’. It is part of a greater narrative effort.

This progressive narrative is wrong on several counts. Thomas Sowell points out that the state of healthcare in a nation is rarely an indicator of people’s health.[8] It ignores the fact that we will “always have the poor”. (Mathew 26:11 ESV) It is blind to the fact that every time governments try to eliminate all poverty, they only succeed in lowing wealth overall.  However, the CNN piece and the emerging narrative from the far progressive left is reductionist as it sees one problem, inequity based upon discrimination, and one solution, government-run universal healthcare.

This is, of course, not the only plank of the progressive narrative being pushed. The Post Millennial reports that “Jealous of coronavirus, radical trans activists seek attention from Buzzfeed”.[9] On its face, this is so absurd[10] as to be unbelievable, yet this is part of the debate in the public square.  This is the result of what Alasdair MacIntyre termed the victory of Nietzsche and Weber over Aristotle.[11]

Recognizing the progressive narrative and Alinsky’s tactics is one thing, counteracting them is another matter. Shaffer in Manifesto points out that principles and real revival are required.[12] However, even from what we might consider now an innocent perspective in 1981, he foresaw real change might require something more extreme.[13]

Public policy based upon the Weberism and emotivism that MacIntyre describes as the prevailing worldview[14] is flawed. It is antithetical to the Judeo-Christian principles upon which America was founded. It is ultimately absurd because it does not comport with proven economic principles and does not align with the observations of history. If America is to traverse this crisis and those to follow with any semblance of freedom, right-reasoned government and morality we must act. The sophist, the progressive narrative weavers and the “useful idiots”[15] must be denounced or converted. Old assumptions about the value of enlightenment thinking must be reexamined.[16] The center can no longer hold. Two such opposing worldviews cannot coexist. Only poverty, tyranny, suffering and persecution can follow the complete victory of progressivism.[17]

[1] Yan, M, Holcombe, M., “Coronavirus hitting some African American communities extremely hard”, CNN, 6 April, 2020, https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/06/health/us-coronavirus-updates-monday/index.html

[2] See Aristotle's Ethics: Writings from the Complete Works - Revised Edition. United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 2014. (EE 1.6 1217 1-6), https://www.google.com/books/edition/Aristotle_s_Ethics/NGmYDwAAQBAJ. via Strauss, Leo, Cropsey, Joseph. History of Political Philosophy. United States: University of Chicago Press, 2012. p. 121. https://www.google.com/books/edition/History_of_Political_Philosophy/E7mScxst9UoC.

[3] Alinsky, Saul D., Rules for Radicals. United States: Random House, 1972. p. xix. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Rules_for_Radicals/4LbvAQAACAAJ.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Yan, M, Holcombe, M., “Coronavirus hitting some African American communities extremely hard”.

[6] See, https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1246091210449719296.

[7] See, https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1246134686092537862.

[8] Sowell, Thomas. Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One. United States, Basic Books, 2008. p. 93. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Applied_Economics/gh4JdTv-t9sC.

[9] See, “Jealous of coronavirus, radical trans activists seek attention from Buzzfeed”, https://www.thepostmillennial.com/jealous-of-coronavirus-radical-trans-activists-seek-attention-from-buzzfeed.

[10] Clark, Barry, The Rise of Absurdity in Western Philosophical and Political Views (January 22, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3523995 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3523995.

[11] MacIntyre, Alasdair. After Virtue. United Kingdom: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2013. p.112. https://www.google.com/books/edition/After_Virtue/00rsK2Y98gQC.

[12] Schaeffer, Francis August. A Christian Manifesto. United Kingdom: Crossway Books, 1981. p. 71. https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_Christian_Manifesto/eWHBcQAACAAJ.

[13] Ibid. 130.

[14] Ibid. 121.

[15] 1959, Congressional Record, Section: Appendix, Useful Idiots: Extension of Remarks of Hon. Edward J. Derwinski of Illinois in the House of Representatives on June 30, 1959, (Reprint of editorial from June 23 edition of the Chicago Daily Calumet), Page A5653, Column 2, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (LexisNexis Congressional Record Permanent Digital Collection)

[16] See, “Government for the Common Good”, https://calhouninstitute.com/government-for-the-common-good/.

[17] Clark, Barry, From Radical Progressivism to Authoritarianism (December 19, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3506918 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3506918.