In my last article, “The Deplorables – Who We Are And What We Want,” I examined the basic philosophies that define what I call the liberty movement; the same group of Americans that Hillary Clinton admonishes as part of her “basket of deplorables.”
It is important to recognize that only foolish progressives actually take Clinton’s claims at face value. Clinton seeks to characterize a large subset of conservatives as narrow-minded when she mentions the “deplorables.” But, it is how she defines “narrow-minded” that is the crux of the thing.
When people like her talk about “racists,” they are referring to conservatives who want a secure southern border. When they talk about “Islamaphobes,” they are referring to people who want to stop Islamic refugees from being bused into the country without being vetted or philosophically and morally acclimated to our way of life. When they talk about sexists, they are usually referring to all males in general, because remember, social justice warriors (SJWs) claim that we are “subconsciously sexist,” even if we think we are fair to women. When they talk about homophobes, they are referring to Christian bakers who do not want to participate in services for gay weddings despite the fact that they should be perfectly free to refuse association with anyone at any time for any reason.
What Clinton and social justice lunatics are really referring to when they use these attacks are those people who want to be free to think and do as they see fit as long as they are not violating the constitutional rights of others. No one in Hillary’s basket is actually narrow-minded, but she and her cronies pigeonhole them as narrow-minded anyway.
Clinton is not actually worried about real racists, or real sexists or real homophobes. What she and the establishment are worried about are true conservatives, because our principles are not built on hate; they are built on reason and truth. It’s easy to defeat a movement driven by hate; it’s next to impossible to defeat a movement driven by truth.
It is absolutely essential for liberty activists to understand that the goal of the establishment will be to redefine the core of our movement. If they can repaint us as hateful, then we can be beaten. If they can fool us into acting against our principles in the name of winning by any means, then once again, we can be beaten. If we are able to retain our principles and repel the propaganda, then we will NEVER be beaten. Even the greatest war machines on Earth can be crushed by the force of a principled rebellion.
As my readers know well, I do not hold much optimism for America in the short term. Our economic status is dismal. In my article, “Brexit Aftermath – Here’s What Happens Next,” I warned that global markets would be experiencing a slow grinding decline into the U.S. elections. This is now occurring. It is my belief that international financiers and central banks will pull stimulus support from the global economy just before or just after the elections. I believe that the establishment will attempt to blame conservative movements for the fiscal crisis they created.
By extension, and as I have been predicting for many months, I believe that Donald Trump will be allowed into the White House. Whether Trump is aware of this dynamic or not, I do not know. The point is, our fight is just beginning, and it has nothing to do with a Trump presidency.
The U.S. cannot be saved from the financial crisis; instability is a mathematical certainty. It is how we respond to this instability that will determine our success or failure. Here is what we “deplorables” must accomplish in the next decade if we are to rebuild America and defeat globalism.
Economic harmonization is nothing more than a globalist phrase meaning the socialist redistribution of wealth. Globalists and progressives will assert that capitalism is the cause of all our ailments. They will say it leads to an unfair allocation of wealth into the coffers of a select few through the “natural” evolution of corporate power. In reality, most socialist nations work side by side with corporations, and even the existence of the legal corporate model is owed to government interference in free markets. That is to say, there is nothing natural about corporations.
It was western governments that fabricated special legal protections for corporations including corporate personhood and limited liability. Without government protection, corporations could not exist at their current level of dominance. Therefore, bigger government and more government intervention in free markets will likely only serve to secure even greater empires for the corporate elite.
These empires can only be dismantled by removing government as a factor in free markets and allowing true competition in business to return instead of corporate favoritism. As a part of this shift, the middle class must be allowed to thrive through innovation and production. Taxation designed to redistribute wealth only seems to harm burgeoning entrepreneurs and stifles their ability to use good ideas to compete with larger businesses and their superior capital.
Economic harmonization will eventually result in equality — it will make everyone equally poor. Only a handful of elites will ever be able to pursue economic success within this kind of framework.
We’re tired of Cloward-Piven strategies used by cultural Marxists to undermine western principles and heritage. The bottom line is, some cultures are completely incompatible and they should not be roommates. Are we racist for holding this view? No, we’re just being practical. One look at the scheisse-storm hitting Europe right now and only an idiot or a Leftist with an agenda would argue that mass immigration of contrary cultures is a good idea.
Uncontrolled migrations of peoples from socialist nations into nations that desire free markets will only make the effort towards free markets impossible. Illegal immigration by people who only want taxpayer-funded entitlements and that import their socialist ideals as they invade is counter to the health of a liberty-based model.
Harshly theocratic cultures also will not be able to integrate into a society that respects individual freedom. Social justice groups assume that religious freedom requires us to remain apathetic in the face of unchecked theocratic immigration (as long as it is anything other than Christian). But, potential immigrants and illegal immigrants do not have legal rights under the U.S. Constitution. Religious freedom has nothing to do with immigration.
For example, fundamentalist Islamic culture does not mix with the traditional Western ideals of liberty and free market participation. Period.
Leftists are willfully blind to the distinction. Globalists understand the problem full well and they intend to exploit it. Their goal is to import counter-ideologies en masse in order to annihilate the last vestiges of the West.
Why? Because this is about eliminating the final obstacle to total globalization. They seek to wash out conservative and classical liberal thinking to make way for a collectivist system that outlaws sovereign philosophies as “barbaric.” It is not exactly an “ethnic cleansing;” more like an ideological cleansing of true conservativism.
We aren’t going to allow that.
This is why many in the liberty movement do in fact support a ban on all immigration into Western nations until the damage done by the multicultural cabal can be mitigated. Some may argue for a limited ban on the immigration of certain groups (including Muslims) and this is an issue where the “deplorables” diverge.
I personally don’t know how such a selective ban could be enforced without an insanely large, intrusive and expensive immigration bureaucracy designed to investigate and weed out millions of people not allowed under such a law. A simpler solution would be to freeze ALL immigration for a period of time (perhaps 10 years or more).
This would eliminate the need for the U.S. Citizenship And Immigration Services (USCIS). The $3.2 billion allocated to that entity could be spent better securing U.S. borders.
Frankly, there is nothing wrong with denying citizenship to immigrants for a period of time. The extreme left acts as if open immigration into our country is some kind of human right. It’s not.
It is perfectly healthy to be discriminating against ideologies and people that are destructive to inherent freedoms. I remember after Barack Obama took office for a second term that the common argument by Democratic and Republican elites alike was that it was “time for the Republican Party to be more inclusive” if they ever wanted to win the White House again. What that really means in translation is, it was time for the Republican Party to move completely away from conservative values and be more like the Left.
In reality, the Republican Party needs to stop accommodating socialist and globalist ideals and be more selective about who its friends are, and who its leaders are. Either that or the party needs to go the way of smallpox and die so that more honest political organizations can take its place.
We “deplorables” have seen political correctness and social justice fear mongering turn our society into a simpering cesspool of terrified effeminate spineless men, deluded miserable vitriolic women who think they are men, and the rest of us who are supposed to walk on eggshells whenever the PC police are around while being sure to use the “proper pronouns.” I think not.
I think instead, the deplorables are going to say whatever the hell we feel like saying. Why should we concern ourselves with the irrational feelings of others? Why should we censor ourselves just to satisfy the ignorant notion that language shapes environment? Language is irrelevant to our internal monolog. Changing the language is not going to change our souls. Thus, controlling it is pointless and only serves to oppress the public.
We’re not going to refer to anyone by a gender other than what their genetics dictate. We don’t care if you wear make-up and a wig and a tampon. If you were born with a Y chromosome, then you are a man. Your personal freedoms do not include the right to force others to recognize you as a woman, a “trans,” a diva, a porpoise, etc. Your feelings do not matter. We are no longer going to participate in your gender role-play fantasies.
Some of us may at times play with race-related jokes and have fun at the expense of other groups. We might argue that women actually don’t make very good Ghostbusters or that movies pontificating about slavery are becoming extraordinarily boring. We will probably refer to illegal immigrants as illegal immigrants and stare at beautiful women like we have x-ray vision.
Understand, there is nothing you can do to stop us, so you might as well spend your time doing something more constructive, like dropping out of gender studies and enrolling in a real college course.
For decades now it has become trendy for anyone besides white heterosexual males to blame all their failures on white heterosexual males. With all the gnashing of teeth over “white male privilege,” we might forget that the only groups with privileges under the law are victim groups. So much government preference is being given to these groups that almost everyone is now clamoring to categorize themselves as a victim in some sense.
The “transgender” movement is the culmination of this insanity; primarily because there is no such thing as a transgender person except the extremely rare occasion when someone is born with both male and female genitalia. Gender is biological, it is not fluid. You cannot argue with nature about your gender. Laws that govern gender issues should follow biological standards, not hollow psychological standards.
Today, anyone can simply say they are a victim group by virtue of what amounts to a mental illness. It is time to stop treating this mental illness as a civil rights issue. In turn, it is also time to stop the government from designating privileges to groups based on arbitrary victimhood. Everyone today has equal rights under the law. Everything else should be based on merit. If you fail, then it is your own fault. To foster the notion in our society that the evil white man is to blame for all the inadequacies of every loser in the world is to do more harm to those losers than good. Instead, let them take responsibility for their failings so that they might actually strive to do better.
There are only a few reasonable purposes behind government — to defend the inborn liberties of the populace, to repel foreign invaders and to secure a sound monetary framework. That’s about it. But while we deplorables see these as limited powers and responsibilities, socialists and globalists see these as excuses for an infinitely expanding government behemoth.
For example, you can build a functioning military based on the militia model, in which every able-bodied citizen rises to the defense of their community and nation in the event of an attack. This would be a cost-effective and less intrusive model.
Or, you can build a massive standing army with hundreds of bases around the world and a police state here at home, all funded by an unsustainable fiat money and debt system. This would be the big government model, which socialists argue is what government should do to fulfill its role.
The government can also be used to force private associations in the name of protecting the “rights” of others. A Christian taxpayer might be forced to fund entities they oppose, like Planned Parenthood (which receives around $500 million in tax dollars per year). This is the problem with open-ended nanny government; the individual freedom to associate is violated in the name of protecting the victim status of others.
This comes from a “fluid interpretation” of the Constitution and the role of government that allows expansion to be rationalized. To put an end to this would require we “deplorables” to assert a literal and limited interpretation.
The establishment has spent the better part of the past 30 years trying to convince the world that globalism is a natural extension of the free market. It’s not. The fact is, globalism is a system thrust upon the people, not an organic evolution of economics.
True free market philosophy would dictate that if a model is destroying the wealth standards of a society, that society would naturally abandon it. If a model is elevating corporations, which are a product of government charter and are artificially supported by taxpayer dollars, then this is not conducive to real competition. If a model is allowing those same government chartered corporations to export jobs while destroying any chance for smaller competitors to fill the void through unfair taxation and other laws, then this creates economic instability. Without government intervention, globalism would not exist, because no society with a free market would naturally seek to destroy itself.
The “deplorables” want the end of all welfare, including corporate welfare and the concept of the “too big to fail” company. We want the end of government intervention in business and special favors for corporate elites. We also want the end of central banking and fiat debt based currency. It’s funny, but the mainstream media constantly accuses us of seeking an unfair world, but we are actually the only group of people working on a level playing field.
This concept terrifies progressives and corporate elites alike because without a socialist welfare system and special treatment for victim groups and companies, all success would then rely on merit. This means they would have to work harder than most, or be smarter than most or be more naturally gifted than most in order to be more prosperous than most. Take a look at the millennials permeating the halls of universities today — those that espouse socialist ideals –and you will find yourself struggling to identify a single person with exceptional merit or work ethic.
Take a look at all the banks and corporate monstrosities that should have collapsed eight years ago due to terrible business practices. Under a free market, they would be failures, and rightly so.
As mentioned in my first article on the “deplorables,” these changes– which represent a redress of grievances over decades of American corruption –will not take place without years of struggle and sacrifice. Again, this is not about a Trump presidency or any other future election. This is about action on the part of regular men and women, average conservatives, every day. This is about self-sufficiency, localized economies, the return of individual producers, the refusal to comply with social justice-based laws and legislation, the return of community-based security rather than reliance on state and federal security, local efforts for border security, the punishment of criminal financial institutions, etc.; all of which will probably come at the cost of a fight with the establishment.
While you are welcome to vote for whatever candidate you please, remember that central leadership is not the solution. Self-leadership is the solution. We do not need a hero on a white horse. The future is in OUR hands. Only by the efforts of millions of liberty champions in large and small ways can America return to prosperity, and to freedom.