…the USSR was designed and developed as (1) a resource base for the world revolution and (2) its military mobilization apparatus. And, if we consider its subsequent history on the basis of these goals and objectives, then all the actions of the Soviet authorities in the 1920s-50s, which sometimes seem insane, acquire an exhaustive logical explanation….

Dmitri Savvin [i]

Marxism-Leninism in Russia can best be understood as having an exoteric and esoteric side. The exoteric Marxism-Leninism was for export. The esoteric was what the leaders of the regime actually thought and how they operated. [2] Because the regime did not work so well in economic terms, and they were falling behind in technology, they initiated a New Economic Policy under Gorbachev along the lines set down by Lenin in 1922. They were compelled, for various practical reasons, to give up their exoteric Marxism-Leninism in 1991. Only a stupid minority believed that nonsense anyway, and what good are stupid people? Of course, the soft West was full of people who were willing to believe in that sort of thing. After all, they had never lived under it. And Moscow was sure to take advantage of them as before. By promoting feminism and abortion, to kill population growth, economic arguments could be made for importing Muslims and Africans to Europe. This would disorganize the West and bring ruinous consequences in the long term. Add global warming “science,” and naïve policies regarding China, and the West would be doomed to its own existential crisis. At the same time, the special services’  infiltration of Europe and America would continue at an accelerated pace.

At home the Kremlin would concoct this Eurasian and Novorossiya nonsense and fake Orthodoxy as the new exoteric doctrine. Esoterically, they did not bury Lenin and they are putting up Lenin statues in the conquered areas of Ukraine. The regime in Moscow continues to be Marxist-Leninist under the skin. It continues to follow the old logic, which explains all its actions. However, the new exoteric doctrine is wearning thin. As anyone can see, only 4 percent of Russians could be described as genuinely Orthodox. Worse than that, I suspect there are more true-believing Muslims in Russia than Christians. Consider, as well, how accustomed the Russians are to going along with a regime by outward pretense. “We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.” Now it is, “They pretend to be Orthodox Christians, and we pretend to believe them.” We now see that Russian nationalism in the mouth of the regime’s spokesmen is not taken seriously by the majority of the Russian people, whose young men vote with their feet to avoid military service. This is not patriotism. This is not belief.

Underneath, the regime is still the old Marxist-Leninist cabal, following the esoteric doctrines of Leninism. Marxism-Leninism is not utopian, and the old Soviet textbooks said as much. But who in the West actually read such books? Marxism-Leninism was not egalitarian either, and Soviet textbooks flatly said as much. But again, nobody in the West understood the underlying teachings of esoteric Marxism-Leninism. In Soviet ideology classes the students who grasped the esotericism, the code words, climbed the Party ladder. Those who did not understand, could not rise above the rank of colonel – in the Army or the KGB. Marx and Lenin were cynical human beings. They were after power. The Revolution was all about seizing power. And that is the real focus of their writings. Marx called his class warfare theory “that class shit,” and laughed at the people who believed in it. Marxism was intellectualized demagoguery, invented to turn the flanks of the bourgeoisie. “Make it thick and scientific and hard to follow,” Marx once told Engels. “They will eat it up.” Lenin wrote, “There is no Marxist dogma. Marxism is the scientific management of human affairs.” Here was the distillation of Lenin’s mode of operation. Lenin was scientific in the Machiavellian sense, and in the sense of Gramsci’s New Prince. Yet all the Western leftists could see, was the shiny bobbles and Easter eggs of the promised utopia. The communist wolves, however, knew the game and knew their quarry. The goal was, as ever, to take control and enjoy total power.

A confusion has arisen in Europe and America as a result of these changes in Russia. The new Russian exotericism appeals to angry Western conservatives and traditionalists. In America, where people do not read or think, the Russian propaganda has the greatest effect among the disaffected right. In Europe, where people read but likewise do not think, the alt right challenges the left on key issues like immigration. Suppose, as we must, that Moscow’s energy blackmail will bring revolution to Europe. What sort of revolution can we expect? If Putin’s alt-right friends win power in a place like Germany what will Moscow get? I suspect that the whole project will produce what we see in Sweden and Italy. Why?  Because nobody brave enough to stand against political correctness all this time is going to be Moscow’s puppet when push comes to shove. The rising ideology in Europe contains self-correcting traits, and the virtue of courage, of going against centralized power. The old Marxist-Leninist cadre, huddled in Moscow, attempting to restore the lost empire, have dug their own grave at last. Moscow will never be the capital of “Europe from Vladivostok to Lisbon,” as Putin imagines. The Asiatic threat from the East will be recognized and ultimately resisted.

But first, there will be destruction and death – from the Don and, possibly, all the way to the Rhine.

Notes and Links


[i] Dmitri Savvin, “Ideology and Policy of Neo-Soviet Revanchism,” https://harbin.lv/ideologiya-i-politika-neosovetskogo-revanshizma.

[2] I have remarked on esoteric Leninism in the past, but never gave it full espression outside of private conversation. I was reminded of its importance by Paul Goble’s excellent commentary on Dmitri Savvin’s presentation in Riga last week. See, http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2022/11/1991-marked-not-collapse-of-sovietism.htmlSign up


Quarterly Subscription (to support the site)

JRNyquist.blog

$15.00


J.R.Nyquist
J.R.Nyquist

My books are found on my Amazon Page

165 thoughts on “Esoteric Leninism

    1. Be careful that you understand correctly. I was relating what Mr. Wang of Lude Media, a Chinese dissident with PLA sources, said in an interview published in this site in June. To publish a statement made by a source is not being wrong. The source made certain statements about Chinese strategic intentions. He said they wanted to start a war by November 4th “if” certain conditions applied. Those conditions appear to apply but no attack has taken place. This is how sources work. They are not clairvoyant and must be approached skeptically and analytically. I do not make predictions. I evaluate statements as best I can. As I said again and again, if Mr. Wang’s network in China has accurate intelligence, and if Chinese leaders do not adjust their plans in the mean time, war could occur…. These are big ifs. That being said, China and Russia are still preparing. Admiral Richard of Stratcom has said we are in serious danger. We are only in the overture.

      1. Principals of professional journalism requires three independent first hand witnesses, to provide the same account.

      2. Bitter Lemon: Mr. Wang acquired a tape recording of leading military and political officials in Guangdong discussing war mobilization, as ordered by the CCP in Beijing. I interviewed him. I hope that is okay for you and your “standards of journalism.” We cannot learn anything if we simply ignore people like Mr. Wang. He has produced valid intelligence in the past. Does that mean he always produces valid intelligence? No. I recorded his testimony and have waited to see its value. If something interests me, I write about it. I am not making factual claims that require three witnesses. I am searching for the outlines of an enemy strategy. This is not the same thing as writing a newspaper story. If you want such stories you have come to the wrong place.

      3. Please, Mr Nyquist, share all information which you get, without testing it thoroughly. It is a highest expression of trust, when you share with your friends something you know, which might not be proven, but still gives us food for thought.

      4. I only hold back on information when that information calls for careful thought. What does it mean? Is it disinformation? One must be careful. There is bait in the water, and many hooks. It is best not to get oneself on a hook.

      5. Dear Mister Nyquist:

        You say that you do not practice professional journalism here, and that you “are not making factual claims that require three witnesses,” yet at the same time assert that, “Mr. Wang acquired a tape recording of leading military and political officials in Guangdong discussing war mobilization, as ordered by the CCP in Beijing.”

        I appreciate the essay nevertheless, however it might be more responsible of you to qualify your statements before, rather than after the fact. To your credit, you have broadly tackled this subject most prodigiously, while most other writers have ignored this important topic almost entirely.

        You are truly a fine writer.

        If you promise not to bristle, please let me ad that your propensity to gravitate towards social science concepts of debunking, as opposed to rigorous standards of the scientific method, rules of legal evidence, or principals of professional journalism, severely weakens your analysis and undermines your conclusions. Furthermore, ignoring enemy propaganda, instead of debating the points thereof, does not negate the enemies fallacious talking points, but rather lets them stand.

        Your readers would benefit from more deconstruction. There have been some articles where you’ve done that quite effectively, if not in this venue. Be that as it may, I do enjoy your fine writing at face value.

      6. I am certainly not perfect, and as Joseph Farah once said to me: “You are not a journalist,” This does not bother me at all. Of course, it also depends on your definition of journalism. By nineteenth century standards I would be one. By Joe Farah’s standard, I am not. And that’s okay. My preference for categorizing writers comes from Walter Kaufmann, the Princeton philosophy professor and Nietzsche translator. Kaufmann said there were four kinds of minds, the first two being (1) visionaries and (2) scholastics. Kaufmann said that these two distinctions, especially, are “essential for understanding the humanities as well as the natural and social sciences.” He wrote that, “Visionaries are loners. Alienated from the common sense of their time, they see the world differently and make sustained attempts to spell out their vision.” On the other side, “Scholastics travel in schools, take pride in their rigor and professionalism, and rely heavily on their consensus or their common ‘know-how.’ They are usually hostile to contemporary visionaries, especially in their own field, but swear by some visionaries of the past.” The two remaining types of minds are (3) the Socratic and (4) the journalistic. According to Kaufmann, “Socrates was a loner who questioned the common sense of his time. Yet he did not try to spell out a vision of his own. He made a point of not being a visionary and of being, in effect, an antischolastic.” As for the journalistic mind, it is the weakest but most prevalent in the moment. Journalistic writing, said Kaufmann, is full of errors. It wholeheartedly embraces the moment, but usually does not survive the test of time. It is permeated by a spirit of presentism, and basis itself on something called “public opinion.” (Soren Kierkegaard held public opinion in contempt, calling it a “nullity”). The journalist is writing for the present, so he is hurried. He is not careful. He has not thought things through deeply enough, following a kind of formula related to the mass consumption of “information.” Journalism, having these shallow tendencies, often misses the big picture. But in our hurry to know everything immediately, we always turn to it. In addition, journalists sometimes take their testimony from the wrong witnesses, creating a kind of myth out of current events. Kaufmann wrote, “Those who make their living writing for a journal can have the highest standards of accuracy, though this would be sure to make their life very hard. And some who never write for journals have very little intellectual integrity. Moreover, sometimes … speed is indeed of the essence, and a report must be published in a hurry without time for much checking and double-checking.” Kaufmann believes that some scholastics, who write for scholarly journals offer “rigor” only for show. I think this is more and more the case as our culture has tipped into a journalistic style, even as television makes abbreviation into a disease. Of course, real writers are not purely possessed of one type of mind. There is a mix in many of us. You might say that I am a real mongrel, having been a scholar, having worked for deadlines in journalism, yet possessing the core traits of a visionary and the inclinations of a Socratic (i.e., opposed to the common sense of my time, but not having definitive answers for everything). You apparently think I am irresponsible insofar as you say that I “might be more responsible” if I qualify my statements ahead of time. I have always tried to do that. Sorry if I have fallen down in this, but one can only duck and weave so much. If I think something is true or probable, why not say it? More often than not I present my suspicions as questions. My rule is to have suspicions about current events rather than beliefs. Yet I do have beliefs that do not belong to the present. And that rubs a lot of people the wrong way. If I am wrong, we will find out soon enough. No reason to admix rhetorical cowardice in every sentence. Such is bad writing and weak-minded to boot. In strategic terms, my larger suspicions belong on a general’s wargame table, or in policy discussions. I present my position (or blurry vision) as best I can. I am strongest on critiquing today’s received wisdom. To be sure, there is always something to criticize. In terms of disliking my critique, please do not stop at throwing up generalizations. What you say against me is so vague that I do not entirely understand your point. Okay, maybe I am irresponsible. But am I more irresponsible than everyone else? As criticisms go, it is out of place when our government has let our nuclear deterrent disintegrate; when we have no civil defense; when we cannot properly identify our enemies. Am I the irresponsible one, or am I pointing out a much greater irresponsibility and its consequences? So, forgive me, but I do not understand your critique of my critique. Possibly you do not like my criticism of the loose conspiracy theories that are paraded on every side. These theories are so ineffective, and so vulgar, and self-defeating, and vague, that I cannot sign on with them. I take conspiracy theory as a byproduct of mass politics at its lowest, appealing to people who have no patience for knowledge or careful analysis. Is this position, on my part, irresponsible? But I am trying to be more careful, more precise, and responsible in discussing these things. That is why I take the positions I do. Of course, most people do not have a lot of flexibility in their thinking in all these areas. That is a core problem. They want “final” answers (which conspiracy narratives seem to give). But there are no “final” answers here. We live in the metaxy, where uncertainty rules. And being unable to play with ideas, or investigate certain questions, we sometime take every suggestion as some kind of definitive answer when this is beyond our ken. So, every statement, given to people who are looking for some “final” answer, is subject to misunderstanding. Am I beyond criticism? Of course not. I was educated in certain scientific ideas, and certain methods, but in the end this whole project of mine has been done — for many years — while working for a living. I do not have professional research assistants. I do not have an investigative staff. It is all done by me, even the formatting of this site. Everything here is terribly time consuming. And then there are the chores of life which can be very taxing. So, I have all the failings of the visionary, and the journalist, the Socratic and the scholastic. Yes, like I said, I am a mongrel. I am even divided against myself, and only hold body and soul together by holding to a standard of intellectual consistency. And what am I trying to be consistent with? That foggy, ill-perceived thing called truth.

      7. I’m grateful to Jeff for the excellent work. I learned more in 2 months reading his texts and books than in 5 years at university.

      8. I simply say that to debunk rather than to debate, is weak, and to make definitive statements such as, ‘the source provides a recording of an actual discussion’ as opposed to saying that ‘the source provides a recording, supposedly of an actual discussion,’ tends to mislead. I realize of course that it is not your intent to mislead, but the less discerning might jump to erroneous conclusions.

      9. I think the tape would have been debunked by now if the voice on the tape was not that of the Guangdong governor. Has anyone seen where the tape was debunked. But then, who is debunking in this instance — rather than debating? Not me.

      10. Re: [ Jeff Nyquist says:
        November 9, 2022 at 2:29 pm

        I think the tape would have been debunked by now if the voice on the tape was not that of the Guangdong governor. Has anyone seen where the tape was debunked. But then, who is debunking in this instance — rather than debating? Not me. ]

        Great illustration of my point, Jeff. Debunking is pseudo science.

        Even if someone were to come along and assert that the tape doesn’t sound like the governor’s voice, that would prove nothing. In court, a first hand eye witness to the discussion would have to testify that the tape represents what was heard live.
        In addition, a forensic voice and recording annalist ought to testify, as well.

        For an investigative journalist, there would need to be three, first hand witnesses providing the same story. What’s more, what’s to say that the discussion wasn’t scripted propaganda, intentionally leaked?

        Just because it can’t be disproved, doesn’t make it factual, either. It might seem reasonable to assume that the recording is legit, but those accused of capitol offense have been hanged on circumstantial evidence, only latter to be found innocent after the fact.

        This brings to mind a recent development in New York State, where the Governor was sued for building Covid internment camps pursuant to executive order where anyone can be accused of having Covid, without any diagnosis to support the allegation, and then imprisoned with no recourse other than to sue. Just try to sue from inside a place like that, separated from your funds. There’s nothing in the legislation giving privilege for phone calls.

        The State of New York, has long had in place detailed legislation for how to deal with dangerously infected individuals, which provides many safeguards and due process. The Governor lost the suit, and is now appealing in Federal Court. The gall of her. She smiles and says it’s for the good of the public.

      11. Bitter Lemon: Your claim that “Debunking” is “pseudo-science” is nowhere affirmed by any English language dictionary. You are now misusing English words. Shall we say, then, that arguing itself is pseudo-science, or that we should never debate anything because debating is pseudo-science? Please use language the way it is supposed to be used, instead of creating confusion by misusing common English words. Debunking is defined, in English, as exposing the falseness or hollowness of a belief. Even if you do not allow it, because it is “psuedo-science,” I will carry on. It is a perfectly acceptable thing to do. What is not acceptable is making up definitions and throwing them out as some kind of argument. So let me dispense with your real objection: It is my assessment that the Guangdong recording is genuine after consulting with people in intelligence and with Chinese languages background. To understand whether something is true, you have to do some thinking, and consult with experts, and go to the source (which I did, interviewing him in June). And so, I have given you my conclusion. The 57-minute audio recording from Guangdong is authentic. I believe your reservations to be pedantic, fussy, and harmful to our larger understanding. Is there any reason to think my judgment is poor in this case? Now comes the sequel: In recent speeches, Xi Jinping himself says China must focus on preparing for war. Here is the Daily Mail article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11403145/amp/China-focus-preparing-WAR-Xi-Jinping-declares.html.
        If you have trouble with this, write a letter of complaint to the Daily Mail. Tell them they have misquoted the Chinese leader. This is not scripted propaganda, if we take all the other known facts into account. Russia is at war with China’s support. China is locking down its population, moving troops and missiles around, stockpiling food and rallying their allies. They are certainly preparing. I take this statement by President Xi as confirmation of the 57-minute recording from Guangdong. Confirmation, that is, from the horse’s mouth. Your judgment is different. Okay. Just say so. There is no reason to fuss over my missing qualifiers. I do not qualify it. I have been watching Russia and China for decades. I have been expecting this type of mobilization and these kind of pronouncements for many years. I have long suspected this was going to happen. And I have been warning people for good reason. Most people are asleep. And I am trying to wake them. Your little pedantry bears the suggestion of turning off the alarm. Look, Nyquist is not being exact. He is not proving every letter of the alphabet as he goes along. Am I not? But China’s leader is now saying that war preparation is their main focus. I have also heard this same story, for more than two years, from a variety of sources — from businessmen with contacts in Beijing, from intelligence officials, from researchers, from Chinese military publications, from U.S. military officials. China’s war preparations are not even secret. Does every little tidbit require “scientific” proof as if we are sitting in some graduate physics seminar? I hope not. You cannot fight a war, or judge military things, in the same way you play at science. Strategy and war involve us in a different kind of game. Now that Xi has confirmed his war preparations, please give over. This question has been settled. My analysis is confirmed by President Xi. China is preparing for war.

      12. Yes Eddie. And the last bit made no sense at all. Social science is not science? Is that a slap at my academic background (as if I have not left that behind). Bitter Lemon has denounced several sciences. Has he conducted a survey of all these sciences? Does he understand the philosophy of science? To make such a claim about so many fields of study, makes him a hypocrite in regard to his own pedantry, which demands absolute proof of every statement. So he gets to throw up this whopper, and I am out of bounds for crediting Mr. Wang’s recording. This merry-go-round is now making me dizzy.

      13. Pseudo Science is not a word; it’s a term.

        Social Science is for the most part, pseudo science, meaning that it is not science at all, but merely speculation posing as fact. The only point I make, which you misrepresent, is that you ought to clarify when somebody might have some valid evidence, when all they have is a curiosity.

        Whatever Xi does is no proof of the dubious recording. There is no genuine comparison between Xi to Mao.

      14. Misleading qualifiers: This is the thing that is killing us where Russia and China are concerned, where the testimony of defectors like Mr. Wang and Golitsyn are routinely ignored and even attacked. Nearly all defector testimony during the last hundred years has been ignored. Why? Because the witnesses are inconvenient. They are bad for business. In fact, we have many verifiable actions and testimonies into which Mr. Wang’s 57-minute tape fits. But who dares to notice? If China’s friends in America could have demonstrated that the voices on the 57-minute recording were not those of the provincial governor and the provincial military commander, they would have done so. But the recording was not debunked. It was safer to ignore what could not be disproved. And Beijing would have disproved these allegations if they could have done so. For the recording was and remains extremely damaging to Beijing’s interests if anyone should take it seriously. If this tape was a hoax, given what Beijing had at stake, Mr. Wang would have been publicly embarrassed by the exposure of his fraud — if fraud it was. But the CCP did not debunk it. And so we have a brilliant little gem of evidence; a rare look inside a Chinese military-civil committee. In putting together the larger puzzle, each witness gives us a different piece that finds validation in the way it adds depth and understanding to other pieces of the puzzle. Wang’s statements must be examined in this context. Each piece in a strategic puzzle is indeed “alleged” while none makes sense as part of a whole. But once a piece of testimony begins to make sense, and fits with the larger tapestry, we drop the word “alleged” and go on with putting the puzzle together. Strictly speaking, no theory in this world is ever “scientifically proved” but, according to the falsifiability principle, can only be disproved. Thus Mr. Wang’s 57-minute tape stands the test of time. Even so, we are not merely allowing the falsifiability principle to work, but we have an enemy who is motivated to disprove a fraud. We are also navigating through a strategic reality, attempting to find our way. We are engaged in something more than proving a “scientific theory.” We are evaluating the war preparations of an enemy in real time. And it is not a “theory” that communist China is our enemy, or that they are rapidly building their forces. Our fools in business and government prefer to ignore all this. Why accommodate their blunder? Mr. Wang’s tape is of the greatest importance as a rare window into our enemy’s thinking. If we want to play the game incorrectly, then we will naturally cling to our culture of denial. War is irrational, we say. Let us frame each item of evidence (for enemy war preparations) as strictly unproven when, in fact, contextual proofs and confirmations abound. The weight of all allegations should have long ago removed all doubt as to what the CCP intends. We do not drive on the highway distrusting our sight, hearing, judgment and depth perception at every turn. We use that fine instrument, called the brain, to miraculously navigate the highway instead of stopping two other witnesses to verify whether the light ahead is green before driving through it. Our brain is able to puzzle out the larger reality, immediately and intuitively. And we do this every day. Why is it so difficult where China and Russia are concerned? Sometimes we know what is true, without finding three witnesses to our every observance. Do drivers make mistakes? Of course. But these are rare. We need more if this practical daring as we navigate the highway of our national military strategy. I repeat the point: Of great importance to navigating this highway is defector testimony. This testimony is NOT purely subjective. When we first see this body of testimony we see a mass of allegations. Once our brain has sifted these “allegations,” we can see the outline of our predicament. Taken as a whole, this testimony is not to be understood as an unverifiable intelligence waste product. One man’s “allegation” may be another man’s crowning proof. Our eye puts together a picture of reality from discrete pixels. It is our larger sense that constructs real reality out of those pixels. Could one pixel be wrong, due to flaws in our eyesight? Yes. Could all our pixels regarding China’s doings be wrong when so clear a picture is formed? No. There is much in each defector that our brain can use to assemble a correct picture of the road ahead. We may not see distant objects with perfect clarity. But we have their outline, at least, while all these journalists and academics stumble about blindly, following a policy of placing the word “alleged” in front of each pixel of intelligence so as to avoid drawing the big picture. I say: They all should have seen this coming. They should have never invested in China. They should have never allowed China access to our capital markets. But all is not lost in terms of covering up their mistake. Yes, the word “alleged” serves them well when as more defector warnings come in. Later they will say that they did not know, when tens of millions lie dead. Such an excuse is the work of ten thousand hands — of every journalist, and every pundit who frames things with doubt when there should be no doubt. Failing to see the most important danger, all these people have wronged the next generation. They have wronged their ancestors, too. Such irresponsibility, in the name of profit or expediency, will be judged criminal one day. We can see quite clearly how important it is to our businessman to deny that China is an enemy. It is useful, then, that we are required to judge each instance without reference to the whole, and say it is merely “alleged” that China is preparing for war, or that it is discreditable to say Xi is like Mao. In terms of our strategic survival, we cannot strategically navigate with a standard of absolute skepticism in such matters. Many things are, indeed, unproven in the course of politics, and we need our skepticism when the facts are unclear. But the more you know about communist power, and the current actions of the regimes in Russia and China, and the defector testimony, the more we can see that a thousand discreet items form a very clear picture; so much so that no less a person than Admiral Richard of Stratcom says war with China is coming. The Ukraine battle is a “warmup,” he says. What has always troubled me is this insane readiness to dismiss the threat of war as unreal at every turn. It is our want of vigilance that invites attack. Every con artist knows that doubt and skepticism are his allies. All the evidence suggestive of a swindle must be cast into doubt. The swindler then appeals to greed. And here, as elsewhere, emphasizing the word “alleged” may be technically correct in the pedant’s playbook. Make no mistake: China is preparing for war. We hope and pray China will draw back or suffer internal disorganization that forestalls an attack. But Russia and China have long been preparing for war. And it is a war in which many elements come together — economic, political, biological. I therefore eschew weak qualifying words in showing the larger picture.

      15. Awesomely said, Mr. Nyquist!! If Bitter Lemons or anyone else still wants to argue journalistic methodology after that, then there is not even a sliver of a doubt that they are just trying to sow confusion. And I don’t mean allegedly! 🤣

      16. Which of the other fields of Social Science you allude to, utilize the Scientific Method?

    2. Jeff never said that an invasion would happen on this date. He only said that his sources pointed to November.
      Things are getting weird. The stage is set for war. China has doubled down on crazy lockdowns, and all the western media reporting that this drastically affects their economy. It makes no sense. How could a country destroy its own economy like that for no reason? They’re getting ready for something big, really big. In addition, some senior US Strategic Command officials are warning that as of 2023, military forces will not be strong enough to fight in more than one conflict. It is not possible for this to be a coincidence.

      1. How could the US destroy its own economy for no reason? It seems to me that we are currently ruled by Marxist-Leninists who actively seek to destroy America.

    3. “You were wrong sir we are at the midterms an no invasion”
      Mr. Nyquist was sharing information, not making predictions. This is a failure of basic comprehension by the commenter. 🤦

    4. The
      profoundest
      thought or passion
      sleeps as in a mine, until
      an equal mind and heart finds and publishes it.
      Ralph Waldo Emerson

    5. Bitter Lemons:
      “your propensity to gravitate towards social science concepts of debunking, as opposed to rigorous standards of the scientific method, rules of legal evidence, or principals of professional journalism, severely weakens your analysis and undermines your conclusions”.

      I’m not sure how you can be this obtuse and expect anyone here to take you seriously. Since you insist on being a pedant, you should know that writing ‘principals’ (of professional journalism) is incorrect. The correct word is ‘principles’.

  1. Interesting article, which I can see you drew from many sources. It is difficult to even think about about today’s election. Just praying.

    Off topic, but perhaps interesting: We have a friend in Brazil who tells us that things are going nuts there with truckers blocking all the roads. Demonstrations all over, even in the north, which Lula supposedly carried. Our friend says that the police have sided with the people, and parts of the military as well. They are waiting, he says to see the results of the US elections, hoping for some kind of support.

    Our friend may have a limited view, so I went looking for verification. Seems there is almost a total blackout of reporting in the mainstream media, and Brazil seems to have silenced many alternative sites. It would be very interesting to know more. Perhaps Alan dos Santos knows more or can point to a good sight to follow events.

    1. Over the years I have received correspondence from Brazilian readers. Twice I have received emails from Brazilian federal police officers. They were very worried, and conflicted, at the time. This is when Dilma Rousseff was president and Brazil’s people were standing up against her, demanding impeachment. Both of my police correspondents wanted to side with the people against the corrupt politicians. This was not necessary back then, however. Rousseff was impeached. Today’s situation in Brazil is therefore not a surprise. What we are seeing in Brazil May turn out to be like the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. It is a grass roots thing where people are fed up and determined to express themselves. This is how real revolutions begin.

      1. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Jeff. Do you think Bolsonaro will act and call on the military? This seems like a do or die moment for Brazil as a free nation. I hope he does something. Also, do you think that the people are doing enough to help Bolsonaro?

      2. Bolsonaro probably cannot rely on the military. But if the Brazilian people take to the streets for a fair vote, and question the election, the military may have no choice but to stand with the people.

      3. Just think. Had Pennsylvania been a 28 to 1 longshot in the derby and you put your money on it, you might be rich. Funny how a shot in the thigh makes you run faster. Then there’s NY and Michigan. Lots of folks here like dictators. Unless, of course, the fix was in. I don’t see a good outcome. I’m hearing a bugle in the background. Does anyone else hear it?

      4. I’m afraid it’s going to have to be at some point. Barring the Lord’s intervention in some way, I don’t see how we can go on much longer like this. I know a civil war will be horrible, and invite outside enemies to attack, but it may just have to be that way. It’s definitely not because those of us who love our country desire it.

        But first and foremost, we must individually turn to God and the Bible. Without a relationship with Him through His Son, and a humble, obedient walk with Him, there is zero hope.

      5. I’ve the same feeling. We seem to have reached the inflection point in history.

        Things can’t go as it is. It looks like The Rod of God’s Anger is upon country. He will also allow us to face the fruit of our wrong decisions; pain, suffering, fear, turmoil, and so forth, all in order to help us realize just what turning away from Him leads to.

    2. Trucking strikes are a Hallmark of Kissinger (Chile), a man suspected of being a Soviet agent (and demonstrably too close to UK). This shipping activism leitmotif has been in the mix all over the world even before the China virus.

      Talks from Naval War College professor Thomas Barnett in 2005 touch on the “supply chain issue” presciently, but of course view the adversary as something to be transformed into yet another market to be integrated, rather than rotten fruit that ought to be sequestered and left to catabolically rot on the ideological vine. The demographic situations as projected by Peter Zeihan lend themselves to greater Zero Sum gambits from the East; mere containment here isn’t enough. “Kick what’s falling.”

      1. All strategies in dealing with such regimes are dangerous. “Kick what’s falling” is probably the right approach. Our politicians, however, do not seem up to the task. Time will tell.

  2. Ultimately, that esoteric Marxism and Leninism will drive away those under its control just as surely as the exoteric. Most normal humans yearn for freedom and justice and naturally rebel against being controlled unrighteously.

    People’s bodies and actions may be controlled, but the human mind will remain independent and free so long as it refuses to submit. This is displayed in China as residents bang pots and pans in protest which, while still an action, displays the large quantity of people whose minds remain free even as they are imprisoned.

    And while evil governments and leaders may compel men to war (the Russians are shooting their own if they dare retreat), they cannot compel their loyalty. And without loyalty and unity their war machine will ultimately fall apart because the entire system is built on chaos and entropy, from conception to fruition, they will be their own undoing. Although I agree with Jeff that we are likely to see much more bloodshed before we reach that point.

  3. While you show better understanding of Marxism Leninism than western idealistic self-proclaimed Marxists, you are dismissing the class aspect of the teaching, which is essential. The bourgeoise draft dodgers exist on both sides (my country is full of military age Ukrainians) and are irrelevant. When Ukraine loses, those who fought will turn against the compradorist government. That is the strategy.

    Communists (under any brand) will inevitably win, because there is not a class basis for sustaining western liberalism anymore. In previous article you write about warrior class, who should those people fight for? 0.00001% monopolist class that despises them?

    1. Re:
      [ What happens to the truth when people are silenced? What happens after the government has extorted something vital from a nation – from its warrior class – by threatening people’s jobs, livelihoods, and freedom of movement? Once you have been intimidated into taking an experimental injection because you are “afraid to say anything,” or incapable of standing up, that is the end of your liberty. Your governors can ride roughshod over you and they know it. In that situation, only one comfort remains; namely, that you are doing what everyone else is doing.

      https://jrnyquist.blog/2021/10/05/vaccine-madness-part-i/ ]

      COMMIT, what do you imagine compradorist government in Ukraine might be comprised of; Ukrainians, Ukrainian ethnic Russians, or Russians from Russia? Would there be a new constitution or merely new legislation?

      ___________________________________________________________

      Ps –
      Zelensky seems to be responding to pressure from Biden now, to negotiate with Russia. So, Zelensky says okay, all Russia has to do as precondition is to give back the Donbas and pay to repair the damage done to Ukraine.

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraines-zelensky-sets-conditions-for-genuine-peace-talks-with-russia-11667907501

      1. A group of 30 liberal Democratic representatives urged President Joe Biden to pursue negotiations with Russia to end the war in Ukraine, in the first sign of disagreement in the party over the White House’s strategy.

        In a letter to Biden, the lawmakers, led by Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal, said that direct negotiations with Russia should be opened in order to avoid prolonging the war even further.

        https://progressives.house.gov/_cache/files/5/5/5523c5cc-4028-4c46-8ee1-b56c7101c764/B7B3674EFB12D933EA4A2B97C7405DD4.10-24-22-cpc-letter-for-diplomacy-on-russia-ukraine-conflict.pdf

      2. Ps –

        Letter to Biden signatories (several most interesting ones):

        Ilhan Omar
        Member of Congress

        Rashida Tlaib
        Member of Congress

        Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
        Member of Congress

  4. Osypets is one of some 100 Ukrainians who have landed in Hawaii as part of the federal Uniting for Ukraine program, which gives those fleeing the war a legal pathway to enter the United States and stay with Americans who have agreed to sponsor them for up to two years.

    https://www.civilbeat.org/2022/11/ukrainians-fleeing-the-war-find-refuge-in-hawaii-but-struggle-with-housing/

    Am I eligible to participate in Uniting for Ukraine?
    To be eligible, Ukrainians must have been resident in Ukraine as of February 11, 2022, have a supporter in the United States, complete vaccinations and other public health requirements, and pass biometric and biographic screening and vetting security checks. Ukrainians approved via this process will be authorized to travel to the United States to be considered for parole, on a case-by-case basis, for a period of up to two years. Once paroled through this process, Ukrainians will be eligible to apply for work authorization.

    https://www.dhs.gov/ukraine

    1. Ooops!

      Re:
      [ Volodymyr Osypets didn’t plan to travel to Hawaii when he, his wife and their 3-year-old daughter left Ukraine about a week before Russia invaded the country in February. But he knew that he probably wouldn’t be returning to his homeland anytime soon.

      The 40-year-old IT project manager got a tip from a friend in the U.S. Embassy that military action was likely imminent and he and his family should leave the country. They had long planned a pilgrimage to India, so that was their first stop.

      civilbeat dot org
      /2022/11/ukrainians-fleeing-the-war-find-refuge-in-hawaii-but-struggle-with-housing/ ]

      …”To be eligible, Ukrainians must have been resident in Ukraine as of February 11, 2022,”..

      dhs dot
      gov/ukraine

  5. “[2] I have remarked on esoteric Leninism in the past, but never gave it full espression [sic.] …”

    “Nothing is true, and everything is permitted.” The worldly god of Socialists turns out also to be Mammon once the Tartufferie is set aside. And they will say in their defense,

    Godless?
    Yes.
    Materialist?
    Yes.
    Honest?
    More scientific than thou, human cattle.

    The “esoteric truth of Marxist-Leninism” as Evola described needs more circulation if the demoralized and miscalibrated friend-enemy distinction capacity of its natural enemies are to be recovered. The endemic and catastrophic levels of Soviet et. al. espionage is not sufficiently appreciated, nor what it spells for the present situation. We may have civilizational forgotten about God, but the Devil is more concrete than ever. The specter of Communism is indelible as Cain’s mark, it will not recede into the dust bin of history in a Fukuyaman way. If it isn’t contested here and now there may not be another time given the trajectory of technological advancement.

    A century ago, Rudolf Steiner saw the Great War as a failure of the mystery schools’ mission to educate and induct the public, and that another opportunity to do so would have to wait until our present day. Ukraine being invaded by Soviet revanchists has at least put out the idea of “the end of history”. It is time to start building again.

  6. China will focus on preparing for WAR, Xi Jinping declares: President says nation’s ‘security is increasingly unstable and uncertain’

    *Chinese President Xi Jinping today said Beijing will strengthen military training and prepare for any war
    *Xi’s announcement will raise fears that China may invade Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its own
    *China, which has second-largest military in world, has threatened to annex Taiwan by force if necessary

    By RACHAEL BUNYAN FOR MAILONLINE
    PUBLISHED: 06:19 EST, 8 November 2022 | UPDATED: 10:05 EST, 8 November 2022

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11403145/China-focus-preparing-WAR-Xi-Jinping-declares.html

    1. China is preparing for war, as anyone can see. But is it really about Taiwan? This cannot be the case. How does owning Tiawan save their economy? There is something fatalistic, or final in what Beijing is doing. An old plan is being adapted to the situation as it unfolds. Regarding the pandemic: We do not as yet know the full story. Secrecy continues regarding this part of the game. The subject is sensitive for the Chinese. Why?

      1. No economy will be viable for much longer. Or to put it another way: all economies will become fatalities.

    1. This whole Chinese COVID-19 lockdown regime in China is highly suspicious. Why are they doing this? I suspect they are facing major unrest, and the COVID-19 lockdowns are being used for population control. Of course, there may be more to it. What does China know about biowarfare in this instance that we do not? Is there something about COVID we do not know? Are the preparing for the release of something knew, something frightful? Could they be using the lockdowns to accelerate war preparations as Mr. Wang has testified?

      1. I hope not. Also, if the CCP wants to ‘teach the Chinese people to go out’ when they supposedly defeat, and they supposedly conquer the U.S., how are they going to do that if they keep the people ‘locked-down’ and confined all the time?

      2. The lockdowns are a mystery. Population control? Hiding mobilizations? Eliminating opposition? Protection from something we don’t understand. Probably in connection with “going out.” But, one thing at a time.

      1. Could it be how China has or is expecting to have a tremendous surplus of labor, more unemployed people than they ever had before? You have talked about how the population numbers over there are lower than they appear to be and that explains the ghost cities of China, I remember hearing around that China has used those pharaonic projects, enormous cities to be built because the booming civil construction artificially inflates the economical growth of the country to the outside world. If the CCP will try to fix its economical and production woes with massive layoffs, that could lead to more unrest, on top of the other sources of Chinese people’s anguish over the CCP dictators, now with the threat of famine looming over the Chinese yet again.

  7. Wow, I didin’t know you knew Dmitri Savvin. His last article was great, and the Shulgin’s 1961 quote of “Neo-NEP” and “Neo-Brest” after attesting the 22nd CPSU Congress is another hint of what Golitsyn and Sejna talked later.

    Thank you for your work.

  8. Mr. Nyquist, I think that on a certain level from a Western perspective things might appear as they do to you in Russia: not entirely wrong, but by no means telling the whole story. People don’t go for full Divine Liturgy services at the ” official ” Orthodox temples, not because they do not believe in their hearts in the truth, but because they do not fully place their trust in those ” official ” structures. But that is not terribly new: it stems from conditions of the Raskol during the time of Patriarch Nikon in the middle 1600s. Western ways still have a hold on the elites, and Bolshevism and other glamours from the West are just one current in the Zapadniki river flowing since that earlier time. The heart of the people is Monarchist and Orthodox by instinct, when fully freed from restrictions. And all indications are that this is happening. The West won’t like the outcome to be sure, but it wont be Bolshevist.

    1. Vladimir: Is there any chance that the Russian spirit will overcome the spirit of neo-Sovietism? As for the West not liking a Monarchist and Orthodox Russia, this may not be entirely true. There are some who suspect, as I do, that the Latin countries of Europe may be returning to monarchical principles later in this century. The crisis of our time is coming to a head. Television has brought us back to a kind of pre-literate culture which is going to resemble, in part, the Middle Ages. Representative institutions appear to be breaking down. The people have been corrupted. The elites have been corrupted. Populism is not the answer and there are no real leaders to be found. Here is the catastrophe. The question of what theology or ideology then prevails has not been answered as yet — for Russia or the West. And then, of course, there is the question of China, and the question of Islam, and the question of the grand solar minimum and the global food supply. It seems we are approaching a tragic moment, a time of troubles for the entire world. There are further questions, and none of the news is good. The West has degenerated. The East has degenerated. In which direction will we see a revival of principles conducive to civilized life and balance? It is difficult to see through the fog of war. Yet, the present regimes that dominate Europe, on both sides of the divide, must change. The present dispensation cannot continue. How does Russia move past the present moment, where the annexed territories are putting up statues of Lenin? Why don’t they bury Lenin as they buried Tsar Nicholas II? Russia must reject the esoteric Leninists. How? When? We are waiting on the Russian people to make a decision. Or is that even possible? Are the Russian people too fatalistic, too accustomed to a corrupt autocracy? Is Orthodoxy going to return by way of Ukraine rather than Russia?

      1. Rhetorically, I fear Caterina’s arguments do not inspire confidence in her knowledge or sense of precision. We ought to describe real things with precision, right? She says NATO was created and is “operated” by the U.S. Alone? All by itself? But this is untrue if anyone understands NATO’s organization. Right now Turkey is holding up Finland and Sweden’s accession to the organization. There is no American control in that! And then she says that NATO has been continuously fighting wars for over the last one hundred years? This is just slovenly. Forgive me, but I am stooping now to respond. While it is correct that Carter uses loaded language, and we should not demonize our enemies, Caterina is forcing facts to fit her prejudices.

      2. I ran into a Russian Orthodox priest some years ago in a store. He was alone and we engaged in an interesting conversation. I took him to eat and we continued for another two hours. One takeaway was that Russia is, indeed, as you point out, not exactly an Orthodox country. He told me only about 4-6% of Russia is actually Orthodox and attends church regularly, as they are required to. Sad Vlad is simply blowing smoke.

      3. Mr. Nyquist, Ivan Ilyin once said that the Monarchy would be restored, but that the Russian people would have to earn it back. That usually requires suffering from any people, but certainly and usually the Russian people (of any variety). And in my opinion, return to what is called the ” Old Belief” as even Solzhenitsyn and Dostoevsky suggested. Then Russia will be impervious to the Cacodoxy East and West. These percentages bandied about of low numbers of ” attendees ” at the Nikonian official Church do not reflect the inner realities of adherence to the Christian truth, or of personal sin and redemption on an individual or collective level

      4. Vladimir: This seems like wishful thinking, and I have no way of evaluating statements about the “inner reality” of 143 million people in Russia. As an outside observer, I see terrible danger signs — signs of deep spiritual corruption. Russia is sunk in false narratives, and the population is clearly demoralized. Was this the promise of freedom in Russia, trumpeted by A. Solzhenitsyn, a false promise? Stalin, together with his exoteric Leninism, is gone. The worst of the killing and torturing is over. But the inner degradation continues. The country’s favorite poison has been artificially flavored with Orthodoxy. But it is still poison. Putin is not a savior. He is not a pathway to some better place. He is a placeholder for the old system that is trying to return. In my view, Solzhenitsyn’s unwillingness to see the truth about the Kremlin regime casts a shadow over his work. Solzenitsyn was completely out of touch with the reality of his country’s trajectory. I love his books, and his idealism. But in his last years he embraced Putin. This has left me bitterly disappointed in him. Admittedly, there is something good inside of the Russian soul. But there is something dark there, too. And the darkness yet prevails over the light.

      5. Vladimir. If I may, it is worth quoting Berdyaev: “interruption is a characteristic of Russian history. Contrary to the opinion of the Slavophiles the last thing it is is organic.” This has been true of Russian monarchism, too, as opposed to that of the British (for example). Russia is, therefore, a place that resembles modernity ahead of modernity. The West, on arriving in Hell, finds Russia already there — extending a warm greeting. The question is now one of escaping Hell.

  9. Elements
    of the heroic
    exist in almost
    every individual: it is only
    the felicitous development of them all in one that is rare.
    Christian Nestell Bovee

    Go Practice.
    Anon.

  10. Some people here give too much importance to a middle eastern religion imported to Europe relatively recently. Humanity existed before Christianity and will exist after. Romans fell to then still pagan nations shortly after they embaraced lies of Rabbi Jesus. Why do Americans here believe the faith will somehow make them stronger.

    1. Commit: What proof is there of your communistic atheism? It seems not only dismal, but highly improbable. The universe came into existence, and life came into existence, how? Evolution from what? Out of chaos and accident? Order in the cosmos was created from what intelligence? If gravity and the mass of the universe was not exactly calibrated, life would not exist. The periodic chart would not exist. All this order, all this fine calibration making life possible, happened by accident? Not credible.

      1. I’m no atheist, not at all.
        I agree all this order is not by accident considering 99.99% of the observable universe is inhospitable to our form of life. And, that here, on this planet, we have ALL the base elements on the periodic table. Like lead not being on the planet, or magnesium, etc.
        Not by coincidence I agree’

        I don’t however buy into the fantastical Jesus story. Especially as the default end all be all. And it’s rather frustrating to hear that harp played all the time.

        Offended, hardly. Just frustrated that when one offers any other explanation
        you often get a return of prerecorded bible quotes, nominally out of context and without understanding the meaning, nor the meaning to those people in that time.
        Yet you are righteously demeaned and told you will burn in fire for all eternity. Hmmm, Hell, like the imported Zoroastrian hell or has it been upgraded recently?

        In serious academic work, I found Richard’s work very insightful.

        richardcarrier.info

        And please don’t dismiss this researcher because he happens to be an atheist.
        His piece on why Daniel is a forgery is pretty thorough.

        https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/18242

        As are the video presentations on the gospels and the resurrection.
        He gives Jesus a 1-in3 chance of being a historical person, albeit without all the
        X-men superpowers.

        And if the Jesus story is a fable, Islam isn’t far behind.
        And Mormonism? It’s been proven to be inaccurate to say the least.
        Jehovah’s witness and Metatron.
        Cargo cults, Rastafarians, Scientologists, etc.
        And they keep on rolling, and rolling in the cash (Benny Hinn / megachurches).
        Yet there they are, still. And that’s only a handful of the planets beliefs systems on religion both past and present. And none of them contain absolute truth of our creation nor purpose, whatsoever.

        Judaism’s Strange gods by Michael Hoffman is an interesting read.

        What I’ve read of the Babylonian Talmud is not very nice or inspiring.

        Christianity was born of Jewish apocalyptic death cults declaring the world was going to end. And there were many such cults in Jerusalem at the time. World still hasn’t ended
        2000+ years on.

        For me, these fantastical stories and traditions just don’t jibe. Eating the flesh and drinking the blood of ones god, as the Catholics do, is just too strange for me.
        The commercial insanity that surrounds it is a big turn off for me. Especially the
        Christmas sheeple shopping, a fragment more aware than a NPC on GTAV
        or a zombie.

        I’m grateful for any fortunes I have in this life. I see creation all around me
        and realize this place has been here for a long time before the latest religions
        showed up. The most important thing to me is to be thankful for this life, it’s experiences, and return this gift in the form of actions, and charity like helping other people.

        But what is it really? Is God an operating system? We are all waves in a hologram?
        Or this is a sort of hell we repeat until we learn or change our nature and surrender?
        We’ve reincarnated millions of times, remember it all, and come here to forget and experience things anew. It’s one of endless realms we visit. We are one consciousness that’s fractally split apart into myriad consciousness. The list is pretty endless and no one really has any proof of any of it. And no one can point a finger at something and say this, this is it, this is what’s going on.

        Maybe it’s just a dream. Maybe there isn’t much meaning, merely experience.

        -bill freeman

        P.S.

        I did find Revelation interesting because it seems to describe the solar nova that
        supposedly happens every 12068 years. As does the book World in Peril. The ice core samples from the Arctic which changed from tropic, to arctic, to tropic, to arctic etc.
        The glass beads (with fission tracks) found all over the moon. The Oort cloud, the outer remnants of earlier novas as is the Kuiper belt. The accounts by Plato as told to him by the Egyptians if I recall. So many of the most ancient stories speak of this as well.
        Is this what happens?

        -Bill Freeman

      2. Bill Freeman. Just consider one thing before you close the book on Christ.

        How do you explain the total change that takes place in a person’s life after they trust in Christ for salvation from their sins and hell?

        I mean, throughout history, there are many instances of people who, after they believe on Christ as Savior, are transformed from being murderers, sexually depraved, angry, hate filled, profane, blasphemous, into people who are kind, loving, patient, joyful. And at times, and still today thousands and millions of them have willingly even joyfully- undergone horrible tortures, imprisonment, ostracism, and death for His name’s sake.

        This cannot be denied. How can it be explained?

        The change that takes place in people after they accept Jesus as Savior, flies in the face of human nature. They forgive their enemies, even love and pray for them. They share with others even if it would make more sense to hoard up what they have. They will not deny His name, even out of self-preservation.

        This has been the case since He ascended back into Heaven -for around 2,000 years across every people and culture, the stories are the same.

        How can this be explained, unless He is real?

        Please consider these things.

      3. Bill Freeman, I want to something else for consideration before the comments close.

        I’m not saying these things in order to win an argument or anything like that. If Jesus is who He said He is, and the penalty for not believing on Him as severe as He said, then it is in our best interest to at least consider the things I mentioned.

        Also…

        It has dawned on me over the years as I read through the Gospels, man could not make someone such as Jesus up.

        We are incapable of making up a person as good, unselfish, bold, humble, secure, confident, unpretentious, matter of fact, totally opposite of the selfish and prideful parts of our human nature.

        It boggles my mind when I think about it. We really could not make up such a good man, because that kind of goodness is not in us. It’s just not there.

        Truly, this Man is the Son of God.

      4. Bill Freeman: You made a reference to Richard Carrier. I hadn’t heard of him before, so I followed your link to his article on why the book of Daniel is a forgery.

        I looked at that article that claims that Daniel is a forgery, and already in the introduction I found many problems with it. The author claims that Ezekiel was written to a non-Israelite audience—that is evidence that he hasn’t read Ezekiel. Another claim “the Daniel depicted in the book of Daniel is portrayed as a wise and righteous judge” is nowhere depicted in the Book of Daniel, again evidence that he hasn’t read the book in question. With such obvious ignorance of the books in question, can we trust anything else that he says?

        Secondly his grasp of history leaves much to be desired. For example, it was common for cities to hold out for years under siege—the well-known example of Troy holding out for ten years. So the picture we get is that Jerusalem held out for eight years.

        The author claims to be a historian—doesn’t he know how messed up is ancient history? For example, I’ve seen three different dates for Raamsis II—1300 BC, 900 BC and around 600 BC—from the evidences I’ve seen from all sources, the 600 BC date may be accurate. How many of his other claims based on “history” may likewise be questionable?

        He makes an appeal to authority which, besides being a logical fallacy, assumes that the “mainstream scholarly consensus” is accurate. Is it?

        One thing he would not know is linguistics. According to Dr. Furuli, professor emeritus of Oslo University, the Aramaic written in the book of Daniel is that of the sixth century BC, not later.

        Enough of that article. I can’t stand something like that which is so unscholarly.

        So paraphrasing Jesus in John 3:12, if what I’ve read from him is so messed up, how can I trust anything else that he writes?

        I do not believe in the Kierkegaardian “leap of faith”, especially when dealing with historical matters that can’t be tested with modern scientific methods. So when faced with a choice between different claims, we ultimately need to analyze each claim, then make an informed decision. You have decided one way. I have decided that, taken as a whole, the Bible is the trustworthy source.

      5. Re:
        [ bill freeman says:
        November 10, 2022 at 3:14 pm ]

        Rome kept meticulous records. The Roman incident report, is the same as the Biblical accounting that the guards fell asleep and when they woke up, Jesus was gone. The guards were executed for dereliction of duty.

    2. Moe invented Islam a few hundred years after the, Hebrew Messiah, Emanuel. If you’ve ever skimmed the Bible, you may have noticed all those so and so begat so and so after so and so after so and so. That is the linage of the Messiah, right up to the birth of Christ. The Prophecies of Jesus are presently coming true, all around us today, but Christianity will indeed be gone in the very, near future, along with all the Christians. Even Islam will not remain in it’s current and/or traditional form.

    3. “…. remake the World to their specifications.”

      The reason this will always fail is because it is
      impossible to stop subconscious mental processes
      from working, minute after minute, hour after hour
      day after day, week after week, … and decade after
      decade.

      Thank God.

      1. The fact “this will always fail” is a given. However, that does not mean it will not be implemented and run for a time before it fails.

    4. Am I the only one who finds it ironic that, because atheism conduces to exaltation of the material, it is fundamentally idolatrous?

      And can we all see that atheism – as it has advanced in the West – is leading to exaltation of the environment, or dare I say it, earth worship? And isn’t earth worship paganism?

      1. Yes, that’s my point. Paganism is not atheism, yet atheism is paradoxically bringing in a paganism redivivus, a “scientific paganism” if you will.

    5. “Why do Americans here believe the faith will somehow make them stronger.”

      Commit: Surely you know faith does make people stronger and you are being sly here. If it doesn’t, why have communists focused on crushing anyone of faith thru their history? Churches are and have been severely persecuted under communism, as well as other faiths like Islam, Falun Gong, etc — think live organ harvesting from the Uyghur Muslim people group in China and “re-education camps”.

      If communists sincerely believe a people’s faith and morals do not and can not strengthen a nation and culture, then why has the communist bloc been working so hard thru the decades to destroy the foundations of faith and morality in the West as shown in “Naked Communist” goals numbers 24-28?
      https://www.theblaze.com/45-communist-goals

      Why then, have they purposefully infiltrated the churches?
      https://youtu.be/d1pd46zZp8c

      Even China’s communist scholars concluded our historical Judeo-Christian roots of faith and values have been our nation’s key strength:
      “Former Time correspondent, David Aikman interviewed the retiring head of state in Communist China in 2002, Jiang Zemin, and asked what he wished for in regard to China’s future. His response shocked Aikman, and much of the world when he replied: “I would like for my country to become a Christian nation.” When asked “Why?” Zemin’s response was an amazing revelation. He explained how a panel of Chinese scholars had spent twenty years studying why China continually lagged behind the West in science, industry, and culture. After considering every possible explanation, they concluded that it was the religious heritage of the West that had allowed it to reach such heights. The statement of these Chinese scholars was: One of the things we were asked to do was look into what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world. We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective. At first, we thought it was because of a more powerful military. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic systems. But in the past 20 years we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion:
      Christianity. This is why the West is powerful. The Christian moral foundation of the social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don’t have any doubt about this. Quoted from Jesus in Beijing: How Christianity is Changing the Global Balance of Power, by David Aikman”.
      Exerpt from the book “The Harvest, 25th Anniversary Edition” by Rick Joyner.

      1. I remember reading this article when it came out. Very interesting. The Chinese communists are looking for every angle to get advantage. They have no idea what changes would happen to their system if they seriously embraced Christianity. No more forced organ donors, for starters.

      2. The problem with this attitude is that in order to get the benefits that they want, they have to accept the whole of Christianity. Not just the parts they like.

        But he is quite right, that it is Christianity that gave us the benefits that he wants.

    6. You are more ignorant of history than I would have thought. The Germanic tribes were largely Arian heretics, not heathens. The one prominent tribe that were heathen, the Franks, became adherents of the True Faith and thereafter became the dominant power in Western Europe. The seeds of the collapse of the Empire were sown long before Constantine, the various crises of the 3rd century prepared the way for it. The Church will endure till the end; long after you are rotting in your grave feeding worms & Jesus Christ has judged your black putrescent soul there will be Christians flourishing & spitting on the graves of worthless fools like you boy.

      Do you really think, you blaspheming cockroach, that scum like you will prevail when Nero, Domitian, Decius, Diocletian, Arius, Mahomet, Luther, Calvin, Voltaire, Rousseau, Saint Simon, Robespierre, Napoleon, Marx, Bakunin, Mazzini, Garibaldi, Lenin & Stalin among countless others failed? They were far more able than you little maggot & they dashed themselves against the Rock in vain. If it weren’t for the Church you wouldn’t even be able to sit & entertain yourself with such contemptible delusions of grandeur as the leisure & technology you use wouldn’t be afforded you. You would likely be a slave to some tribe of savages little different from those which inhabit the Amazon or the Congo save in the use of metals rather than stone.

      You might well have finished up as a human, or in your case self-made sub-animal sacrifice to their idols. Go on fantasizing boy, you’re nothing, you’ll always be nothing, you’ll accomplish nothing, you’ll die one day & thereafter cease to pollute the face of the earth with your loathsome presence & be consigned to the ground to rot & feed the worms & in a few more years you’ll be utterly forgotten, you might as well have never existed. Think on that you laughable little coprophage ha ha ha!

  11. Petunia,
    I was clever … so I created more personal
    accountability, more personal risk, less
    personal comfort, less social status, and
    less cuddling with frauds.
    Mr. Walker

    1. Way to walk, Mr Walker. Get ahead of the curve. People will be blindsided.

      Mao’s devastating Cultural Revolution eradicated free enterprise, religion, art, and artists; even fine paint brushes from bear and wolf whiskers, which nobody today knows how to make, Taoist Monks in the Pine Martin Abode, were undiscovered and left untouched, but today, even if one were to find a nice remote secluded piece of land, suitable for self sustenance, drones can spot them with infrared, then drop robo dogs with machine guns, and confiscate the small crop.

      1. “but today, even if one were to find a nice remote secluded piece of land, suitable for self sustenance,……..”

        Therein lies to crux. While this should not be a deterrent to active resistance, it is certain that lives will be lost. As the saying goes – “Better dead than red.”

      2. Cultural revolution eradicated bourgeoise class, was a necessary precondion for opening up.

  12. Jeff, I would be interested in your thoughts if you have time to comment on how explicit and precise the infiltration of communist strategy is in our corrupted halls of government. Do you believe elected officials and high ranking bureaucrats explicitly propose and adopt policies resulting in authoritarian power and pushing us to revolution or are they duped into it by their nefarious consultants, contributors, left wing policy ngos? How do we counter this? It seems the midterms thus far show a sleepy America waking up, but not wide alert as to the dangers our Communist 5th column presents.

    In my rural community, 20 friends of mine contributed funds on October 30 to buy a full page ad in our tri -county newspaper on the 45 Goals of Communism. These were published in 1963 in the Congressional Record. We wanted to warn our community of what has mostly already been done and how a Communist-plann is the root cause of many of our institutions’ decay. It seems our job is to shake people wide awake.

    1. Ladyfromlibertygarage – is your rural community doing anything to prepare for the inevitable? If so, how?

      1. LADYFROMLIBERTYGARAGE- the collapse of our government. The possibility of the power grid going down, no food and anarchy among those who aren’t prepared….

  13. I feel obliged to point out the use of the terms “exoteric” and “esoteric” in reference to Leninism seems quite misleading to me. It is possible to use it in the way the text does, but it seems to me it would be more fitting (although not exactly precise) to describe the outward aspect of Marxism-Leninism as a Pseudo-initiation, and its inward aspect as Counter-initiation, the former being a positive (meaning content-filled) outlook, while the latter being negative or comparatively content-empty by design. This pair (pseudo-initiation and counter-initiation) is discussed in detail in René Guénon’s The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of of the Times (which book is said to be his magnum opus); which is the same as saying these are terms he used to express realities and human possibilities he reckoned were quite real, and his work on Madame Blavatsky and her sweeping secular influence (among others) suggests he was quite familiar with.

    There is a correspondence (as opposed to a coincidence) between Pseudo-Initiation and Conter-Initiation, on the one hand, and [respectively] Leszek Kolakowski’s pair “hysterical collaborator and psychopath”.

    It is important to be careful in using these terms, exoterism and esoterism, because they don’t have a primary pejorative sense. In America, it seems to me, the word “religion” acquired a pejorative sense (even among people who consider themselves religious and serious believers) and is largely used to connote something absurd or rhetorically uncouth or inadequate; when religion, duly defined or understood, means originally precisely the opposite of it.

    1. A co worker of Jeff’s from World Net Daily, Dr. Hal Lindsey, says that “Religion is an invention of Man, Christianity, is a personal relationship with the Creator of the Universe.”

      1. Associating Christianity with a “personal experience” necessarily connotes it is something private to the detriment of being public and nobility-wise (the idea of nobility etymologycally means “famed”, “beautiful” [therefore imposing on others]). To associate true spirituality to this private experience to the detriment of public experience is to promote an infra-religious point of view, that is, a point of view that would traditionally be deemed below religion. Religion [understood etymologically and originally] by its very nature reveals the underlying unity between good and evil [corresponding to essence and accident] (for instance in martyrdom salvation [good] and death [evil] are underlyingly displayed as bonded), it brings together something and what would be otherwise accidental to this something. Thus, if one associates private accomplishment to the detriment of public accomplishement one is promoting what is below the sacred cleansing nature of the religious point of view.

        Further, this point of view according to which private realization is superior to public man-made artificial belief, is a point of view clearly mainstream-like. There is a Simpson’s episode that promote this outlook, among many other examples. One is definitely not “fighting the man” by promoting this outlook, which means this outlook is the norm, is a conventional paradigm that is enforced and imposed. This outlook is historically traceable to philosophical tendencies like Henri Bergson’s, and Bergson was (though not a Spiritualist personally) influenced by Spiritualism or Spiritism, which is one of the modern cultural tendencies that helped spread a certain at least subliminal resentment against dogmatic formulas as opposed to sentimental and fleeting aspirations and or notions.

      2. Re:
        [ PEDRO HENRIQUE BARRETO DE LIMA says:
        NOVEMBER 9, 2022 AT 11:07 PM
        Associating Christianity with a “personal experience” ]

        Not necessarily. Not to contradict you, Pedro, please allow me to explain, that Christianity as a personal experience, is not exclusive to any one individual, but rather a relationship that everyone may have if they so chose, as ancient Hebrew Scriptures describes. In fact the Holy Spirit through the Prophets, calls upon the Body of Believers to publicly share the Gospel.

      3. In the context in question (Christianity vs. a conventional artificial belief or group) “personal experience” [directly with God, no less] connotes something private to the detriment of being public and nobility-wise.

        My point was not that in this “personal experience” outlook each one is not called upon to partake in the same experience or in one’s own version of it sufficiently similar to the next person; my point is that this is an infra-religious outlook because in it outwardness and inwardness are to emphatically distinct and set apart, whereas in religion it is really a question of revealing how convention and outwardness, on the one hand, and inwardness on the other, are two sides of the same coin and equally sacred. This is seen, for example, in that the priests corresponds symbolically to inwardness, and the nobleman to outwardness; in the BBC show, “Merlin”, Merlin and Arthur (two classical symbols for priesthood and nobility, respectively) are described explicitly as “two sides of the same coin” repeatedly. Another way of seeing it is that in the Garden of Eden the “names of animals” (corresponding to the Pentecost tongues of Fire/contents of the Ark or contents of divine revelation) are authored by Adam, they are “made by human hands”, but they are at the same time divine and “not made by human hands”. That is because convention and nature, accident and essence, are in religion, in true religion, underlyingly the same, none can be separated from the other. The unity underlying this distinction is God himself.

      4. Pedro, with all due respect, you illustrate the reason why not to study religion at a secular university. However, I found it interesting when a friend of mine who studied at an, American Baptist seminary and became a deacon, told me that the first thing they taught them there, is comparative religion, before cracking the Bible. That is so they are able to understand where prospects for conversion are coming from. I can’t begin to tackle addressing the specifics of your prose, but please, read:

        Mary says:
        November 10, 2022 at 12:17 pm

      5. I did not study this subject I attempted to explain in a secular university, and the outlook I put foward is by no means characteristic of a secular university, not even in a religion department. Your words seem to indicate you either claim to have understood what I said and dismissed as ridiculous (albeit you’re apparently unable to tackle it rhetorically in any way), or you symply found what I said unintelligible. In the latter case, if you don’t know what I am saying, why dismiss it? If why I said is unintelligible, in the sense of there being nothing in it to be understood, this doesn’t prove it is beyond the domain of rhetoric to tackle it, to try and show I am incorrect instead of claiming I am incorrect.

        Besides, I am not a native English speaker, which puts me in significant disadvantage in trying to convey my meaning, especially in subtle matters.

      6. I read the commentary you recommended, and an important point regarding it is conventional religion and outward authority is not in and of itself illegitimate. Just as a government is not by definition a tyranny (except from a point of view quite usual among atheists and other milieux) outward religion is not by definition tyranny. Revelation 11:15: “The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.” It is not outside the realm of possibility, in this world, for outward authority to be associated with the center of spiritual gratification. To deny this should be seen as an expression of an outlook which assumes what is pejorative or degenerate to be the norm, thus making the offense to rule the golden rule. That is not how reality works. But that is definitely an expectation begotten in a tyranny atmosphere. Aristotle essentially taught in tyranny law and the general language used by people are made supersticious and provincial by design, as opposed to having universal validity.

      7. Pedro, I appreciate your complexity; it’s just beyond me. I suggested Mary’s post to see how you might relate to that which I do comprehend and embrace. Your well considered reflection and response is also over my head. One point might be off point from what you said, but The Golden Rule is the lowest common denominator of most religions from various cultures. It is true of course that tyrannical dictates, particularly in at least a couple of organized religions, do tend to supersede spirituality.

      8. If I am not mistaken the expression “golden rule” is sometimes used in English to express some kind of outlook or position which is said to have the upper hand or an imposing look; just as gold is an imposing and center-like commodity. Thus one may find an author saying for the sake of portraying an outlook that doesn’t take anything philosophically serious “The golden rule is that there is no golden rule”.

        It is unlikely that ordinary critics of the millenarian expectation (provided the latter view be vaguely understood as a certain purifying renewal of the earth; purification which in addition will also be lasting), it is unlikely they will be able to examine the symbolic meaning and the underneath layer of mystery, for example, intended by millenarians of Christian antiquity such as Saint Irenaeus or Papias.

        Here is a doctrine adopted by many early Christians (for example in the generation of St. Jerome [4th century], as the latter claims); and it seems that this same doctrine caused St. Paul to hasten to calm the Thessalonian faithful with the warning that before the restoration must first come the son of perdition and his revolt (corresponding to the eclipse and the Beast).

        In Against the Heresies, Book V, Chapter 33, St. Irenaeus quotes Papias in Papias’ capacity as John’s [the apostle’s] hearer, and in Papias’ capacity as Polycarp’s [an early martyr and bishop] companion; for Irenaeus says that Papias in the context of this testimony claimed that the promised millennium blessings are credible to those who believe [one would assume this means those who are inclined to fidelity regarding revealed truths].
        And Irenaeus also credits Papias with hearing about how Judas the traitor did not believe these promised blessings, and questioned them, saying, “How then can things so bountiful be wrought by the Lord?”, and the Lord declared “Those who will come to these [times] will see.”

  14. Jeff, not sure if you can comment in regards to the Grand Solar Minimum, Adapt2030 (David DuByne) is warning about a cooler summer in the Southern Hemisphere this year:

  15. OHENGINEER: Evolution based on genetics is an imperialist myth justifying superiority of one people over others.

    You can’t deny though that organisms have ability to adapt to conditions they are in. The abilities are not hard coded in genome, it is nonsense.

    Academian Lysenko was correct and it is nice to see his legacy restored in recent years.

      1. Lysenkoism was a political campaign led by Soviet biologist Trokhym Lysenko against genetics and science-based agriculture in the mid-20th century, rejecting natural selection in favour of a form of Lamarckism, as well as expanding upon the techniques of vernalization and grafting. — Wikipedia

    1. In Thousand Oaks, California, the Oak trees have adapted to the dry climate, and the trees have become sensitized to watering subject to rot, where in wetter environments the Oaks are far less tolerant to drought. That is natural genetic modification due to external factors. It’s not as if the trees have a choice to change their minds. Evolution is a good term to describe variation within a species, but there is no example of any species changing into a different species. Darwinism itself has devolved into a Social Science misnomer called, Evolution.

      1. Adaptation yes, but not through natural selection as claimed by Darwin. The oaks adapt during their lifetime and transfer the adaptation to offsprings. This was experimentally proven by academian Lysenko.

      2. Re:
        [ commit says:
        November 10, 2022 at 12:44 pm

        Adaptation yes, but not through natural selection as claimed by Darwin. ]

        Good point. Mendel would be more like it, yeah?

      3. Adaption occurs over many different timescales through a large number of mechanisms. On a short time scale, molecules will attach to an enzyme and cause a conformal (shape) change to the enzyme at the active site, causing a change in enzyme activity. An extreme example of this is the enzyme that converts cysteine to cysteine-sulfinate. Cysteine is an essential amino acid but toxic in excess, so the body must keep it tightly regulated. When eating meat or cheese a heavy load of methionine enters the liver cells and is quickly converted into cysteine. This enzyme can change activity by a factor of 300 in a very short period of time (seconds if I remember correctly) through conformational changes plus changes in ubiquination to quickly get rid of the excess cysteine.

        I am not familiar with Lysenko’s work, but it sounds similar to epigenetics. In this case, the cells can add methyl and acetyl groups to DNA to regulate the amount of mRNA that is produced. These changes can be in place for long periods of time and occur in germ cells also, so that the adaptations pass to the offspring.

        If organisms had to wait multiple generations to adapt, the earth would be barren of life.

      1. It is an attempt to scientifically justify Malthusianism, an ideology of British ruling class.

  16. “If there is no bourgeoisie, Commit, how can you have a Revolution? You lost me.”

    What do you mean? There were relicts of pre-civil war class system in China until cultural revolution. Cultural revolution eradicated those relicts. If they opened up before cultural revolution, those former bourgeoise classes would use their advantage to regain wealth and power.

    This was actually mentioned by Golitsyn among others.

  17. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in Jesus. There is over 500 proven historical facts and prophesies that have come true in regards to Jesus. Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world for thousands of years? How many times has the scholars, the philosophers and scientists of this world been proven true? God calls them fools! They are mostly all proven wrong in time. They have agendas to deceive for profit and control.

    I grew up in “religion” and it wasn’t until I was born again that I was I able to see the Kingdom of God (John3:3) We have blinders on our eyes and it isn’t until the Lord removes the veil that we can see what we were unable to see. This is a personal experience between you and God, praying and asking for forgiveness of sins, saying you surrender your life to him and asking him to fill you with his Holy Spirit. Religion tries to complicate it, make rules and regulations about it so they can control us and profit from us…it hinders people, giving them hard thoughts of God and religion.

    What did Jesus say he was pleased with? He was just pleased with Mary sitting at his feet. That’s is all he wants from us-to seek him with our whole mind, heart and soul so we can find him. Seek him first everyday and he will give us all we need. He is our strength because as we read his word, which is alive and active and powerful and sharper than a double edged sword, cutting between soul and spirit, bone and marrow exposing the inner thoughts and desires (Heb 4:12) it is His word that gives us our strength and power. Jesus had to go away alone in the wilderness daily to be with the father to gain the strength he needed and we are no different. He set the example of how it is to be done, “man does not live on bread alone but every word that comes from the mouth of God.” “We overcome because we believe what God says in His word” (Matt 17:19).

    Jesus relied on the holy Spirt and so do we. We receive revelation and enlightenment from the Holy Spirit as we read His living breathing word, which leads us to all truth. It enables us to see as Jesus sees-and have the mind of Christ.

    We are born into this world to seek God, find Him, have a personal relationship with Him, be empowered and strengthened by Him, to be a vessel for Him to fill, to do His will. That is the whole reason we where created, to know God and live for Him and until you surrender to this your life will never make sense.

    You can complicate it all you want, you can try and lean on your own understanding, you can make your own rules, you can listen to what others say or you can trust what God says-we choose, we have free will. He made the way simple, simply believe what He says and leave the rest to Him to reveal to you as you walk with Him, seeking Him daily in faith.

    His promises never fail!
    Thank you Jeff! God Bless You!

  18. “Good point. Mendel would be more like it, yeah?”

    Mendelism is just a rigorous formulation of darwinism. The problem is, Mendel developed the theory based on experiments with color of blossoms. There is no proof it works on more complex or quantitative traits. Mendel’s laws say nothing about traits gained during lifetime. Mendelists and Darwinists assume those traits don’t transfer to offsprings, which goes against all real world observations.

    1. Most interesting, Commit. What please might be the best study that you could recommend?

  19. You say “Lysenkoism was a political campaign”

    Who cares. So is Darwinism. Marx said that Darwin didn’t have to travel across the globe to project British class system on nature.

    Do you agree that science should serve humanity? How does humanity ever benefit from Darwin’s theory of natural selection? It only inspired people such as Adolf Hitler and Bill Gates who want to kill large part of human population to improve its alleged “genefond”.

    1. I agree with Commit in so far as eugenics goes, but I dare say that Mendel’s work has led to benefits in food crops, as well as agricultural abuses similar to eugenics, such as Monsanto’s Terminator seeds.

      If I may ask please, Commit, would Lysenko’s research explain the inconsistency in plant breeding? While there are consistent results in crossing one particular strain with a specific other strain, those results don’t hold up as similarly predictive when crossing a pair of other strains of the same species.

      Jeff has been from Humboldt County, so he must know what I’m talking about, too.

      1. After a brief skimming, I see the usual destructive result of Marxist hypothesis. That being said, hybridization does in fact produce dramatic results in one generation. It’s not clear if Lysenko discovered hybridization or if he was merely an enthusiastic proponent.

        A mystery of botany is the origin of Ruderalis, a Siberian strain of Cannabis, which flowers automatically, irrespective of lighting conditions or season. Notable Cannabis breeder, DJ Short, speculates that perhaps that strain is the result of breeding Indica for the flowering characteristics, at expense of psychoactivity; perhaps for use as hemp.

        More recently, Ruderalis, has been hybridized with Indica and Sativa, over many generations, to impart the autoflowering attributes while restoring the greater size, yields, and potency of medicinal, ritual, and recreational, Cannabis.

        I wonder if Lysenko could have been the botanist who first bred, Ruderalis?

      2. Du-UH! Mendel used hybridization. One thing that Lysenko advocated, though, was cold environmental temperature to induce variation within a plant species. Ruderalis is from Siberia. Is that a Bingo? Does Jeff bear a physical resemblance to Christoph Waltz?

      3. “I wonder if Lysenko could have been the botanist who first bred, Ruderalis?”

        I doubt that. As far as I know, drug use and production is a capitalist society phenomenon.

        As for Lysenko and Mendel, those concepts probably are not mutually exclusive. Mendel laws describe enheritance of certain traits, but surely don’t describe mechanism of appearance of new traits.

  20. Responding to Debra Schmitt. Yes, this community has recognized that even though we are rural, we are an hour away from a major city, so we’re vulnerable. In August, I gave a book to all the Commissioners and our County Judge called The Civil Defense Book: Emergency Preparedness for a Rural or Suburban Community by Michael Mabee. It focuses on the EMP threat. One lesson from the book is you can be the prepper king, but if your community isn’t with you, then you are no better off than the homeless guy sleeping at the bus stop. Now others are reading it and it’s “percolating.” It’s will help people orient their thinking, so we’ll see.Building a community in a way that we know each other’s skills and practice those skills regularly are other key thoughts.

    If you don’t know, Bill Clinton dismantled our civil defense program, another crime for which he was never held accountable.

    1. Gary North, the Paul Revere who singlehandedly alerted the World to the threat of Y2K programming defect, advised to find a small town with a population of less that twenty five thousand, located at least twenty five miles from any other town.

    2. LADYFROMLIBERTYGARAGE- thank you! I have that book as well. I may try to do the same here but I’m afraid many on our town council still have their heads in the sand. I’ve talked to the chief of police and she has experience with natural disasters but she talks of relying on neighboring communities. I believe it’s just going to be us getting through it alone because the neighboring communities will be struggling as well. I think it will be the people from the community stepping up and working together. But so many around here are still asleep. I ask God everyday to tell me what to do and ask for the strength to do it.

      1. Debra, when I gave the commissioners their copies of the book, I did it during a public session. I wrote a handwritten note to each one thanking them for their service and hoping that they will find this book useful and enclosed the note in the book. I made a 3 minute presentation about the importance of civil defense, especially in these times. I had met the County Judge at an event prior and told him about the book and he was very receptive so I gave him a copy and talked to him privately first. He encouraged me to come to the public meeting.These people know how vulnerable their communities are to an EMP, but they get bogged down in the day to day, and the task of preparation is too much even for four or five officials. If they know people care about civil defense, they will be more motivated, but the book as you know encourages citizens to form their own association.

        I am not saying my method worked, because I am still waiting to see what they do before I take any further action. They have increased their the wattage power of their emergency radio which is a good step. I hope they have a back-up generator and plenty of diesel.

  21. Quote:
    “…the USSR was designed and developed as (1) a resource base for the world revolution and (2) its military mobilization apparatus.”

    Jeff, one question: Who exactly was this done by? By Lenin? With the collaboration of financial people and by whom?

  22. Again, too much of the discussion here drifts toward/into religious theology instead of the ongoing developing world geopolitical/military activity, which I thought was the central purpose of Mr. Nyquist’s columns. (Just an observation.)

  23. Finally back home and need to catch up, but I wanted to post this before the comments get closed. Jeff what do you think about this?

    US Drops Experimental ‘Parachuted’ Missile In Arctic As Warning To Russia

    The experimental weapon system and program is called Rapid Dragon, and on Wednesday it was successfully test-fired at Norway’s Andoya Space Range, which is the country’s premiere far-northern weapons testing site.

    Rapid Dragon is a new cruise missile delivery method which begins by parachuting a long-range missile from the back of a C-130 plane. A guided missile then shoots out during the descent of the large crate containing the projectile, as video of this week’s successful deployment shows.

  24. Do you think that Russia’s failures in Ukraine are deliberate? Are they feigning weakness for a greater strategic purpose?

Comments are now closed.