It was while I was going over these stories that I realized for the first time just how important a part of the communist movement in America the teachers were. They touched practically every phase of Party work. They were not used only as teachers in Party education, where they gave their services free of charge, but in the summer they traveled and visited Party figures in other countries. Most of them were an idealistic, selfless lot who manned the front committees and were the backbone of the Party’s strength in the labor Party and later in the Progressive Party. Even in the inner Party apparatus they performed invaluable services.

Bella Dodd[i]

Brazil is falling to the communists. America is only a few steps behind. Here is the process: You capture the public schools. You capture the colleges. You indoctrinate and capture the elite. At the same time, you infiltrate the seminaries and corrupt the churches. You take over the tax-exempt foundations. You enter the intelligence community, the government, and the media. You get control of the money spigot. You make and break careers. You finance false fronts. You shape the larger culture. You conquer society itself. There is one thing you must be careful of, however. When your tyranny becomes effective, and society collapses under your destructive policies, and freedom evaporates, the masses will come after you with their guns (if they have any). Perhaps they will come after you with their bare hands. So, it is advisable that you misdirect the masses. You must get them to blame someone else for your crimes. Even more to the point, if you decide to devastate society with a biological attack, you must convince your victims that someone else was behind it. You must maintain your innocence to the end, even as you are taking over the world in plain view.     

Ask yourself why nobody frets over communism’s advance to power in Brazil. How has this happened?  Nobody sounds the alarm? NOBODY!? That Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was a friend of Fidel Castro, and a comrade in the communist movement, is well known. Yet nobody mentions this. And nobody finds it curious that Russian President Vladimir Putin supports Lula da Silva, and supports the “little rocket man” in North Korea, and is close friends with President Xi of the Chinese Communist Party, and supports the communist regimes Cuba and Nicaragua. President Putin has even given military support to the communist regime in Venezuela.[ii]  Does Putin sound like a good Christian boy, or a communist who pretends to be a Christian? There is a red elephant in the room, and everyone fails to see it. What? Are you seeing elephants? Only anticommunist dinosaurs see communists “under the bed.” But I am not pointing under the bed. I am pointing to Mexico, Cuba, Venezuela, Colombia, Bolivia, Chile and now Brazil. These are places that can be seen from the moon! But then, our deluded pundits and politicos do not want to notice vast regions that are falling to communism – in the Western Hemisphere. So, it bears repeating: Brazil is falling to the communists. America is only a few steps behind.

Yes, the Kremlin has pulled the wool over everyone’s eyes, making us think that the communist bloc split apart decades ago and ceased to exist with the fall of the Soviet Union. The best alibi is when nobody thinks you exist. But even so, in communism’s war against humanity, somebody must be blamed for the bad things that are beginning to happen – the pandemic, the war in Ukraine, the food shortages, the energy shortages, the economic collapse, etc. The global movement that put Lula da Silva in power in Brazil, that put Joseph Biden in the White House, that unleashed COVID-19 on the world using Big Pharma as its cat’s paw – needs patsies aplenty, and scapegoats, and dupes, and false narratives galore.

The key to redirecting blame for all the bad that is coming is found in something called ideology – a thing that evolves over time as it disorients and misdirects. Ideology is a political formula that does not require much study. The masses are drawn to ideology because it is easy to understand. The manipulators of humanity see ideology as a weapon. As Mao Zedong once said, “Marxism-Leninism is better than a machine gun.” The bullets in this machine gun are lies. They are fired in a steady stream against those targeted for conquest. The first target is the anticommunist, the person who resists communism, who recognizes its formations and themes – who understands communist subterfuge and misdirection.

The relationship between communism and ideology is not easy to understand. Exoteric communism is a changing set of outward dogmas and causes, linked together beneath the surface by esoteric communist practice; that is to say, by what Lenin called “the scientific management of human affairs” in the Machiavellian sense. Therefore, Chinese communism emphasizes its Chinese characteristics even as Venezuelan communism is “Bolivarian.” The communist practitioner conforms to the “laws” of history – of time and place. If he must pretend to be a liberal or a nationalist or a Christian to advance the Revolution, then he pretends. But underneath, he remains what he is. Esoteric Marxism is about global conquest through the inversion of all symbols and existing principles, as modeled by Karl Marx. Marxism in this sense is not a dogma, said Lenin. It is a living and evolving system for destroying everything. Marx’s favorite quote, in this regard, was from Goethe’s Faust, where Mephistopheles says, “Everything that exists deserves to perish.” The full quote is,

I am the spirit that negates.
And rightly so, for all that comes to be
Deserves to perish wretchedly;
‘Twere better nothing would begin.
Thus everything found in your terms, sin,
Destruction, evil represent –
That is my proper element.

Here is the anti-metaphysics, the anti-religion, the anti-philosophy of esoteric communism. Under Lenin’s guidance and Stalin’s helmsmanship, the communists built up a global system of power aiming at the destruction of the Old Order – an order based on ancient principles carried forward from generation to generation, through religious traditions and philosophic explanations. Only a small number of thinkers have noticed the true face – the wicked esoteric face – of communism. It is only by understanding esoteric communism that a person sees the real meaning of exoteric communism (which consists of flexible ideologic themes which may or may not self-advertise as “communist”). Unlike the Western ideologue, who stupidly believes in his ideology, the esoteric Marxist does not believe his own ideology. In fact, as Robert Payne tells us in his biography of Marx, the Founding Father of Marxism laughed at those who believed in “that class shit.”[iii] In his malevolence, Marx had developed intellectual weapons for destroying mankind. As Lenin realized, these weapons could be improved upon.

Of course, Marx was not the first to fashion intellectual weapons. Such weapons have been continually fashioned throughout history. And they continue to be fashioned today. The general rule, in fashioning an ideology (i.e., a political weapon) is to envision your enemy. Ideology, therefore, always demonizes someone.  For example, Nazi ideology demonizes the Jews while the communists (who call their ideology a “science”) demonize the bourgeoisie. Cultural Marxism (which is the latest and most refined version of Marxism’s exoteric iteration) demonizes white males. At the same time, on the right, conspiracy ideology demonizes a hidden cabal of actors who have allegedly controlled history since the dawn of time. Stalin, in his turn, more modestly spoke of a series of conspiracies involving Trotskyites, saboteurs, spies, and wreckers (around which Stalin built the narrative of his famous show trials).

To demonize is to generate hatred – an important feature of ideologies. Julien Benda, in his famous book La Trahison des Clercs, said that our age is the “age of the intellectual organization of political hatreds.” And the biggest hatred that now appears, ominously, is hatred of the West, especially in the form of anti-Americanism. This hatred has been fostered with such success, that many Westerners (especially Americans of white European extraction) hate themselves. Consider the example of Critical Race Theory, which says that all white people are racist. We should not be surprised to learn that Critical Race Theory is fashionable in American universities, and is even taught within the U.S. military. We know from the history of antisemitism the phenomenon of self-hating Jews (who have succumbed to their enemy’s propaganda). Now we have the phenomenon of self-hating Americans and Europeans. All of this is helpful to the communists, especially since their objective is to destroy Western civilization (which, as Mephistopheles said, “deserves to perish wretchedly”).

In the war of ideas, which is fought all around us, we are continuously attacked by those who would subdue us with their intellectual weapons. One of these weapons consists in the argument that we do indeed deserve to perish, as Mephistopheles said, “wretchedly.” Stalin famously boiled this down to a simple sentence: “If our enemies accuse us of crimes, then we blame them for the crimes.” In other words, communism teaches its acolytes to “blame the victim” of communism’s atrocities. That America is the chief intended victim should be obvious. Thus, we find the following themes continuously pounded home: the CIA killed Kennedy; America bombed and invaded Cambodia; Bush lied and people died; America is “destroying the planet,” etc. All of these slogans, spread far and wide by the communists and their dupes, are distortions of reality that blame the intended target for everything bad that has ever happened. The sad fact is, many Americans believe one or all of these ideologically-loaded slogans.

As an aside, a reader recently objected to my suggestion that all ideologies are inevitably untrue. He had probably looked up the dictionary definition of ideology, where it is described innocuously as “a system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy.” This definition is problematic because theory, policy and ideals are items too distinct to be subsumed under such a referent (which yet remains undefined by this supposed definition). These items can never be reconciled in a “system.” After studying hundreds of ideologues over a period of many years, Eric Voegelin realized that all ideologues were system-builders. But truth cannot be encapsulated in a “system.” In fact, all systems falsify the truth because life itself is a process of questing for the truth. It is a process by which we discover ideas and learn their meaning by direct experience. What a system pretends to be, inevitably, is a final and decisive answer of some kind – a shortcut that removes the very reason for living (i.e., discovery). Mortal man does not know the full truth. He therefore cannot devise a system of truth that is true. Here is an intellectual impertinence, a usurpation, an impersonation of God by man. Furthermore, could anything be more disastrous for a man than abandoning his quest for truth in favor of a formula that pretends to be the truth? This counterfeit would cheat a man of his very life; for Voegelin implies that once you have adopted an ideology you are no longer in life. By adopting an ideology, a human being becomes the stuffed thing of an intellectual taxidermist.[iv]

What about ideologies that claim to be “scientific”? Are they not searching for the truth? Here one must distinguish a real quest from a fraudulent one. When ideologists talk of class theory or race theory, or conspiracy theory, or global warming theory, they are lying. A theory is suggestive of a scientific approach, but ideologists have no real interest in science or methods leading to the truth. Remember that they must establish their system as truth, with all its answers. The word theory, therefore, coming out of their mouths, is the biggest lie of all. It is bluff pseudo-science. All incidents, all documents, etc., are taken out of context by these “theorists” who regularly misuse language to pile one fallacy upon another. Their objective is to persuade the reader that their “system” is the truth.

The most alluring ideology posing as “theory” – for most Americans – is “conspiracy theory.” Many patriots, who would save their country, are caught up in false notions of a history-spanning and all-encompassing conspiracy that regularly diverts their attention from flesh-and-blood enemies who are running circles around them. More than other ideologists, the ideologists who believe in THE ONE GRAND OMNIPOTENT CABAL, are always boxing with shadows. But when have they ever landed a blow? As ideology, conspiracy theory uses the wrong methodologies, mixing fact with metaphor – mistaking paranoia for a sensory organ. The research that is presented by conspiracy theorists knows nothing of the “falsifiability Principle,” expounded by Karl Popper in his book, The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Smugly using a figure of speech as the subject of their sentences, conspiracy theorists follow the same failed practice as President George W. Bush in his “War on Terror.” They would prosecute a “War on Conspiracy” with a similarly futile outcome.

The most striking example of bad methodology in a conspiracy ideologist can be found in Anthony Sutton’s book, America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. “Now in scientific methodology,” wrote Sutton, “a hypothesis can be proven. It cannot be disproven.”[v] In other words, Sutton refused to accept the falsifiability principle. Perhaps he unconsciously realized that his work would have crumbled into dust once his many omissions – factual and contextual – were brought to light. It was convenient then, that his “theory” could not be questioned but only affirmed. One ought to ask, then: what kind of theorist could Sutton’s have been? Here is why I have never taken Anthony Sutton’s work seriously.

Another kind of conspiracy “theory” attaches to the ideology of antisemitism – the crudest ideology of all (and sometimes referred to as “the stupid man’s Marxism”). For example, conspiracist antisemitism believes that Jewish black magicians rule the world through the masonic lodges and the banks. What happens, indeed, when you show an antisemite that his beloved conspiracy theory, based on The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, was plagiarized from Maurice Joly’s book, The Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu? Does the antisemite say, “Oops I goofed”? Does he do as Anthony Sutton did, and offer a perverted scientific methodology? Being simpler, the antisemite’s reaction is more earthy. Even if he is shown a copy of Joly’s book, he will say that the book itself is part of the larger deception. He will say to your face that you have been duped by the Jews.  And if you persist in arguing against his hobby horse, you will eventually find yourself denounced as an agent of the Zionist conspiracy.[vi]

Those who have adopted an ideology usually seem sincere in their beliefs. But this sincerity is not at all innocent. “Ideologies, whether Positivist, or Marxist, or National Socialist, indulge in constructions that are not intellectually tenable,” wrote the political philosopher Eric Voegelin. “That raises the question of why people who otherwise are not quite stupid, and who have the secondary virtues of being quite honest in their daily affairs, indulge in intellectual dishonesty as soon as they touch science.”[vii]

Intellectual dishonesty in this case, noted Voegelin, arises from the ideologist’s “persistent state of alienation.” To better understand what alienation means in this context, it is worth remembering that psychiatrists were once called “alienists.” That is to say, alienation is the root cause of madness (provided the patient’s symptoms owe nothing to a disease of the brain). In ancient and medieval times alienation signified estrangement from God or the divine ground of being (i.e., ultimate reality). Secular modernity uses the word alienation differently, referring to estrangement from society. Thus, modernity has adopted a peculiar view; for if God is the ultimate reality, and if insanity is estrangement from God, then reconciling a crazy person to a Godless society must also be crazy. On the other hand, if God does not exist, and reality is “other people,” then we have assuredlly come closer to validating Jean-Paul Sartre’s idea that “Hell is other people.” For any fool can see that our socially mediated secular reality is turning into Hell.[viii]

We should not be afraid, at this late hour, to call things by their proper names. So here is the bottom line: The modern world is gradually going to hell as it goes insane, and ideology is a symptom of that insanity. We should not be surprised, therefore, that our institutions are weighed down, more and more, by more and more ideological baggage, making us crazier and crazier. All around us people are offering false narratives, fake news, and facts out of context. When Tucker Carlson presented supposed evidence that “the CIA” was behind John F. Kennedy’s assassination we ought to ask whether all three letters in CIA were directly or indirectly involved? Was the C on the grassy knoll, the I in the book depository building? Where, then, was A positioned? This is not serious, of course, and neither is blaming an entire organization, made up of thousands of patriotic individuals, for murdering the President of the United States. But the purpose is clear, even if Carlson cannot see it. To reproduce Soviet KGB themes on FOX NEWS, without realizing what you have done, is a kind of madness.

Naturally, the worst kind of insanity is what we are seeing in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, in threats of nuclear war, and in China’s threats to invade Taiwan. This is the blood-soaked kind of insanity which will reach the shores of America one day. But for the present, the dominant political insanity in America takes the form of an all-encompassing political clown show – with spectacular pratfalls involving senile or orange-haired Bozos, special counsels, impeachments, fake news, and action-packed politics-as-sports & entertainment. It is great fun until you realize that the joke is always on us.

And what, pray tell, is wrong with clowns? The late Brazilian philosopher, Olavo de Carvalho, once said, “Never trust uncultured people.” A clown, in this context, is an uncultured person who has risen – inexplicably – to high office. Olavo understood that uncultured people are bound to fall in line with the first silly thing that captivates their otherwise flagging attention. A political clown is the first to believe in a conspiracy theory or false narrative that eventually promises to bring him into alignment with his country’s enemies. The thing about political clowns is their readiness to side against you and even themselves at the drop of a hat. A clown’s allegiance is always up for grabs. He will vote a communist into the White House because she smiles sweetly, talks about God, and pretends to be a conservative.

What makes for a clown is a readiness to over-simplify, to avoid anything serious, to say what is true without knowing anything at all. How can a serious thought exist out of nothing? And what is between a clown’s ears? Very little to nothing. Clowns are incurious and uncultured folks who know very little history or philosophy, and therefore have no context for judging politics. Yet they are loaded to the gills with judgments and certainties. This is a problem that generally afflicts our political discourse today, on the right and left.  

Ideology and Strategy

From the standpoint of global strategy, ideology has great importance; for an enemy sees your ideological stupidities better than you do, and he will play games based on these stupidities. Our friends and colleagues, sharing many of our preconceptions, add to the problem by joining with us in an intellectual phalanx of error, which Irving Janis called “groupthink.” Janis defined groupthink as “a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment that results from in-group pressures.”[ix] Human beings tend to be stuck in their own respective echo chambers, constantly seeking reassurance, blotting out anyone who disagrees. Of course, when you are dealing with an enemy this sort of thing is very dangerous.

The Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union and its successor state have been studying America and Western Europe for the past century. They are well acquainted with our wishful thinking and our various misconceptions. In fact, they would like to foster as many misconceptions in us as they can; for good strategists make their own opportunities. Agents of influence, carrying out the instructions of Moscow Center, are meant to operate in the shadows; yet the most important shadows in which they operate are produced in minds beclouded by ignorance and ideology. In fact, Russian and Chinese agents of influence have used our own ideological preconceptions against us at every turn. For example, our economic conservatives and libertarians have always said that “communism does not work.” So the communists condescended to flatter them in the late 1980s, turning openly to capitalism. In this way the communists made inroads into the libertarian right. After 1991, when Russia pretended to become a Christian conservative country, paleoconservatives were romanced. Given the proprietary vanity which ideologists feel with regard to their ideas, who is so firm that he cannot be seduced? Ideological agreement can be a form of flattery, and flattery is an agent-recruiter’s most important tool.        

This leads us to consider the great success that Communism Incognito has had, behind the scenes, in American and European politics since 1991. The grandiose deception strategy adopted by the communist bloc in 1960,[x] which was predicated on organizing a false liberalization in Russia as well as market-oriented reforms in both Russia and China, appeared absurdly ambitious and optimistic on its face. To properly grasp the strategy’s ingenuity, one must see its psychological depth. The communists had done well insofar as they knew their enemy. They knew that the West wanted to be fooled. Especially, the West wanted to believe that the threat of nuclear world war was a thing of the past. Thus, the communist and post-communist theater productions of 1989-94 were successful. Those who were paying attention could see the transparently sloppy stagecraft, especially in Czechoslovakia and Romania; yet, the whole thing came off easily; except that the communists had deceived themselves about the unpopularity of their own system. Here, they might have known their enemy but not themselves (for this is always the hardest thing of all). Where it came to the reactions of the West, the strategists in Moscow were masterful. Where it came to the reactions of Poles and Ukrainians and certain other peoples, they blundered badly. But that is a story for another time.

What made the deception work was in the strategist’s understanding of what the West wanted to believe ideologically, and, in fact, psychologically needed to believe. The collapse of the Soviet Union served to validate liberalism, market hedonism, and democratism. All doubts regarding these ideologies were instantly removed by the collapse of the Soviet Union. If the West had been blinded by its ideological assumptions before 1991, the West was blind and deaf and stupid ever afterward; for the West had won a great and painless victory. Heaven help anyone who came along to say otherwise.

The Advance of COmmunisM

In 1958 the American lawyer Robert Morris, who had worked as counsel to the Senate subcommittee on internal security, warned about the infiltration of the communists. “My friends tell me I take these things too seriously,” Morris wrote. “But what I see is an encirclement that has its goal my own five children.” Morris then said there was a connection between the advance of communism abroad and its advance within our country. “Whether it is the Congo, Laos or Berlin, these are mere stepping stones, in Khrushchev’s eye, to the real target, the United States. We are the only obstacle to his goal of world dominion. If we fail, our whole civilization is lost.”[xi]

Morris’s book, which chronicles his legal and intelligence battles against communism in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, is long forgotten now; yet it was a brilliant little history, full of shocking details and unpalatable truth-telling. Morris wrote, “The treachery, the credulity, the ineptitude and the complacency, seem so fantastic. And beholding them, it is no wonder we are losing.”[xii] Morris wrote those words in 1958. Indeed, what would he say now that Brazil is falling to Fidel’s friend, Lula? Of course, despite his many disappointments Morris was not inclined to give up. He said our inability to defeat communism had to do with human weakness, and that these weaknesses could be overcome. He wrote, “perhaps we can effect a stirring reversal.” So far, the most striking moves against communism have occurred in places like Poland, the Baltic States, Georgia and Ukraine. In fact, Ukraine is the only country in Europe that presently bans its Communist Party. (Hungary and Moldova had bans at one time.) In 2015 the Ukrainians legally prohibited communist symbols and barred the Communist Party from participating in elections. Of course, Moscow did not take this lying down.

With the war in Ukraine and the communist takeover in Brazil, we can see America’s peril with greater clarity. The government of the United States, under President Joseph Biden, supports the rise to power in Brazil of a convicted criminal, friend of Fidel Castro, and communist conspirator – Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. In fact, the U.S. Secretary of State has threatened the Brazilian military should it block Lula’s presidency. Here is a bit of that insanity we were discussing earlier; for President Bolsonaro, who is routinely vilified by American Democrats and leftists, is a pro-American politician. He is friendly to American values, while Lula da Silva hates the United States, being friendly to Cuba and China and Russia. In 2019 Bolsonaro offered the United States the possibility of having military bases on Brazilian soil to counter the Russian threat emerging out of Venezuela.[xiii] But this never materialized, and the Biden Administration’s concerns about Russian infiltration of the Western Hemisphere are not anywhere visible. In fact, the Biden Administration will do nothing to prevent Russian military units from deploying to Nicaragua (as announced last year).

We can only understand what is happening in terms of profound ideological changes that have taken place within the United States since the supposed end of the Cold War. Socialism is becoming acceptable in the United States for the first time. This would have been inconceivable fifty years ago. Consider how Washington reacted when a communist came to power in a South American country 53 years ago, when Chile elected Salvador Allende as their president. The CIA bunglingly pressured reluctant Chilean generals to overthrow Allende.[xiv] Now U.S. policy has swung to the opposite position – welcoming communists into power throughout Latin America, threatening those who might oppose communism with force of arms.

This is tragic for millions in Brazil who know their country will be looted by Lula and his communist gangster friends. Millions in Brazil are in the streets, protesting for their deliverance. But President Biden is one of those clowns discussed earlier, who does not know on what side his bread is buttered. – Or does he? At this late hour nobody should be naïve. A time of troubles is beginning for Brazil. The leading institutions of the country no longer belong to the Brazilian people.

In his farewell address, before leaving Brazil, President Bolsonaro said “violence will return to Brazil.” Then he predicted, amid mixed signals, what lies in store:

[They will] stop the economic wheel from spinning and there will be no money for public services. It won’t happen like the pandemic, when you received your full paycheck. With no economy there will be no resources. Everyone will suffer. But I am sure, it won’t take long. Brazil will come back to normal, to prosperity, to order and progress, to respect, love for our flag. Brazil won’t succumb.

Sadly, these hopeful words ring hollow in the wake of what is happening in Brazil. Hundreds are being arrested, including anticommunist journalists. I understand why Bolsonaro fled his country, since nobody wants to be tortured in a communist jail. But was not Bolsonaro like the captain of a ship? Was he not obliged, in some sense, to go down with that ship – to fight to the end? I cannot judge a man for saving his own life. But then, I think of the millions he left behind – the 1,700 Brazilian patriots arrested. The only hope Brazil had was in Bolsonaro. Now the Brazilian people will have to do what the Ukrainian people did; that is, distrust their leaders and mock them – to the point of settling on a comedian as president; for if one must have clowns, then have a real one. It is a choice that has proven satisfactory in Ukraine.

And what does the vile American press have to say about the Brazilian patriots? The vile American media slanders the Brazilian patriots as “right wing extremists.” Earlier in his farewell speech, Bolsonaro said that peace required guns and that peace required war preparations. But then, tearfully, he turned everything upside down, telling his followers, “Always seek peace, harmony – not just talk about it. How important this is, in this quick journey here on earth, to live in peace.” As a blubbering subtext, we can hear someone mumbling –

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a wimper.

Links and Notes

[i] Bella Dodd, School of Darkness (Kindle Edition), p. 263 at 46 percent. Dodd was a Communist Party lawyer who had worked for communist control of the leading teachers’ unions, which captured the education system in the state of New York by 1939. For further details the takeover of America’s schools in New York and New Jersey: Robert Morris, No Wonder We Are Losing (New York, The Bookmailer, 1958).



[iv] In France, during the eighteenth century, the term ideology was first used to describe the scientific study of ideas. But through common usage, during the turbulence of the French Revolution, it became what it is today; that is, a byword for various political belief systems. Napoleon Bonaparte was astute enough to realize that ideology represented something negative; for he used the word ideology as term of abuse, depicting his opponents as “ideologues.” The correctness of this usage was also recognized by Karl Marx, who knew exactly what he was doing when he concocted his own ideological system – disguised as philosophy (i.e., dialectical materialism). Unlike Marx, who said ideologies were mere byproducts of “material life conditions,” Eric Voegelin suggested that ideologies were the result of man’s spiritual estrangement from the “divine ground” of being. The key point is that ideologists do not begin with God and advance to an ordered understanding. They begin estranged from the “divine ground of being,” and invent their own truth – which is hardly propitious.

[v] Anthony C. Sutton, America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones (Oregon: TrineDay LLC, 2002), p. 2.

[vi] Conspiracy theorists who believe I am an agent of the conspiracy, however, need to explain my relative poverty and underemployment over the past thirty years. If I am somehow supporting Doctor Evil and his crew, why didn’t they get me on Fox News? – or, at least, a better book deal!

[vii] Eric Voegelin, Autobiographical Reflections (USA: Louisiana State University Press, 1989), p. 45.



[x] See KGB Major Anatoliy Golitsyn, New Lies for Old (New York: Dodd & Mead, 1984).

[xi] Morris, p. 213.

[xii] Ibid, p. 216.


[xiv] The Chilean generals refused to do the CIA’s bidding, but overthrew Allende on their own initiative when he violated the Constitution by attempting to raise his own troops.

Quartlery Subscription (to support the site)



235 thoughts on “Ideology, Subversion, and the Fall of Brazil: Not With a Bang

    1. The Communists’ method of projecting the mirror opposite of the truth continues to work wonders. We need some kind of term for this technique as they use it over and over again, I have come up with Opposite Projection.

      The Brazilian Marxist-Leninists have not only taken the election, they are now purging the duly elected representatives. The initial theft was followed by a direct threat of prosecution to any who objected, using their Supreme Court thug. I found this tactic both ballsy, high risk and high reward. The threat frightens opposition, but if the wronged party investigates and finds the crime, they go to jail. It worked in America too. I had a feeling Bolsonaro would fold. As much as I hate to say it, he was intimidated and betrayed the citizenry. And now it is very likely that he himself will be imprisoned.

      The theft, then the threat, was followed by the same staged theatrical production of hundreds of people who we are supposed to be frightened of. Capable of nothing, we were supposed to believe this sad Marxist Hollywood production was a dire threat to Brazilian democracy. And now the play is followed by the Purge. The armed forces will be replaced with Marxist-Leninist loyalists. Similar to other centers of power. Putin agrees, citing “law and order”. Maduro agrees, railing against the “neo-Nazis in Brazil”, comparing them to the apparently starving protesting people in his Slave State who are “funded by the Gringo Empire”.

      Here we see the Convergence. It was bound to happen sooner or later. As they gain control, their rhetoric is bound to converge, align, and run in parallel. All of the former Latin American military dictatorships were merely military men who stepped in at the last minute to prevent the final stages of a Marxist-Leninist Slave State. They had no grand plan and were certainly not “fascists”.

      It appears those types of men are gone. Colombia has fallen. Chile has fallen. Peru has fallen. And now Brazil has fallen.

      The age-old war between Communist Russia and Anti-Communist America in all of these countries is over; Communism subsumed America and now there is no one left to counter the takeovers in these nations. On the contrary, America now eagerly helps. This only ends in one way, as spoken of by Golitsyn: the World Federation of Communist Slave States.

    2. Jeff, are you sure that the main stream media are not collaborating in the communist takeover?

      1. Many media people are collaborating with the communists. When did I say otherwise? A thing so large as “the mainstream media,” however, is not all one thing or another. Let’s be nuanced.

  1. Hi, Jeff. I am a pupil of Olavo de Carvalho (1947-2022). This is my second commentary to you, even though I have been following you since 2012, because of Olavo.

    Last month I asked you an article about «Putinist disinformation among Conservatives in the USA». It amazes me that many Conservatives there think that Putin is a right-winger! The level of dumbness is off the limits. Putin backed Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chávez, Xi Jiping, the Kim family, Iran’s ayatollah etc. The fact that he prohibits LGBT parades means zero – the USSR also prohibited them. It is a Communist habit. But Russia is a safe haven for… abortions! And the Russian Orthodox Church is full of Gnostic thoughts, like no other church. Olavo used to say something like this: “Russia’s thought is built over: (1) Orthodox Christianity, (2) Slavic paganism, (3) scarce Western influence, and (4) Marxist Materialism. Its result, its ‘sum’, has been ‘tyranogenic’ in the last centuries, long before 1917.”

    Now I ask you a second article. About «Ron DeSantis’ potential political career». Questions to be answered in that hypothetical article:

    1. Can Ron DeSantis be a “SuperTrump”, that is, can he do what Trump did well, but avoid his mistakes? Can he start the disintegration of China’s imperialism?

    2. Can Ron DeSantis decentralize industries around the world?

    3. Can Ron DeSantis take China’s estate in the USA and give them, as reparations, to Americans, due to the CCP’s negligent rule in Covid-19 viral spread?

    4. Can Ron DeSantis prohibit the ownership of American land and companies by foreigners?

    5. Can Ron DeSantis start the restoration of the USA’s world hegemony?

    6. Can Ron DeSantis be a model Conservative politician, a contemporaneous Ronald Reagan, a light for the next decades?

    7. Can Ron DeSantis do for the USA what Olavo dreamed for Brazil, that is, a culture war, “build a ‘wall of good books'”, a “vaccine against the revolutionary mentality”?

    8. Can Ron DeSantis influence other countries, like what Trump did to Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro and Italy’s Giorgia Meloni?

    9. Can Ron DeSantis avoid the invasion of the Republic of China (Taiwan) by Communist China?

    10. Can Ron DeSantis expand NATO and protect Russia’s Far East following the downfall of Vladimir Putin? Xi is hungry… and Vladivostok was Chinese. It was Eastern Manchuria.

    [11. Can Ron DeSantis – please! – save Brazil from the Communists? :(]

    Thank you for tolerating me again. Haha! Greeting from Brazil’s landlocked highland state of Minas Gerais – the land of coffee, cheese and milk! 🙂

    1. “The Russian Orthodox Church is full of Gnostic thoughts.” I have been watching The Passion of Andrei, by Tarkovsky, and at about the 55 minute mark, I paused the film, disturbed, and said to myself, “There’s a whiff of gnosticism about this.” It’s a kind of mysticism that’s gone off the rails.

    2. I really don’t understand these delusional questions. Ron DeSantis has zero chance of stopping the Marxist-Leninists from purging their enemies from government and arresting them. The only chance was Bolsonaro investigating the election crimes in time to expose them. He tucked his tail and so that chance is gone. Nobody is saving them now, the MLs will consolidate power. Ron DeSantis barely has a chance at making it through the completely compromised American election apparatus, much less saving some other nation. We have to be real, guys.

    3. G. Gama: For some reason, on my main screen your post did not appear. I saw it when reviewing today, so please forget my late answers to your questions. These questions are a plea for hope. I am not going to answer all of them, except to say: Electoral politics and bourgeois politicians are not going to save us. Sorry. We have to pass through the fire.

      1. How do you know, Jeff, that China does not use mRNA gene treatment injections? I’ve never found that assertion made anywhere. A citation would be greatly, appreciated.

      2. I doubt you are sincere, Petunia, but how about the BBC? They state that China uses Sinovac and Sinopharm.

        “The Beijing-based biopharmaceutical company Sinovac is behind the CoronaVac, an inactivated vaccine.

        It works by using killed viral particles to expose the body’s immune system to the virus without risking a serious disease response.

        By comparison the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are mRNA vaccines. This means part of the coronavirus’ genetic code is injected into the body, triggering the body to begin making viral proteins, but not the whole virus, which is enough to train the immune system to attack.”

      3. I have and I don’t find it. Besides, it’s most relevant, Jeff, to realize what source that you find credible. Seems to me that Russia and China are both on board with the Globalist depopulation agenda, domestically as well as internationally.

        Even Zelensky busted three dams around Chernobyl, exterminating who knows how many Ukrainians, without so much as an evacuation warning, thereby taking vast areas of prime farmland out of production for the next few years as the waters recede and the soaked land can dry out.

        Then who’s going to farm it again with all the experienced farmers dead? If this isn’t intentionally conspired as a major contribution to global depopulation, then the Globalists are just on a lucky streak.

      4. How about we both cough up the evidence? Your ex post facto request does not make you right; it leaves you indefensible. However, you do make a fair point. There is an expert witness who asserts that the SARS2 Covid is a synthetic strand of DNA, combined with snake and sea snail venom, to produce spike proteins, which was released in Wuhan via aerosol. By whom is not clear, but the development of this bioweapon was a joint project of the DoD and CCP. Ostensibly, the US is way ahead of China in the development of bioweapons, and so gave the obsolete technology to China, in order to have access to their lab so that the US could monitor their other research. I’ll post a link to follow.

      5. I don’t quite trust this guy, but this is quite, interesting.

        Dr. Jane welcomes former EcoHealth GOF Vice Pres Dr. Andrew Huff to talk about the Truth About Wuhan and what he calls the lab leak. Was it intentional or accidental? Dr. Jane asks him the tough questions to expose the DOD mass genocide operation on both the Covid scam and the bioweapon shots created to take out Americans.

      6. Petunia. This is crazy. The United States Department of Defense is sponsoring a mass genocide? So, the Americans working at the DOD want to genocide everyone, including their own friends and relatives and the soldiers that defend the country? What would their motive be? Is it an elaborate suicide plot? Why don’t they all just take poison? It’s quicker. How can you seriously entertain these kind of conclusions? If this is something you believe, you will want Chinese and Russian troops to save you from the evil Department of Defense. Right? What side does that put you on in World War III?

      7. The Russian Covid Sputnik serum, contains lipid nano particles which create spike proteins, if not mRNA genetic editing, but China was the first to use the mRNA with lipid nano particles.

        All of the governments in the World, but for a couple, are enjoined in this depopulation agenda, as espoused by the United Nations, Agenda 2021 & 2030. It is madness, indeed. They say it’s to protect the planet. You buy that?

        I’ve been saying about your thesis all along, that if Russia wanted to nuke US they would have simply done it long, ago. Whatever the Great Reset is really all about, is Top Secret. There are a lot of conspiracy theories about it, though. In my opinion, it won’t wipe out enough people to alter the context of The Book Of Revelation and The Book Of Daniel.

      8. Since you ask me a direct question, Jeff, please be fair enough not to delete my answer. The United States will not be around for World War Three. Anything that might remain of it, will be part of a larger country, that has no semblance to the US Constitutional, Bill Of Rights. The infiltrators of the DoD are in position of dominance. Homeland Security linked together all of the US Intelligence agencies, which originally were prudently kept separate by design.

        When the Covid Live Exercise, first began, I traveled from Honolulu, to Seattle, San Diego, Los Angels, Ventura, and Santa Barbara. In all of those cities, I rode the public bus. Every single bus agency, directed the same exact mandated restrictions; enter the rear door, wear a mask, no fare required.

        How did that get coordinated so quickly without exception? What two politicians can ever agree on anything? Usually, there’s a lot of meetings and votes to enact any laws, but somehow no mayor or county commissioner objected.

        Centralization is in full force and effect. THEY, whomever They are, are following a scenario. What difference does it make if it’s, Russia, Belgium, Vatican City, Peking, or Washington? They all seem to be following orders from somebody else. You want to blame Russia? How does that change things? Whomever is behind this is cowardly. I find that encouraging.

      9. It is precisely because Russia and China do not want to be nuked that they have proceeded in the way they have. This is not cowardice so much as prudence. If the West starts to die, they want everyone as confused as you are about who was behind the kill shot.

      10. Jeff, theres no question but that the kill shots can be traced back to Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates and people working with them. Yes, it’s part of a depopulation event. Suicide. There are very evil people running those agencies.

        But when it comes to World War III, I will defend my people and my country to the best of my ability. Yes, the Russians and Chinese will be my foes.

    1. Jeff et al, I want to bring up an issue that I have been tearing my hair out reading over the last 2 weeks. I read your comment to Petunia that echos my concern. In Substack (indie authors), many authors/researchers are jumping on the bandwagon with headline titles like this: “COVID…is it a DoD Operation?” All of these seemingly well meaning authors are affixing blame on the covid vax operation as being under the DoD perview. If you look at samples of indie videos floating around, its the same thing. My radar is now on high alert. This seems like a deliberate operation.

      This all seems to be stemming from one woman pushing this narrative, Sasha Latypova who says she is ex pharma analyst and now seems to be turning whistleblower. maybe she is legitimate–would take some digging. There are no ends to whistleblowers which makes me sit up and also take notice–why are they coming out now? Latypova on her large and growing number of interviews has documents that show DoD as a signatory and prime contractor with the elements of vaccine developments long prior to covid. Are these legitimate or could they be counterfeits?

      We also do know that the US DoD DMED data base has been fouled/spiked with false data immediately after the Johnson vaccine injury hearing in summer 2022 to deflect the rising tide of military injuries. Various good reseachers are showing this spiking of the data is a real thing and that someone within DoD (or DoD contractor) has allowed this falsification of data to continue. For the top level response, its is causing suspicion towards the DoD and that they are hiding something from the American people and those in the military. Is the DoD being set up by CCP as a demoralization target?

      1. Oh yes, “Brave Sasha,” etc. A Russian, once again, telling us that we are the Evil Country. To paraphrase Tolkein: “One conspiracy theory to rule them all, One conspiracy theory to delude them, One conspiracy theory to twist them all, and in the darkness denude them!”

        This whole thing reads right out of Stalin’s playbook. Never allow your victim his innocence. Blame the victim for what you have done. The Pentagon is target number one for Moscow. So they targeted it for infiltration long ago. Then, should that infiltration succeed, they do nefarious things through their agents INSIDE the Pentagon. They can then claim the Department of Defense attacked the whole world even as they continue to undermine us from within. This seems rather obvious, and very simple to understand; for what motive would “THE PENTAGON” have to depopulate the entire planet, including the United States? (But, of course, we Americans are so terribly evil.) It makes no sense unless you get people conditioned, in the first instance, by conspiracy theory. And now we have a Russian national demonizing our own military — and Americans readily believing her! Consider how easy we are to fool. Note how dangerous conspiracy theory is. If you want to know why I write against it, THIS IS THE REASON.

  2. I try to use the term “conspiracy theory” in a neutral way like Murray Rothbard did (“There are, of course, good conspiracy analysts and bad conspiracy analysts, just as there are good and bad historians or practitioners of any discipline”). I am consuming selected so called conspiracy theories for 2 decades now. I did not find any of them very convincing, in part because I found it unlikely that a group of people would conspire to destroy the world. A few years ago I realised that there are people who actually do want to destroy the world as their ideology tells them that the current system – whatever it may be – is evil, must be destroyed and replaced by their own set of rules they claim will bring Utopia. The Communists are very open about their use of conspiratorial means (unlike other accused groups). The one thing missing is imho the current “Moscow Center” or the “Comintern”, i.e. the undisputed head and center of the Conspiracy, so I still think it might be a “Conspiracy of Ideas”, as Ron Paul once put it, i.e. something more like a decentralised movement than a centrally steered conspiracy, but maybe Moscow is actually pulling the strings.
    As for Popper, he wrote in his “Open Society” (in 1945, thus predating the alleged invention of the term by the CIA in the late 60ies…):

    “I do not wish to imply that conspiracies never happen. On the contrary, they are typical social phenomena. They become important, for example, whenever people who believe in the conspiracy theory get into power. And people who sincerely believe that they know how to make heaven on earth are most likely to adopt the conspiracy theory, and to get involved in a counter-conspiracy against non-existing conspirators. For the only explanation of their failure to produce their heaven is the evil intention of the Devil, who has a vested interest in hell.
    Conspiracies occur, it must be admitted. But the striking fact which, in spite of their occurrence, disproves the conspiracy theory is that few of these conspiracies are ultimately successful. Conspirators rarely consummate their conspiracy.”

    Communists to me look a lot like “Counter-Conspirators” against an alleged conspiracy of the Bourgeoisie or now the White Patriarchy or whatever Class Oppressor du Jour they come up with.
    If we get a One World Government with strong socialist leaning, will Popper have been falsified? Probably not, as Communists are never happy and always will see the current flawed reality as just an intermediate state towards earthly communist paradise, so they won`t “consummate their conspiracy”.

    1. The existence of the communist movement cannot be disputed. That it was organized and dominated by Lenin, who said it was a conspiratorial movement, cannot be disputed. That Golitsyn made 140 falsifiable predictions in 1984 about Soviet liberalization, and that around 95 percent of those predictions have come true, cannot be disputed. That some other organization or group is destroying our strategic and economic positions (as the West), can nowhere be validated. That Russia is helping the communist movement, cannot be disputed. If Soros is an agent of the communist movement and uses Popper, and Popper is dead, is Popper to blame?

      1. Re:
        [ Petunia Meadowbrook says:
        January 7, 2023 at 1:48 pm
        “…Jeff, how do you reconcile Biden supporting Ukraine against Russia, if Russia is calling the shots?…”

        Jeff Nyquist says:
        January 7, 2023 at 3:44 pm
        “…Biden has postured as anti-Russian. That’s an alibi,…”
        “…It was KGB agent Hammer who promoted Joseph Biden as a politician…” ]

        To follow up please, Jeff, do I have the wrong impression, of is the United States, making it extremely expensive in money and Russian lives, to maintain a charade?
        It seems to me that Biden and Putin are truly at odds.

        Is it just a matter of no honor among thieves?

        Might it be a competition for leadership of a new totalitarian regime?

        If Biden is in league with Putin, why do you support Biden’s adventure in, The Ukraine?

      2. The Russian military offensive in Ukraine, last winter, was defeated before any significant weapons came to Ukraine from Biden. The groundswell of sympathy for the Ukrainian people is not something a politician like Biden is free to ignore. Russia’s leaders have no problem sacrificing Russian lives if they can keep Biden in place. He is worth a whole Russian army group.

      3. Thank you. I’ve been trying to get that out of you for months. Now I get where you’re coming from. With all your ad hominem attacks on Biden as being senile, like they said about Regan, I guess I just never valued Biden as highly as you suggest he’s actually worth, after all.

      4. My ad hominem attacks on Biden? I think it is pretty well known that his colleagues in the Democratic Party are worried about his publicly observable symptoms. An objective assessment of his performance, and of his health, is not an ad hominem attack. But if you are such a fan of his — I suppose it explains why you are trolling me.

    2. I agree the grand strategy of the anti-imperialist camp (or communist if you want) does not depend on individuals pulling the strings. It is more about creating revolutionary pre-conditions using dialectics, creating the class basis that can lead the change. The revolution that will overthrow the imperialist or compradorist establishment doesn’t have to be purely proletarian one, it will have a character of national liberation.

      1. This is exactly correct, Commit. The divide and conquer strategy exploits divisions in the existing society. Class divisions may be mirrored in racial or sexual divisions, which must be exploited. Divide them all. Divide divide divide. Then microwave three minutes and it is ready to eat .

      2. There is truly nothing more revolutionary than creating an oppressive slave state for the benefit of a few psychopathic murderers. They shall liberate the people from their freedom and into the utopia of poverty, torture, and death. Glory to communism.

    3. Fabio: Sorry for this late response. Are communists “Counter-Conspirators”? If you tease this sort of interpretation out of Karl Marx, or Lenin, you get a sense of communist paranoia — as we see in the postings of our resident communist (commit). This idea has no objective merit insofar as the power of money is not a conspiracy. It is simply the way the market impacts politics after the decline of aristocracy and monarchy. Plutocracy is not a conspiracy, because plutocrats do not really understand politics or the idea of political authority. They cannot survive, in the long run, a system directed by their “logic.” The power to buy everything in sight is not a conspiracy. Whenever you do not have a healthy monarchy or aristocracy to check the power of the trading class, whenever wealth in land is politically and socially overtaken by wealth in banks and industry, a country will tend to decline into plutocracy. Joseph Schumpeter wrote that aristocracy was essential for protecting society (as aristocrats traditionally performed the military function of society). Plutocracy, having no military ethic, neglects the defenses of society, bureaucratizing and despiritualizing as it goes. The government becomes an extension of the market, which throws civilization out of balance. Once the market system brushes aristocracy aside in favor of plutocratic power, bureacratic socialism becomes inevitable. The plutocrats kill themselves, in effect, with their own success. This is Schumpeter’s argument, in a nutshell. He said that the Stalin system, once begun, would eventually spread throughout the world because the West’s plutocratic classes are not capable of stopping Stalin’s epigones. In this analysis I am drawing from the historical analysis of the Swiss historian Jacob Burckhardt, who explained that civilization consists of three elements: The Church, the State, and the Culture. If one element dominates over the others, the resulting imbalance negatively impacts the whole. The Church spiritualizes man, the State defends man, and the Culture creates wealth and art and science. If the State dominates all the other functions, the Church and Culture become extensions of the State, as in totalitarian societies. If the Culture dominates, you get plutocracy and the State can no longer perform its defensive function properly. At the same timevthe Church becomes the “Jesus business,” and descends into mere money-making and the “prosperity gospel.” This degenerative process will bring the barbarians to the gates, and inside the gates. Vilfredo Pareto characterized this same process in his theory of the circulation of elites, saying that the foxes would eventually kick the lions out of the elite, and civilization would then succumb to the barbarians — as happened to the Roman Empire. All these great minds had different ways of describing the same phenomenon. It is not a conspiracy. It goes much deeper than that.

  3. There is a new book titled “The Devil and Bella Dodd: The Story of One Woman’s Struggle Against Communism and Her Redemption”, reviewed by Cliff Kincaid here.
    “There are many revelations in this important book, including how she told a close friend by the name of Frank Savile that as she rose in the ranks of the Communist Party USA, she realized that the communists were agents of a higher power, not only Lucifer …but elites with power and money. She names them as the representatives of the Rockefellers, the Lehmans, and the Harrimans – capitalists and politicians who … financed the rise of communism, including the Soviet Union and Communist China.”

    These revelations were left out of Bella Dodd’s own book “School of Darkness”, so it’s just Savile’s word that she actually said this. Jeff, do you know anything more about these claims? That the testimony of a well-known anti-communist would be turned around to service classic anti-capitalist conspiracy theories which recast the communists as being puppets of the Western elites – this seems to be another example of what you describe in the article, of the many false ideologies that downplay or distract from the very real communist threat.

    1. I know about this claim attributed to Dodd and I have never taken it seriously because, in those days, there was a core claim of conspiracy theorists, like Robert Welch, of a conspiracy behind communism. But after many decades nobody could come up with a single decisive proof of the theory. And then, they can only put words into the mouth of a witness like Dodd. Probably Dodd said something that was interpreted by Savile to signify a larger conspiracy, which Savile believed in. One defector said that some Western bankers wanted to make secret deals with the communist bloc, and could be helpful. But the same was true of many opportunists in the West. This is quickly taken up by eager conspiracy theorists and turned into “proof.”

  4. Mr, Nyquist you wrote: “What a system pretends to be, inevitably, is a final and decisive answer of some kind – a shortcut that removes the very reason for living (i.e., discovery). Mortal man does not know the full truth.”

    It is the Voegelin position all right (judging by a preface in his first Order and History volume etc.) to characterize man as a seeker (being a seeker as a property of man). But this is not a universally accepted notion in late of human traditions. For example, in the Hindu doctrine there are five human types corresponding to the five elements, ether, air, fire, water, earth. Air corresponds to the contemplative person, fire to the person of action (the nobleman), water to the promoter of commerce, earth to the servant of labourer. Each type has its own nature. But there is the ether type, a person who cannot be said to be more of a scholar than a doer etc., who has the qualities of all the other human types and acts as if he was the underlying principle behind the transformations and therefore quests/searches of the world around him. He is not a seeker. The contemplative person (the air element) is the human type more akin to the ether person, because the air person is notable for not changing while the world around him does, which means his searches end up where they begin because of a certain exacerbated, albeit relative, proximity to an unmovable center.

    Olavo admitted Popper had some grasp about science methodology, but he deemed Popper’s outlook incomplete and too rudimentary; Olavo preferred Aristotle. Aristotle’s Topics, the first chapter or part of the Topics really, condenses the entirety of science methodology. The rest of the book is his explanation of how to unpack the first part. The stereotypical notion of a falsifiable thesis is limited by the apparent assumption that there is not distinction between center and perphery in an investigation, namely, disproving or proving an idea seems to divert one from the expectation that the gist of an investigation is about getting to the core of the matter, getting to what Ortega y Gasset called “the definition”, the center which sheds light on everything. So even when Aristotle’s investigations seem to be detail-laden and lengthy, all he wants to do is to collect this center payoff.

    The Young Turks self-described journalists have repeatedly promoted the idea Bolsonaro was the one behind Lula’s arrest/prison sentence; but it is a common place in Brazil that his imprisonment was part of a plan/lobby from the political party of Lula’s current vice-president, the social democrats whose leadership helped cover-up the São Paulo Forum story to a large extent. That is, the arrest was an effect of an internal left-wing dispute. Bolsonaro’s movement or correligionists notably have never had the State bureaucracy as an asset; Bolsonaro didn’t even have a stable party he belonged/belongs to; apparently he didn’t even have a dossier on the military officials to know who’s who, it didn’t take long for him to fall out with General Santos Cruz, whom Bolsonaro intended was to be his right-hand man secretary, Santos Cruz turned out to not have been on the same page with Bolsonaro ideologically from the get-go, it was rumored Santos Cruz was arranging funds for left-wing organizations while working for Bolsonaro’s government.

    Another hammered talking point about Bolsonaro in the international media is the suggestion Bolsonaro represented some kind of Amazon deforestation lobby. Graham Hancock, for instance, jumped onto the bandwagon. No one ever produced evidence Bolsonaro recieved bribes, or had strong supporters among people interested in ravaging the Amazon and having a history of doing so. The whole thing was based on statistics of deforestation that had been worse at some point before (during left-wing mandates) without inviting all this internation reaction and indignation; and based on the expectation right-wing politics is about greed to the detriment of the environment.

    I wonder if Ann Coulter’s politics, which is a brand of isolationism for American, if this is not something the communists have encouraged. I get the point that talking down foreigners and entitling natives is good for the country in many ways, and is a smart “reading the room” response to the flagrant loss of sovereignty American increasingly endure. However, Anatoliy Golitsyn says essentially what America should do is to create a supranational entity with a lot o cohesion to face up to the communist threat; and if America is to lead this entity, it has necessarily to treat foreigners as “their own” in some way.

    Another Golitsyn thesis that amazes me is he says the clenched fist upcoming policy from communists is relative to the dissolution of the apparent gaggle of incoherent communist fronts into a built-up unified architecture with basically one voice only. If this is true, if I understood it correctly, this should be the scientific criterium for judging how far one is in way of proximity to the clenched fist policy. If they can pull it off, it would be something.

    1. Yes. The problem of induction does not begin or end with Popper; but for explanatory purposes, to a general audience, Popper serves to show that Sutton and the conspiracy crowd have no epistemological sense. As for Ann Coulter, I do not think she is not an isolationist, as she recommended a Crusade against Islam after 9/11.

      1. Have you read Aristotle’s Topics?

        The thesis from Sutton is ambiguous enough that it can be read as more or less meaning or alluding to the notion that in the domain of probable things (as opposed to the domain of certainty) the discussion of a thesis/the dispute over a thesis can prolong itself indefinitely. If that is what he meant, he is simply following an age-old etiquette/rhetoric precept. I agree that the Skull and Bones organization is more likely a venue being disputed, just like Freemasonry, than an actual historical agent.

        Ann Coulter is an admirable writer, and has thereby assured a position among non-American countries. I don’t think, though, she speaks to nonAmericans. One of the most recurring themes of hers seems to be the resentment against foreign interference, and the hijacking of America by foreign lobbies; which is a legitimate enough worry to be sure, but it is by no means a distinct Golitsyn kind of an approach to politics. I bought a paperback copy of Godless, and also her If Democrats had any brains they’d be republicans, long before her publication of Adios America. The 9/11 controversy surrounding her did not clearly seem to be a call for an international united front against Islam, it seemed more like a stance on what America was supposed to do. The only clear hint she’s given in those books about a common worldwide policy was the promotion of DDT, the pesticide, against environmentalists who wanted to ban it and in the process damage Third World countries as well as America etc. Outside of this not-very-emphatic issue, it doesn’t look like she ever attempted to enlist and rally foreigners to a cause, she has rather implied, for instance that Europeans are not rarely expected by her to dislike the pursuit of American national interests by a strong American president. She was somewhat right in thinking so, but it plays into an apparent-isolationist-looking rhetoric.

      2. Coulter writes for Americans, of course. Her audience is not overseas. As for Aristotle, yes, I have read his works, but my political science training, and my study of economics and sociology, suggests to me that every science must be approached using a different methodology. Given what Anthony Sutton is doing in his books, his methodology is flat wrong as history or social science. And Rhetoric, as it is used by Sutton, is not a path to the heart of the matter. Sutton has certainly persuaded a lot of people with his rhetorical presentation of facts; but he was focussed on the wrong set of malefactors, postulating the wrong cause and effect relationships between actors and events. He was loading his facts with an interpretation they could not fully carry. To understand communists, to understand their movement, you have to study THEM. You cannot dismiss them as insignificant pawns of capitalism. Furthermore, if you make capitalism the villain in world history you are essentially agreeing with the communists. This is a peculiar feature of Sutton’s thinking, which — for a strategist — sets off alarm bells.

      3. Coulter is one of the most reputable enough talked about American political authors overseas. The message her influence signals, to me as a foreigner, is that Golitsyn’s supranational entity/bloc under American leadership to counter communism is unlikely. One of her Good Morning Britain’s videos has a title/quote from her ” I’ve Been Dying to Be Hated in Europe Again”. This does not look terribly like the kind of tease a Golitsyn enthusiast is looking for.

        I don’t claim to understand or be very familiar with Sutton’s point of view.

        I asked if you had read Aristotle’s Topics, a book of his (you seem to have answered positively), because it is nice to see someone who appreciates it; oddly enough, I don’t think there are many Western scholars today who ever did read it . Olavo de Carvalho went out of his way, as it were, to stress the importance of this classic. Reading the Topics/ Doing the Topics chapter 1 exercises proposed by Aristotle, is not something you forget. It recalls the ideal of William Cobbett, who wrote a famous English Grammar, of making the grasp of one’s language a cloudless and sunny linear pathway.

  5. So too in Practice: he, as every man that can be great, or have victory in this world,
    sees, through all entanglements, the practical heart of the matter; drives straight towards that.
    Thomas Carlyle

    Irking questions should be common, at least on Tucker, what irking question, can it be believed as way forward, then, now, and the in future, can we as the thoughtful elite most believe in and practice?

    Are you being straight with me?

    And also so the tired moderator can be less tired, this is how we do some links.

    For input into the YouTube search field, look for “traditional” 2nd one down.

    The Little Drummer Boy (1965 Version)

    Practice intensity.

    1. When I follow your instructions I get “Most beautiful Fish Bake Ever!” There is no problem with links as long as you use only one. Practice clarity.

  6. “Cultural Marxism (which is the latest and most refined version of Marxism’s exoteric iteration) demonizes white males.”

    There is no such a thing as “white male” according to Marxist definition of nations. My skin complexion is white yet I have nothing in common with you anglo Saxons, spreaders of globalism. Our national interests don’t align.

    There is no such a thing as cultural marxism if you ask me. The bourgeoise intellectuals associated with this label lived long after Marx and none of their views is compatible with Marxism.

    1. I doubt if Marx had envisioned what passes for Marxism, today, yet Marxism is a nonviable hypothesis, as it can’t be tested in a vacuum. The only way to test Marxism as a theory would be to impose it upon the entire World. Personally, I don’t consider Marxism to merit the risk. Now, if we could just eliminate the Communists, Fascists, and Mercantilists, we might be on to something. Again, we can only hope that the mRNA lethal injections eliminate all the useful idiots.

      1. You have a long list of people you want to put against the wall, Petunia. Better hope they don’t get you first. Although, I am glad you entertain doubts regarding Marx’s prescience. That being said, you have not understood the essay. It’s not the first time.

      2. I didn’t mean to leave out, Xi Jinping, of course. We are at war, and I fully expect them to come after me. You might find this futile, but I am not a public figure.

        I post on various social media under pseudonyms, so that if I am doxed and slandered, that I’ll have the option to litigate. On the street, I push back against security guards who insist on enforcing mask mandates in government buildings in Los Angeles.

        I speak out against the mRNA lethal injections, when I have lunch at the Senior Citizens’ Center. I tell the public librarians that if they don’t remove the filters from the Internet connected computers, that we are going to sell the building and refund the money to the tax payers. Most people are just, too, intimidated to even give pathetic lip service like that.

        There’s no need for civil war. The useful idiots who took the mRNA lethal injections, will soon be dead or too, demented to function. After that, it might be reasonable to expect a mop up operation conducted by robo dogs with machine guns mounted on their backs, along with drone attacks.

        Do you take comfort in that, Jeff? Do you have a seat in Cheyenne Mountain? Where do you get off taunting me about what Americans might become subject too? What sort of a sadistic deep state operative could be that much of a true believer?

      3. Petunia: Do I take comfort in robo dogs with machine guns mounted on their backs? To be honest, that one never crossed my mind. Do I take comfort in the destruction of my country? Why then would I have been trying to warn my countrymen about communism for decades? But in your mind this puts me on the side of the greatest evil of all — the Deep State. Sorry, but I never could find the Deep State unless it was the communists who infiltrated the state. Everyone else just seems too hapless, and too clueless, to me. If they cannot defend their own country, how “deep” could they be?

      4. Mr. Nyquist, to find the Deep State, we must look deep….deeeeeep into Petunia’s mind. So deep, we will finally get past his head as we exit his rear end, lol!

    2. There’s really no point to conversing with a Marxist-Leninist as they will simply lie to your face. It doesn’t cost them anything to do so. Then if further pressed, they will simply change definitions. Marxist-Leninist rhetorical techniques are designed to divert and control conversation with the goal of obscuring the truth, wasting time, and confusing all involved. That the Marxist-Leninists use “white males” as a relatively modern class category to demonize, similarly to the Rich in Soviet Russia or the Kulaks, or the Educated in Cambodia, is not even in dispute. The linguistic template that they use is elementary school level, they simply switch out the categories depending on the nations being targeted.

      Commit utilizes a technique that Putin has used in public, which is to draw a distinction between “white” and “Anglo-Saxon”; I have remarked on this before and posited it as the Marxist-Leninists’ method of positioning Russian anti-American ideology in alignment with modern leftist “anti-white” ideology, by pretending that Europe and West is “white”, and that Russia is separate.

      Anyone who knows Marxist-Leninist psychological techniques knows that there are always multiple purposes when they deploy a term: the term “white male” refers to both explicitly white men, and it also represents a blank construct which contains the enemy, aka anti-Communism. This is how all of their constructs are utilized, in that ultimately the Class Term simply means “our opposition” – they just need a proxy term to use openly.

      Because the Marxist-Leninists decided to lean heavily into Race as the main fulcrum for their psychological hatred operations, the demonized Class aka the Enemy was designated as the “white male”. And so their day to day operations will describe all non-Communist policies they hate and transfer that hate onto the white male. But if a white male ever enthusiastically supported the Communists and their policies, he would be immediately supported, because the term itself is merely a Construct for the Enemy of the Marxist-Leninists.

      And so, by both Putin and Commit attempting to make a distinction between White & Anglo-Saxon (“the REAL evil white man is the Anglo-Saxon!”), they are merely continuing this technique, only slicing it more finely still: in order for Commit and Putin to still be righteous, to be Good, to be within the category of the Marxist-Leninist camp, they are whites, but they are the good Slavic whites. The real evil White man is the Anglo-Saxon. This is the way that they do not destroy all the work and tens of thousands of propaganda hours that Marxist-Leninists spent defining the White Male as the enemy Construct, while also signaling to other comrades and safely defining themselves as in the Good, Righteous, Marxist-Leninist Slave State camp.

      1. I have nothing against anglo Saxons, as long as they stay in their countries and abandon imperialism.

  7. The most effective brainwash, is to kill the death sentence. Case in point, Saddam Husein, ain’t comm’n back. Nicolae Ceaușescu, is food for the worms.

    After all that hard work by the CIA, importing cocaine from Colombia to Mena Arkansas with the cooperation of then, Governor, Bill Clinton, until he got so greedy that they had to move the operation to Georgia, as the CIA fronted the coke to minor gangs in LA, called, The Bloods & The Crypts, who branched out all across America and dutifully gave half the proceeds to the CIA so that President Reagan via VP Bush, could wage war in Nicaruagua, as Congress refused to foot the bill.

    Why didn’t they hang Daniel Ortega? Now he’s been back in office for quite awhile, already. Lula still should be hanged, as well. With any luck, Ortega, Lula, Biden, Zelensky, and Putin, have all been duped into getting the mRNA lethal injections.

      1. You mean the fate accompli with the thirteen hundred NAZIS brought into the CIA at it’s inception, and the thirty thousand other NAZIS brought into the United States, after World War Two? Okay, so maybe a lot of those NAZI immigrants were Russian spies; big diff.

        Or what are you talking about; the fact that Regan wasn’t the President that so many today look back on through rose colored glasses? Maybe you mean how neither the Democrats nor the Republicans want to talk about how John Kerry, accused Dubya Bush, of cheating him out of the Presidential election with, Smartmatic, Venezualian made, Internet connected voting machines?

      2. John Kerry initiated Iran/Contra investigations. When President Regan left office, he was subpoenaed to testify before the US Senate. His doctor provided an excuse, that Regan had Alzheimer’s. The case was dropped. Are you saying that Regan didn’t give missiles to Iran for keeping Americans hostage until after Carter lost the election? Are you saying that VP Bush didn’t fund the Nicaraguan Freedom Fighters with drug money? Do you mean to imply that Dubya Bush’s cousin, and bellow, Bonesman, John Kerry, fabricated the grounds for investigation? Or specifically what, Jeff, are you talking about? You make these vague accusations against me. How can I answer to what you merely so snidely, imply

      3. What accusation did I make against you, Petunia? I am not attacking you, but showing that your interpretation of all these events and all this history is incoherent, and has very little to do with my essay. If you could properly connect your arguments together, then maybe I could understand what you are saying — what your “theory” of reality might be. But you are playing this hide-and-go-seek game where you pop in with claims and interpretations that are all over the map. It is quite crazy-making if not crazy. As it is, I do not know where you are coming from, whether you are pulling my leg, or whether you are simply incoherent, or spoofing right wing ideas. I don’t know. So i am left to react based on what you write. I would have to brush up on fifteen different volumes to properly address all the historical issues you’ve raised. I’ve read the books and could go from memory. But I would not want to make a mistakes. Please write more directly what you think, with clarity. Stop spraying me with ideological bullets from a gun I am unable to properly identify. Come out of cover and just address me like a person. If you keep firing at me I will keep firing back, and my aim is a little better than yours. You cannot win this way.

    1. They are not that stupid to take an imperialist (Moderna) or Zionist (Pfizer) vaccine.

  8. I
    of no more
    encouraging fact
    than the unquestioned
    ability of a man to elevate
    his life by conscious endeavor.
    Henry David Thoreau

    ill for the CCP, all those
    energetic Chinese getting ideas, and
    working on those ideas, as one would sharpen a blade.

    Practice agitation.

  9. Ok, so let me understand this. Russia is run by communists. The US Gov is run by communists. Western Europe is run by communists. Communism seeks world domination. But, the commies running the west are sending weapons to Ukraine to kill Russian commies? This makes no sense. Shouldn’t the fake Biden Admin be working to bring about a communist victory in Ukraine?

    1. You misunderstand my narrative. Putting an agent of influence in the White House does not mean the West is run by the communists. It means that an avenue of sabotage and further subversion has been opened. Certain destructive policies can be adopted. Suicidal policies. Biden is not a dictator who can act as Putin or Xi. He cannot do anything he is told, nor would he want to. In fact, his own Secret Service Body guards would stop him if he committed treason too obviously. God only knows what he thinks, or how he rationalizes his acts of collaboration. The Western countries have checks and balances, with various powerful interest groups competing for power. These have not entirely disappeared. If the communists in Moscow totally controlled America, they would simply order America to bomb itself. And even you would admit that such an act would be ridiculous. So, why is it ridiculous for Biden to support Ukraine when politically he has no choice? What could he do differently— talk like Tucker Carlson? No. He has political limitations, forced on him by his constituents, by the lies he has already told. Strategy is not an easy subject to understand, in this context. Simplistic ideological thinking, which attaches to your question, does not help you to understand how the world works. Men are free to act, as Marx said, but they are constrained by circumstances.

      1. I’ve really got to think that Putin must be very, disappointed in Biden. Who’s he going to get to replace him, though?

      2. “You misunderstand my narrative. Putting an agent of influence in the White House does not mean the West is run by the communists. It means that an avenue of sabotage and further subversion has been opened. Certain destructive policies can be adopted. Suicidal policies. Biden is not a dictator who can act as Putin or Xi. He cannot do anything he is told, nor would he want to. In fact, his own Secret Service Body guards would stop him if he committed treason too obviously.”

        Excellent clarification. Any agent of influence operates within constraints.

    2. You clearly don’t understand that because Communists practice deception, they have to keep up certain appearances lest the lie be exposed. If the West did not send aid to Ukraine, they would quite clearly be exposed as siding with Russia. How is that difficult to understand?

      Furthermore, by controlling the aid, one can control how much or how little is sent. Also keep in mind that the leadership in Western countries is comprised of both Communist agents and non-Communist agents. The Communists agents must be quite careful how they act. They do not have total control.

      I would also consider the possibility that Ukraine has very little to do with Ukraine, and possibly serves 2 other purposes: 1) as a black hole draining the Western nations of armaments (the US is now sending costly Patriot missile defense systems), and 2) as a pretext for Russia to reach full military mobilization and full nuclear missile alert.

      But the larger answer to your question is that because Communists work almost exclusively through pretexts and false premises, they must pretend to abide by those pretexts and pretenses so as not to expose their agents or their real positions. That’s the very simple answer as to why the West is arming Ukraine.

  10. The
    suffering man
    ought really to consume
    his own smoke; there is no good in
    emitting smoke till you have made it into fire.
    Thomas Carlyle, On Heroes, Hero Worship and the Heroic in History

  11. It is clear that Satan has two key demographics he wishes wiped out in this world:

    1. Evangelicals, the “ultra right” as defined by the CPUSA.
    2. Jews, whom he has managed to convince so many conservatives to be behind every evil in this world; Satan already revealed his hand on his objective for the Jews with the Holocaust.

    Both of these demographics align with the prophesied Kingdom to come; the Jews are to become Christian, at the time their homeland is to be attacked by Russia and this will serve as “life from the dead” (to quote Paul in Romans 11) to the Gentile Christians who by that stage will have been gagged from witnessing in public throughout the West.

    So now we see an endless attack on white Anglo manhood, which is an attack increasingly less masked by the broad brush of communist anti-westernism / anti-Americanism / anti-Atlanticism. At the same time, we see more and more of a push to portray the Jews as evil per se. But we also see terrifying new laws being concocted in the West that will, as predicted by the Word, totally silence any faithful witness for God.

    For example, the UK’s Online Safety Bill aspires to allow the government to define wrongspeak and wrongthink and onerous punitive measures against anyone who does not comply with the narrative. The version drafted for Ireland is even more terrifying, with the legal framework built into it to allow for doors to be kicked in and dissidents dragged from their beds in the dead of night on the basis of mere suspicion that they will commit a “hate crime” against a “protected characteristic” (i.e. LGBT, immigrants, “women”, etc), resulting in a 5 year custodial sentence (remember – for a mere suspicion an offence might be one day committed). It also sets the legal stage for retrospective data-mining as the basis of predicting who will violate the new law, as well as the basis for children being abducted by social services for re-education in right-think.

    The noose is tightening, and as it does, communism’s targets (read, Satan’s targets) are becoming more explicitly defined by communism itself, which only confirms what we who know the Word of God have been saying for a long time anyway: that Satan is the architect and animating spirit of communism and that its primary objective is to prevent the emergence of the Kingdom of Heaven on earth.

  12. Dear Jeff,

    I love your stuff. I have read your latest book, The Lies We Believe In. I think you are doing a great service in the world. For some time, however, I have wanted to say something about “conspiracy”. Two of my favorite writers are Antony Sutton and Joel Skousen, who both have a lot to say about conspiracy.

    Proving A Negative

    You quote Antony Sutton’s book, America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. He says, “Now in scientific methodology a hypothesis can be proven. It cannot be disproven.” You disapprove strongly. I looked it up in his book.

    It is certainly true that if you have a hypothesis, a theory you are considering, and if that theory predicts a certain result, and if you try the experiment and you don’t get that result, then that proves that theory is false. The theory is “falsifiable”. At a minimum, the theory needs more work.

    On the other hand, sometimes it can be difficult or impossible to prove a negative. Maybe I believe there are UFO’s because one landed in my back yard last night. I’ve seen it. That’s proof. At least for me, because I saw it. On the other hand, how do you “prove” that there are no UFO’s? How do you “prove” that nobody ever saw one?

    I think this is more the viewpoint that Antony Sutton is taking. How do you prove that no one is exerting a secret hidden influence on events?

    A Conspiracy So Immense

    I have recently read the magnificent book by M. Stanton Evans, Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy, Chapter 31 is titled “A Conspiracy So Immense”. On page 413, Evans quotes McCarthy: “How can we account for our present situation unless we believe that men high in this government are concerting to deliver us to disaster? This must be the product of a great conspiracy, a conspiracy on a scale so immense as to dwarf any previous such venture in the history of man.”

    This was from a speech condemning General George C. Marshall made by McCarthy in the Senate on June 14, 1951. The whole story presented in the book, in great detail, shows McCarthy observing the obvious which nobody else pays attention to. And it shows how powerful forces, coming largely from the White House (the President) and the State Department, attacked him very heavily. This was definitely a case of the little boy who yelled out that “The emperor is not wearing any clothes!”. You just don’t say that sort of thing! Thus it is evident that the forces of evil were already very largely in control of the government. This is also apparent in Diana West’s book, American Betrayal.

    You are adamantly opposed to any “conspiracy theory”. And yet you talk all day every day about the hidden secret workings of communist agents. But isn’t that a “conspiracy”? It is labeled as such by McCarthy. Do you have a definition of the word “conspiracy” which somehow excludes communists?

    The Remedy For Conspiracy Is Investigation

    In my own book, Liberty For All Men Everywhere, I say “The remedy for Conspiracy is investigation.”. Joe McCarthy was chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. He investigated. And he did a lot of good, before they managed to totally shoot him down.

    If you investigate, you can find things out – especially if you have the power to subpoena people and to compel testimony.

    We can see lots of things going on. But who is giving the orders? Who are the higher up individuals behind the ones we can easily see? And who is above them? And above them?

    Who Is In Charge Here?

    It’s very difficult to know who is at the higher levels, because we can’t see. Presumably, since you talk only about the communist conspiracy, without calling it “conspiracy”, you think the top echelon is in Moscow and Beijing. There are just communists. No Jews. No bankers. No aliens. No whatever. Just communists, taking orders from Moscow or Beijing.

    This becomes more difficult to maintain looking back over history. The “Order” was founded in 1833, as a branch of a German group. Who was running things then? The French Revolution is sometimes said to be the first “communist” revolution. Who was in charge then?

    If the people at the top of the U.S. government – like Truman, Eisenhower, Marshall, Harry Hopkins, and many others – are working to expand communism and to harm America, does that come from Moscow? Maybe there is another group behind the scenes, manipulating things, and trying hard to create chaos and war. That is the theory of Joel Skousen.

    Your work on communism is brilliant. But I think with respect to “conspiracy”, you are in the awkward position of trying to prove a negative, that there is no conspiracy. And again in the awkward position of talking at length about the communist conspiracy, without calling it a “conspiracy”, and in effect denying that it is a conspiracy.

    Warm regards,

    * * * * * * *

    1. In answer to your note, Dale, I do not deny the existence of conspiracies and I do indeed believe in a communist conspiracy. Lenin himself described his movement as a conspiracy. The word that is missing from my writings is “theory.” The existence of a communist conspiratorial movement is not a theory. It is established fact. Read any communist newspaper. The communists are affirming their movement every day, etc. I am not proposing a conspiracy “theory.” I am writing about historical facts — conspiracy history, if you will — and national strategy, military strategy, and so on. There is no theory here to prove. It is simply a thing that is right in front of us that hardly anyone wants to address. Regarding writers like a Sutton or Robert Welch, attempts to make wrongheaded propositions sound scientific, or muddled thinking appear rational, is to misread the conspiracy of communism as owing to some other group whose very existence is theoretical and whose motives cannot even be discussed properly; for how does one discuss the motives of people who cannot even be named? Or if famous names are inserted, these persons cannot even be proved responsible. Essentially, as I read it, the capitalist dupe who sells the rope the Bolsheviks intend to hang him with is not a master conspirator. He is a victim who participates in his own demise. This kind of discourse, which turns the capitalist useful idiot into a political genius is infuriatingly obtuse. Sociology and economics, carried forward by astute analysts like Joseph Schumpeter or Vilfredo Pareto treat the same facts as Sutton, only more comprehensively, without leaving out the telling details; namely, that capitalists want to make money. And that is not a conspiracy. It is commerce. It is human nature. Thus, many of Sutton’s facts are simply a misreading of purposes and motivations. So it was a neat trick to claim science for one’s propositions and then to say your propositions could not be disproved in principle. That’s the same thing as saying that nobody is allowed to question you. If my proposition is, “All swans are white,” finding white swans proves nothing. Find all the white swans you like, you have no proof until you have found every white swan in the universe. And that would require omniscience. But if one purple swan is found, the theory is disproved. There is no question, therefore, of disproving a negative in Sutton’s case. He has left out half the story — the part where all the capitalists who invested in the USSR during the 1920s lost money, or the part where everyone erroneously thought the USSR would never survive. And then there is the part where Stalin refused to accommodate them in 1939. The capitalists were all betting against the Bolshevik regime’s survival while the regime manipulated them to assure its survival. The word “theory” does not even belong here. It is merely misused to support an ideology that demonizes a favored whipping boy — i.e., rich people. Things are never so simple.

  13. Some thoughts as I read Jeff’s article today.

    It looks as if conservatives are being led by false leaders—the “leaders” themselves often are acolytes of the WEF, which as far as we can tell is subservient to their masters in the Kremlin and Beijing. Is that why their opposition to communism is half-hearted.

    Did the CIA kill Kennedy, or were there deep moles from the KGB who did the dastardly deed? From Jeff’s sources pointing to Castro and the KGB, I suspect the latter. The CIA has become a scofflaw organization that opposes the American people and is full of communist sympathizers. The same is true of the FBI and other letter agencies in the U.S. government. What is sad is that there are people in said agencies who are good loyal Americans, who are betrayed by these traitors.

    A final and decisive answer does not have to be a shortcut that removes the very reason for living. In the Bible, a final and decisive answer is given that leads to a life of service—service to God and to one’s neighbor. Service is a very good reason for living. Service is born out of love.

    The Bible is not a system of truth that man has devised, rather one handed to him by God. However, there is a challenge to learn it and to apply it accurately. So many people don’t take up that challenge, don’t read and study the Bible for themselves, rather follow pied pipers who teach their own ideas, claiming that they are Biblical. This is just as true of many “conservatives” as well as “liberals”.

    “That raises the question of why people who otherwise are not quite stupid, and who have the secondary virtues of being quite honest in their daily affairs, indulge in intellectual dishonesty as soon as they touch science.” That’s because they don’t know science. Science, from the time of the Reformation, to the mid 20th century, had a unified methodology that defined “science”. However, starting with seeds planted in the 19th century (e.g. Darwin) where “theories” that violated that definition of “science” were practiced, yet they were called “science”. (When I studied science at the university, I was taught the historical definition of science by scientists who didn’t follow what they taught.) When in the final quarter of the 20th century those practices were called out as being unscientific, “scientists” proceeded to corrupt the definition of “science” itself, so is it any wonder that non-scientists would be confused?

    Karl Popper was not a scientist, rather a philosopher. As a result, he grasped only partially what is meant by science, how science is to be practiced and the limits as to what science can study. The basis of science as I was taught is observation. There’s no requirement that it be understood. The only limit is that observations must be repeatable. If patterns in repeatable observations are noticed, then hypotheses and theories may be proposed. The limit to that methodology is that science is limited to studying present, physical phenomena—both the past and future are closed to a scientific study as well as spiritual truths. Popper wanted science to be logical dealing with theories which is the basis of his theories about science.

    Not all theories are scientific theories. It is a mistake to claim that all theories are scientific theories and only confuses people.

    1. “Not all theories are scientific theories.”

      Pedantic on my part, but I would amend this to a stronger statement: “scientific theories are *not* theories [in the lay sense]”. They are distinct sets. The former is an explanatory framework for observed phenomena with an abundance of supporting experimental evidence; the latter is simply a hypothesis.

  14. Millions of Brazilians took to the streets to demonstrate against the fraudulent election of Lula. Some of that got posted to youtube, but of course the mainstream media tried to bury the story. For awhile there, it seemed as if the Brazilian Military was going to fulfill it’s Constitutional obligation to investigate the elections complaints, and ultimately put Lula back in the slammer, but that didn’t happen.

  15. This is why I don’t believe there will be a nuclear war, its all about fear. I was told this by someone you don’t argue with, and I will believe it true till told otherwise. The discussion was about who rules the world and how they do it. They own all the central banks, and own a huge shipping container ship with a flat top. They fly in on their helicopters, and inside the ship is the most extravagant 7star hotel the world has never seen. This is where they meet and why you will never see them together. They aren’t going to let these little people stuff their lives with a nuclear winter. Easier ways to depopulate than burning it to the ground.

    1. How many more false notions can you weave into this narrative? Nuclear winter is a fabrication. No human beings rule the world. Myth. Gnostic storytelling.

      1. Jeff, this is truth. Around 2000 in Australia, The Commonwealth of Caledonia Australis was established under our constitution. The Queen was involved and wished the “secessionists in Australia well”. The Govenor of Caledonia Australis, Mr Neal Lyster, established the Royal Pacific Reserve Bank. A Chinese lady, who was 105, who lived in the Philippines, who is called Mummy and has a man working for her called Mr. Black, deposited 1 Trillion in gold in Neal Lysters bank. This was to be used as leverage, and was not able to be sold. Neal told me a story about a lady in New York, who was 90 and would get around in a town car with her driver. No one has a clue who she is. Her family lent you say 1m for you revolution 200 years ago. Today that debt has compounded to a trillion dollars and the family gets their interest every year. (this is a different person to the one mentioned previously). That is truth.

      2. And then, there was a 75 year old lady, and a 92 year old lady who loaned the Prince of Wales say 250 billion to keep his mouth shut about the secret 7 star hotel from which the world is ruled, right?

      3. And I fully understand the nuclear fear and why we dont have nuclear energy which is totally safe. Instead we have gasoline and coal which then led to the climate crisis! Nuclear bombs are just big bombs, its the fuel load from the fire in cities that will black it out. I get it. When I hear Bezos Musk who ever is the richest alive I laugh.

      4. I will be attacked for saying this. In the book The worlds trouble makers by Bruce Brown published 1969 it says in 1905 Baron de Rothschild was given two cars, one gasoline and one electric. After a months deliberation he said gasoline.

      5. I didnt realize Jeff was on the Enola Gay that day. Wow, thanks for bringing that to light!

        PS, what do you smoke when you are posting comments? Does it cause hallucinations too?

    2. “The discussion was about who rules the world and how they do it. They own all the central banks, and own a huge shipping container ship with a flat top. They fly in on their helicopters, and inside the ship is the most extravagant 7star hotel the world has never seen. This is where they meet and why you will never see them together.”

      You have only part of the truth, sir. This massive container ship with a flat top has been equipped with an advanced cloaking device of extraterrestrial design. It is completely invisible to human detection. And in this massive, invisible container ship is an eleven-star hotel filled with accommodations and amenities for our reptilian overlords, where they shed their ape-skin disguises and teleconference with their communist Chinese lackies. Nobody has ever seen this ship – not even Xi Jinping himself – but it’s there, I promise you.

  16. As always, thank you for another thought-provoking read.

    So very grievous to see the python of Communism squeezing the life out of yet another beautiful country.

    Do you have any further thoughts/rationale of the timing of an attack by China/Russia, other than “within the year”? Quite the range of opinion out there, from 5 months:

    to not until 2024-2026, which seems a bit too far off.

  17. Mr. Nyquist, I was very disappointed in Bolsonaro. The Brazilian people were 110% behind him. The Brazilian Constitution gave the military the authority to investigate/rectify an election such as they had. The country was behind him, begging him to order the military to intervene, and he sold them out in my opinion. It made me sick. When the chips were down, in the hour of trial, he like Trump on Jan 6, proved he was not the leader he had pretended to be.

    He said something to the effect that he could not act without support from the other institutions of government. I assume he meant the supreme court. What a loser! “Sorry, friends. I am your president, and y’all want me to do all i can to spare the country from a fraudelently elected, Communist criminal, and all the horrors he will impose on you, but alas!, the supreme court is not on my side. Fare thee as well as you can, as i fly to Florida.”

    To me, Trump and Bolsonaro both proved to be cowards when the moment of decision came. Or if not total cowards, then definitely much more concerned for themselves over the fates of their countries. No courage born of true convictions, such as that of Nathan Hale, or Patrick Henry.

    Also, i would like to throw something out there in regards to your last essay.

    If you just peruse the headlines of the Gateway Pundit, without even reading all of them, it seems to me they are trying to say things in such a way as to stoke fires of resentment in readers, and maybe push people closer to civil war. That is just a feeling i get, but we know something is definitely amiss there, especially in light of their “Ukraine evil, Putin justified” narrative. I bet they dont even run a story on the speech Maduro just made in which he referred to Jinping and Putin as elder brothers.

    I think they are more than just naive, or wilfully blind. I think they are playing a part in trying to foment unrest in our nation. It’s not always what they report, but how they report it.

    Just a feeling I get deep down. Maybe I’m wrong.

    1. Also, i don’t mean every article. And i read a lot of them. But sometimes, i will just browse through a day or two’s worth of headlines to seecwhat kind of overall impression i get, and it is one of despair and bitterness towards our government, and a push towards demagogues such as Trump, and (I think) Kari Lake, and a pandering to Putin (in the steady smearing of Ukraine). Many of the articles, i believe, are accurate, but the tone in which they are written in certain ones, seems geared towards inducing fear and anger.

      1. I have in some. I probably havent caught near as many as you. I was mainly thinking of a lot of their articles on Covid that i feel are accurate well done most of the time. But that makes me think: Why do such a good job on tbe Covid related articles, but seem to be pushing a dark agenda in ither articles? And the only answer i can cone up with, is the accurate reporting on Covid fits right in with the overall feelings of despair, desperation, and distrust it seems they are trying to create. And it seems the “solutions” they are trying to herd us toward, are big talkers such as Trump, Lake, Lindell, maybe even Putin.

      2. Right. That’s what I’ve been thinking, in light of the many things i have learned through your work. I truly believe they are working against true patriot’s interests, and the true good of the country, and are subtly manipulating people’s thoughts and feelings in a direction detrimental to the nation, and beneficial to our Communist enemies.

      3. I hope most of their readers at least sense the same thing that I do. I also hope that most of their commenters are Communist trolls.

      4. It seems very possible -maybe even likely. I recall awhile back, they had an article stating that they were one of the only major conservative sites that survived major censoring, or maybe deplatforming in recent years. That threw up an exclamation point in my mind. The article left you with the imoression that they somehow survivedca great purge, and were still standing to deliver the truth. I began to greatly mistrust the overall tenor of the articles from then on. That was when i began just sonetimes browsing a lot of headlines at one time to see what kind of impression or feeling they left me with. And i truly believe there is a sinister operation of manipulation going on.

      5. It’s a catch 22, isn’t it? If you leave Autocorrect on, it often substitutes a word you don’t mean to type. If you disable Autocorrect, you realize just how many times you press a key adjacent to the one you meant to press. But in my case, i have usually pressed the send key before i reread it.

    2. I have the same feeling reading Gateway Pundit. That publication has attacked people I respect, including a personal friend of mine. Something is terribly wrong there.

    3. Olavo de Carvalho used to say about this, quoting Plato, that if the population doesn’t have the support of some part – small as it may be – of the elite, it is absolutely impotent. The political science student have down here in Brazil the perfect case study for this. Bolsonaro and the people ruled and persecuted by all the elites. It is quite sad, but I really can’t help being amazed by it.
      The part of the elite that could have done something was the military. But that is a long story. Suffice to say that this “military men” have audited the voting system before the election, because of Bolsonaro’s insistence, and if you read the report, in one of the opening pages you will learn that they were denied access to some rooms, equipments, and software. And instead of demanding access to it, they subserviently “did their job” and wrote the report saying that “a fraud was not impossible”. To think that people of this quality would overthrow communists of office and deal with the internatinal consequences of it was the collective delusion of this country in the past months.
      Not with bang…

      1. Olavo’s quotation from Plato is very true. This is why Ukraine successfully broke with the post-Soviet system. Parts of the elite joined the people.

  18. I have a dream that one day I will read one of Jeff Nyquist’s essays and not read in the comment section immediately below the exact errors he contends with. Except for Commit. Commit really is hilarious.

      1. By the way, Jeff, in Brazil the Supreme Court wants to set free criminals who are on parole to make room for patriots who were near the Congress and other places during recent events, including people who didn’t touch anything.

  19. Thank you Jeff! Beautiful work!
    We must know the truth-breath it, think it, speak it, walk in it, stand firm on it, never compromise it…for it is the only way to freedom, life, peace and joy.
    The whole satanic culture spends trillions keeping people from the truth.
    We have Gods truth at our fingertips, no one can keep it from us-but the people love lies and so they are destroyed.

  20. Brilliant post Mr Nyquist!
    Do you have any opinions on Peter Zaihan? He was recently on Joe Rogan. Although I don’t trust him particularly, he seems knowledgable and had a logical perspective on world events and where they’re headed. Only thing he’s off on is the current communist threat and runnings around the world.

    1. I have listened to Mr. Zaihain. He is very interesting, but I do not think he understands the rulers of Russia or China. We shall see if he is able to forecast anything of importance. Economics is what he seems to know.

  21. “It is a process by which we discover ideas and learn their meaning by direct experience. What a system pretends to be, inevitably, is a final and decisive answer of some kind – a shortcut that removes the very reason for living (i.e., discovery). Mortal man does not know the full truth. He therefore cannot devise a system of truth that is true.”

    After Nietzsche, “The will to a system is a lack of integrity.” We can thank Bonaparte for the coinage of “ideologue” with reference to de Stutt’s ‘values neutral’ free marketeerism of its day. The materialist appropriation of Hegel is all the more perverse for its Mephistolean golden calf of Negation, the evil annihilationist Infinite (with)in Finitude that stops one step before its overcoming. Maybe the first instance is never tragedy, and all the spokes on Ixion’s wheel read “farce”. We’re certainly in store for a large one if these Year Zero blank slate Utopianisms aren’t burnt off, of their own accord or otherwise.

      1. He also said be careful if you dance with devils lest you become one. None are less visible than those we decide not to see. Stadtler Lewis. Hell on earth is created.

  22. The Brazil play was Jan 6 redux. We’re supposed to believe Bolsonaro committed a coup AFTER handing over power. It’s such an obvious copy it’s embarrassing.

    Bolsonaro made a critical mistake. His move was not optional; once they took the election, this play was foregone. It was going to happen. Trump made the same mistake. The Marxist-Leninists we’re going to purge their opposition and create the pretext regardless. I can not remember a time in world history when the Communists were so powerful. Now they are framing Biden, either to replace him or to pose as impartial for when they indict Trump. On all fronts they advance. Bolsonaro already lost. They will arrest, imprison, and jail many of the Brazilian right-wingers. The funniest thing is how Putin and America have the EXACT SAME TALKING POINTS regarding Brazil. It is a tell, but the people are so stupid they can’t see it.

    Which brings us to our last point: the people themselves. They cannot see this marvelous takeover happening at all levels. These are dark times for the world, and how does it end for America? With the right wing criminalized, or the fire from heaven?

  23. One of your best essays, Jeff, although I think that everytime. Lol. Honestly, this essay is clarifying the focus on our true enemy and i hope your hundreds of readers could distribute it to many with hopes of “waking them up.” For me, I am going to send this to my friends and family.

    For the past three months, I’ve been writing a weekly column in our small town paper. In today’s paper, I wrote a piece on Rev. Dr. King and ended the essay about William Pepper who has devoted his life to discovering the truth of who really participated in King’s death. My last line, was “We are hardwired to search for truth.” Your essay is an example of this, too.

    Three commenters in your blog including myself are captivated by your comment “…questing for the truth. It is a process by which we discover ideas and learn their meaning by direct experience. What a system pretends to be, inevitably, is a final and decisive answer of some kind–a shortcut that removes the very reason for living (i.e. discovery). Mortal man does not know the full truth. He therefore cannot devise a system of truth that is true.” That is an amazing thought and I am adding it to my study notebook.

    I may have said this to you before, but it fits the essay. People are more important than. Ideologies. If we live by what Jesus said was the greatest commandment: namely, to love God and to love our neighbor as ourself, it seems Christians would be on track. Anything that deviates from this “misses the mark” and is harmatia, the Greek word for “sin.” Isn’t Jesus’s commandment is the most relevant “weapon system” against Communism.

    1. The reduction of all the commandments to two (love God and other people) brings us to the question of our basic oriention. Do we feel reverence or not? Do we feel love or not? Do we feel gratitude or not? A person’s orientation toward God is not a system in the sense that Hegel’s philosophy or Marx’s revolutionary catechism is a system. It is a focussing of the will toward the divine ground of existence. To read sacred scriptures is not a system, or an arrival at final truth. It also is a journey of discovery; for we do not understand all that we read, but must discover much of it for ourselves through living it.

      1. The Bible presents a complete Weltanschauung dealing with the major issues of human existence—origins, ontology and purpose in life. On origins, it is a historical document. In this regard, it is a falsifiable document—if the historical events mentioned in the Bible can be proven to be false, then the Biblical message is proven to be false. Origins tell us about our ontology. The pivotable event in the New Testament is the physical resurrection of Jesus from the dead—that is a historical black-swan event that can neither be predicted nor disproven based on expectations. If you can disprove Jesus’ physical resurrection from the dead, then the New Testament is disproven and Christianity is a false religion. The seminal event for Judaism is the Exodus—disprove that then Judaism is based on myths. The basis for all the Bible is Genesis 1–3, everything else in the Bible is based on those three chapters. Disprove those chapters, then the whole Bible is a bunch of ahistorical fables signifying nothing. This is not a matter of subjective feelings, rather of objective facts.

        The Bible is a call to action. Action is done, even when we don’t feel like it. It is an action of love and service to God and our fellow man. These are actions based on objective facts. What sort of actions are based on fables? Other than generalized moral lessons, what can fables teach? “Love God” (Deuteronomy 4:5) and “love your neighbor” (Leviticus 19:18) are not unique to the Bible.

  24. JR Nyquist: “More correct analysis? — Because it conforms to Marxism?”

    I think it describes reality of geopolitics better than American thinkers living in bubble.

    America was able to tighten its control over European and possibly Japanese elites due to this war. Zaihan sees it as American position strengthening, but in reality it is a sign of weakness.

    1. Commit: You are expressing a subjective opinion, which does not align with objective facts and analysis. You are implying that European and Japanese elites would otherwise want to join with Red China and Russia if they had a choice. Therefore you talk of America “tightening” its control over its allies. What you fail to understand is that the American alliance system is voluntary. It is held together by common interests, in the face of common threats. When offered a free choice between Russia/China and America, do you really imagine Europe and Japan would ever pick Russia or China over America? It is easy to see that they will always choose America. In fact, this choice is playing out in Germany’s desperate willingness to turn away from Russian natural gas (after a half century of being warned by successive American presidents that the Russians would use German dependence on Russian gas as a weapon of war. And behold! At the first crisis, which Moscow created by invading Ukraine, natural gas is used as a weapon). The political systems in Russia and China, their violent oppression of neighboring peoples, the tens of thousands of Chechens and Tibetans and Uighurs slaughtered, tortured, and muzzled, sends a chill of cold fear over sensible people everywhere. For you, of course, these genocidal mass-killings are nothing, because your moral compass is broken. You have sided with the science and practice of mass murder and destruction. You hate all institutions because they are not perfect, according to your silly expectations. So you imagine perfection coming by way of World War III, Marxist-Leninist World Revolution, and the overthrow of economic liberty throughout the world. You do know, of course, that if your dream were realized, billions would die. Your philosophy and the countries you favor are, it turns out, repugnant to everyone who has a lick of sense. Your philosophy is the philosophy of Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao, who killed innocent human beings by the millions. Your heroes are theives and liars, like Che Guevara and Laurent Kabila, Fidel Castro and Lula da Silva. Those who “like” your twisted philosophy have names like Kim Jong Un and Vladimir Putin. That the West is decaying, everyone can see. That egalitarian leftism and Marxism is a corollary of this decay, is only understood by those who have discernment. And this is exactly what you do not have. Communism is a philosophy of the alienated. It is intellectualized insanity.

  25. “This is exactly correct, Commit. The divide and conquer strategy exploits divisions in the existing society. Class divisions may be mirrored in racial or sexual divisions, which must be exploited. Divide them all. Divide divide divide. Then microwave three minutes and it is ready to eat .”

    Do you think the liberal identity politics and division is the actual end goal or the counter reaction, united opposition against these agendas, is? You already wrote something in that sense in your previous articles.

    The divisive ideology of radical liberalism and green agenda is pushed by the imperialist elites possibly encountered by agents, but the end goal can be unified opposition against it. The agents are encouraging this nonsense to generate resentment.

      1. “Like you, Commit. A change agent, like you.”

        I am not an agent, I am open about my beliefs.

      2. “Did you get vaccinated”

        No, you? I don’t need it to lead a normal lif in my country.

      3. I never fly cause I suspect I am on the CIA no fly list anyway long before the so called pandemic.

    1. America’s imperialist elites? Are you referring to our imperium over Puerto Rico and Guam? America made the mistake of breaking up the Spanish Empire in the Spanish-American War and, as you can see, Cuba and the Philippines are definitely independent today. But Puerto Rico just does not want to be independent. What can we do? I would kick them loose at the first opportunity. But then, Cuba would take the place over, and build a military base. Right? What you refuse to see is your own side’s infiltration of the Western elite, and the ready imposition of bizarre ideas related to Marx and Engel’s project. The ideas of the left and the right are contaminated with psychological warfare themes built up through the work of communist agents of influence in the West. Are you too dense to see this? Communism advances many themes that do not appear communist on the surface, like feminism, gay rights, abortion, and radical environmentalism. When we believe in those sidebar ideologies and harm ourselves by accepting them as gospel truth, you blame us for being decadent — for being the source of all decadence! But Commit, the mischeif is from YOUR SIDE!

  26. “But it’s such a great tool for weakening the imperialists!”

    Maybe, I don’t know how predominant actual homosexuality is in imperialist societies. What is really hurting imperialism is its attempt to promote this globally, including Muslim countries.

    1. *how predominant actual homosexuality is in imperialist societies

      Actually in my country American embassy is pushing this hard, American ambassadors participating in prides, waving rainbow flags etc. Yet I don’t know any homosexual outside from bourgeoise rentiers and show business people. None among people doing productive labour.

      This phenomenon is a phenomenon of parasitic classes, it already existed in ancient slave owning societies, nowadays exists in rentier classes of imperialist societies, the cure is productive labour. Sent those individuals to labour camps and they will be cured in short time.

      1. CPUSA is full of people of bourgeoise background. Homosexuality does not exist among proletariat. Movies like Brokeback Mountain are fiction.

    2. If there is a central planning committee for the world revolution, I would imagine them to be people like Commit. They`d unleash LGBTQ insanity on the West as an Active Measure, while living true Communism in China and Russia (btw, Russia has to someday stop their NEP I guess, they still don`t look or act very communist on many fronts).

      1. Fabio: The Bolshevik Revolution was a coup. The Bolsheviks were maybe two percent of the population. When they got power another six percent joined the bandwagon. There you get eight percent of the country being Communist Party members. They indoctrinated children to believe. But when the children grew up most of them stopped believing. When the Party gave up power voluntarily in 1991, the Bolsheviks went back to their two percent. But that percent dominates the institutions of the country. A country that belongs to the communist movement is not communist, economically or in terms of public opinion. It is a country dominated by a small Bolshevik sect. I am not claiming anything but this.

  27. Petunia wrote:
    “… There is an expert witness who asserts that the SARS2 Covid is a synthetic strand of DNA, combined with snake and sea snail venom, to produce spike proteins, which was released in Wuhan via aerosol. By whom is not clear, but the development of this bioweapon was a joint project of the DoD and CCP. Ostensibly, the US is way ahead of China in the development of bioweapons, and so gave the obsolete technology to China, in order to have access to their lab so that the US could monitor their other research.”

    This claim of snake venom in SARS-CoV-2 is completely ridiculous and has been debunked elsewhere. No, I don’t have a link handy – this has been discussed and debunked last year. Any ‘expert’ who continues to make these claims demonstrates a clear lack of discernment.

      1. Dr. Jane reveals the work of South African microscopy expert and naturopath, Dr. Zandre Botha, connecting facts and revealing the evidence to support snake venom proteineous organoids, or…the development of synthetic substrates that are made to retain the toxic activity of snake venom and she reviews all of it with Dr. Bryan Ardis, who recently called the world’s attention to this diabolical basis for the covid scam AND the deadly bioweapon shots.

  28. “Are you seriously suggesting that there has never been a homosexual communist?”

    Communist parties get infiltered by various elements. I believe the North Korea approach, keeping the party pure, is the correct one.

      1. Cuba has fallen to imperialism long ago. They never built socialism at the first place, their economy never industrialized. Idk if he is a homosexual but his daughter studied in the USA and brought the LGBTQ ideology to Cuba. Cuba allowed same sex marriage.

  29. Petunia wrote:
    “The Russian Covid Sputnik serum, contains lipid nano particles which create spike proteins, if not mRNA genetic editing … ”

    The intracellular machinery of the host cells – not the lipid nanoparticles – create the spike proteins.

    1. The lipid nano particles are the delivery system to sever the DNA for CRISPR editing. I’m merely a layman, trying to convey what suppressed experts have found.

    2. Furthermore, it’s the spike proteins which leads to the production of prion crystals that causes dementia and Parkinson’s symptoms.

      1. The other major action of the spike proteins, is to create an actual spike in each and every cell of the host body for the mRNA Covid serum injections. The cells in the lining of blood vessels, is read as an infection by blood cells which then attack the spikes as if an intruder. This creates clotting and caused Myocarditis, a weakening of the heart, which makes subsequent heart attacks and strokes, much, more likely. This is the most immediate and obvious symptom, as exhibited by so many young athletes at their peak of physical condition and performance, suddenly dropping dead on the field.

  30. “And you’re not an agent? Or is this a symptom?”

    I don’t hide my anti-imperialist views. It is enough to be on the no fly list.

    I don’t care anyway. Who needs to travel abroad in the age of internet.

    1. I am addressing Commit, but as Petunia answered and I deleted, it was revelatory. One more time: Why can’t your kind (Commit) just live your life and leave the rest of us to work out our problems without your revolutionary movement causing so much trouble?

      1. My kind has no influence on your country, your kind (and your country) has a huge influence on my country and rest of the world. As long as imperialism exist, I will oppose it.

      2. Commit: My kind has influence on your country? You mean, because your country wants freedom and that’s bad, or because you are having untoward urges and America is at fault?

  31. I’m an ardent anti-collectivist in all its forms.

    But you are undermining your own position when you throw god in the pot and stir around without recognizing your god is an ideology because you have zilch to back its existence up.

    AND if you want to use god to attack collectivism you have a problem: collectivists use society, the ant-hill, the common good, the children, social justice, what have you, to create idols and they can easily make this a competition between idols and a large number of people that couldn’t care less about your god fall for any or all of the collectivist forms, some of them CAN be seen like “society”, and you lose.

    All religious positions can’t hold a candle to collectivism because collectivism is the ultimate religion but it has idols that can be shown and moral positions in favor of their idols.

    And you can’t let go of your own ideology and, as you can see all around you, you lose.

    Collectivism is replacing Christianity and all other religions and there’s nothing you can do about it.

    How are you not an ideologue defending his own ideology?

    You are the ideologist that begins with his own ideology and goes “mine is THA TRUTH . . . and all others are wrong”

    Not very compelling.

    1. To the anticollectivist: Collectivism is a normal human thing. Families are collectives. Nations are collectives. There would be no human existence without collectives. And there would nothing, in physical terms, without a Creator of the ordered universe we see. God, family and country seem to be things you do not like. But you cannot fight collectivist materialism with individualistic materialism — without God, family and country. You have atomized yourself, and you have cut yourself off from the divine ground. You have defeated yourself.

  32. Jeff, have you seen this?

    Could this plausibly be said to be just for Ukraine? Or are the Communist nations reaching peak military mobilization right before our eyes as the West is asleep?

    Also, have you seen this about the Patriot missiles?

    Can you place this in context for us? This man is incredibly smug in predicting Russia and China’s downfall, but aren’t these Patriot missiles expensive? Wouldn’t we need them to defend the homeland? Is it possible Ukraine is simply for soaking up American defenses against a nuclear attack?

    1. This Telegraph podcast from December was very informative. The most important thing about the Patriot is that it has anti-ballistic missile capability (Russia has been firing ballistic missiles from the Black Sea and from Belarus). $1.85 billion worth of the Patriot air defense system likely amounts to getting 1 battery of 8 launchers with 16 missiles each. A missile costs $4m and the system costs $400-500m, so remainder of $1.85 bn is for the missiles. It is hard to see how one Patriot system can make a big difference in America’s air defenses. Ukraine is likely not getting the latest model either.
      It will take months of training before the Ukrainian forces can use the Patriots, and that training will not take place in Ukraine. Putin hasn’t intercepted anything because the system hasn’t been delivered yet.

      As for Russia’s 2 million men army, they’re certainly trying and reportedly most of the ranks of the Wagner Group are filled with convicts now. But eventually they will have to draft regular citizens and this will not go down so easy with the public.

      The Russian police is now resorting to kidnapping men on the street to send them to the front. 1/1/23
      “NewYear in #Russia: Wifes trying to get their husbands back as they are taken away by riot police in #SaintPetersburg. No one seems to know why it’s happening, same as in #Moscow. Probably straight to the front in Ukraine.”
      The choices are to either pay a bribe to get released or eventually end up on the frontlines.

      Interesting article from early December (subscription required).
      Just one in four Russians wants to keep troops in Ukraine, down from 57% in July. The figures are from a leaked poll taken for government officials in the Kremlin.
      The drop in the support is due to the partial mobilization, as well as the high Russian losses on the frontlines combined with reports of poor training and equipment for new conscripts.
      Shoigu promises 50% more military spending on new weapons in 2023.

      Early at the beginning of the invasion many people speculated that the high 80% support for Russia’s invasion was either inflated by Kremlin pollsters or due to people self-censoring themselves for fear of government reprisals. Apparently Russians are not afraid anymore, or they were telling the truth back in March. I think more people support the idea of a “great patriotic war” than they support the Stalinist methods being used to fight such a war. They don’t want their young and middle aged men to be used as cannon fodder.

      1. Interesting Laura, as always. The fog of war is a fog indeed. From all the many reports it is difficult to say how many fresh troops the Russians have been raising. The numbers could be higher than we realize. Will the Russian people continue to support the war. Unless there is some great catastrophe I believe they will continue to go along with it.

      2. I’ve heard journalists who cover Russia say that Putin/the Kremlin has always been obsessive about polls and gauging the mood of the Russian public. If this is such an important factor in the Kremlin’s decision making it might limit how far they will push the people. But on the other hand, unlike in World War I, Russia has China and other Communist allies to help keep it afloat. And Putin can always take Kim up on his offer of North Korean troops. Or another possibility is to bring in foreign workers to Russia to help fill the economic gap of so many Russian men going off to war.

        There is also the indication that Russia might be trying to solve its demographic problems by deporting Ukrainians to Russia. Below is a quote from a discussion on Russian state TV. Jan 10/23
        “Consider the cost of enlarging the population by 1,000…We got these people [Ukrainians] for free, for nothing. Approximately 5 million of them, 5 million souls”

        On the same show they also complained that Stalin didn’t kill enough Ukrainians.

    2. Perseus: Some experts do not believe Russia can raise even 500,000 troops. This is a difficult question, but I think Russia can raise a larger army than anyone suspects. I would say two million additional Russian troops is unrealistic. After all, they do have manpower limits and economic limits. A formula German intelligence used in World War II to correctly estimate the Soviet Union’s ability to raise new formations in 1943-44 suggests Russia can raise about 900,000 over the next 18 months. Also, the Russian economy is going to suffer if this is attempted. As for optimistic analyst, Mr. Z, predicting Russia and China’s downfall, that is certainly possible. Mobilizing for a global war is potentially destabilizing. But, so far, Russia and China are not collapsing. And their nuclear weapons are relatively new. America can always get lucky, of course, like we did in 1989-1991. But our nuclear arsenal is in bad shape. And that invites attack. I would like to be more optimistic, but I am not.

  33. Imperialism: the state of Kansas producing a gazillion tons of grain, vs. subsistence living, barely able to feed a few small tribes.

    Commit, go practice starvation, you might gain enlightenment.

  34. To memorize:

    are hurtling
    back into a Soviet
    abyss, into an information vacuum that
    spells death from our own ignorance. All
    we have left is the internet, where information
    is still freely available. For the rest, if you want
    to go on working as a journalist, it’s total servility to
    Putin. Otherwise, it can be death, the bullet, poison, or trial —
    whatever our special services, Putin’s guard dogs, see fit.
    – Anna Politkovskaya

  35. I was doing some reading on the AI breakthroughs. Not solely on the chat bots, but on the technical side for logistics warfare. It appears that Xi is very privy to technical superiority, especially AI related tech. My feeling is that whoever gets the AI systems going first has instant exponential leverage over an opponent. That being said an AI tactical cloud going up in six months would send shivers down Xi’s spine. I would think he would do something soon, or at least try to counter it in some way. I also wonder if Xi already has something similar that we don’t know of yet.

    I’m following the blog, just trying to stay abreast of current events.

  36. Reading these posts I feel like I just read a One flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest like script.
    The essay was excellent, though.

  37. Jeff,
    Switching topics away from the attention-demanding Petunia, do you have any idea what took place on Biden’s first trip to Russia in 1973. In the last blog, I pointed out how every article that had a link to the “1973 trip to Moscow” took you to his 2011 speech at a university in Moscow on the website. This was true if you clicked on the Russian sources or American sources such as CNN. So, for some reason the 1973 stories about his trip have been scrubbed from the internet. Any ideas? Maybe I am making a mountain out of a molehill, but it’s very strange.

    1. I found several articles that mentioned not only his 1973 trip, but also his 1979 trip.

      I use for my search engine, or if you use brave as your browser make its search engine your default search engine. On this computer that doesn’t have brave browser, I was able to make the brave search engine the default search engine in firefox. I have found that I cannot trust the other search engines to find articles like these, not even duckduckgo.

      1. I will check that out on Brave. Thank you.
        All 1973 hyperlinks inside the 3 stories I found went to to the 2011 speech at a Moscow university. It was spooky because one story was written by CNN and the other 2 were Russian publications.

    2. Yes, there are Bukovsky archive documents on Biden’s trip to Russia, smuggled out of the USSR. I subscribe to scribd, where you can access the Bukovsky article and documents on the Biden trip to the USSR. According to the Soviet document, Biden told Soviet authorities, privately, that he had no problem with their human rights abuses but he had to publicly chastise Moscow for political reasons. So they should not be alarmed at anything he said against them in public. He did not really mean it.

  38. In the most recent Populist Roundtable episode you mentioned the following book which describes a meeting between Steve Bannon and Alexander Dugin. Can you say more about this meeting and whether you think Bannon’s influence was a significant factor in turning the conservative media towards Russia?

    War for Eternity: The Return of Traditionalism and the Rise of the Populist Right (available on amazon)
    by Benjamin R. Teitelbaum

    1. Laura, to answer your question about the “War for Eternity.” I am going through Teitelbaum’s book now. There are many interesting things in it. Actually, very explosive things if you realize what is being said. Not everything should be taken at face value, of course, and needs to be sifted. According to Teitelbaum, Dugin and Bannon met in Rome little over four years ago (Nov. 2018). Bannon proposed some kind of an alliance, or cooperation. Why would this be thought possible? To simplify: Bannon has advertised himself as a follower of Traditionalist philosophers Guenon and Evola, just as Dugin has. Ironically, I do not believe either man is seriously following the philosophies of Gueonon and Evola. Their lip service to Traditionalism seems to be part of a game, or a dance, or something even less edifying that each side may be trying to do to the other. My impression is that Bannon made some kind of attempt to penetrate Dugin’s European network by befriending Dugin and some other folks. This looks a little like a spiderweb and interpreting people’s actions can be difficult. When I spoke to Bannon several months ago, during a commercial break on his show, he told me that “We have to end this war in Ukraine so we can ally with Russia.” This comment did not entirely surprise me, given the way the right was then turning. According to Teitelbaum, Bannon has been angling for an alliance with Russia for a long time. Of course, if I’m the Russians I do not trust this guy, Bannon, because he might be a Pentagon spy (i.e., as he is a former US Navy officer). If Bannon is working for U.S. intelligence, as a paranoid communist agent might suppose, he would not be particularly concerned about taking the money of a Chinese billionaire-defector, like Miles Guo (whose defection might not be what it seems). Of course, this is a tangle that should make your head hurt.


    Comedian Leaves Oxford Union SPEECHLESS

    2,033,422 views Jan 13, 2023
    Konstantin Kisin speaking at the Oxford Union for the motion “This House Believes Wokeness Has Gone Too Far”.

    1. Excellent speech. Everyone needs to memorize his points and use them.

    2. I think this speech misses a main element of Marxist ideologues, and which is that of replacing their ignroance and shallow clownness with threats in order to elicit respect. Clowns in power, like the little Zeke Zinnober of ETA Hoffmann, become vicious and cruel due to their lack of authority, as if they unconsciously knew they were ridiculous. Violence is all they have as a resort. This is the biggest problem with wokists. And this is fodder for Russia because rapists like communists will always lay in wait to attack someone at the first sign of identified “threat” behavior. The idiot is not only useful when he supports communists but also when he himself becomes dangerously schizophrenic. Stalin always built a consensus that way during his purges, picking one by one people clowns getting carried away with everyone agreeing at the table but also everyone a dupe because Stalin was a step ahead and had in mind everyone.

      If threatening aloof imperial clownish behavior is what Russia and the world will perceive our new generation to be, it will be easy for them to call us Nazis. I am wondering if by invading Ukraine the goal was to provoke the west in a nuclear war. Obviously the bombing of civilians in Ukraine is that. Suffice to say that if you want to kill your pitbull in front of neighbors, the best way is to make it stupid and dangerous first.

  40. Sutton’s statement on Page2 is logically incorrect;

    “in scientific methodology a hypothesis can be proven. It cannot be disproven.”

    Actually he seems to have got it backwards;

    “So, a scientific hypothesis most definitely can be disproved. We can also validate an hypothesis, but it cannot be proved. Hypotheses can be well validated. They can even be considered as “laws” but they are never proved.”


    Logically, the correct understanding in this context could be; “in scientific methodology an hypothesis CAN’T be proven. It CAN be DISproven.”

    Therefore it would be up to an opponent to supply evidence or observations that disprove Sutton’s hypothesis that “America’s secret establishment” did the things he alleged.

    Sutton however did correctly state “a negative proposition can never be proven” earlier on the same page.

    You said “In other words, Sutton refused to accept the falsifiability principle.”

    Irrespective of whether he really did or not, the onus would be on you Jeff to disprove his hypothesis, which I do hope you will try to do instead of just summarily dismissing his body of work so easily.

    Crumbling into dust? Really?

    1. g1: Yes, Sutton’s epistemology is backwards. A hypothesis (e.g., all swans are white) can never be proven. But it can be disproven if you can find a black swan. This is not the whole story regarding science or epistemology, of course. But Sutton has made a mistake; and you would like to rationalize this by suggesting that I cannot disprove a negative in Sutton’s case. Sorry to say, you are making another kind of mistake. You are admitting that Sutton’s conspiracy theory is not proven in any sense (i.e., that it is a negative). All you have to do is assert it’s truth, without any real proof, and I have to prove it is wrong. But again, this is entirely backwards. If there is nothing to disprove, I need not do anything of the kind.

      So what was Sutton’s conspiracy theory? It was in line with certain assertions made by Robert Welch, which I have strong objections to. In his book “National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union,” Sutton concluded that the Vietnam War, the Korean War, and the Cold War were “not fought to restrain communism [but] … to generate multibillion-dollar armament contracts.” Then, in “Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution,” Sutton detailed Wall Street investment in the early Bolshevik regime, arguing that it was a plot to turn Russia into “a captive market and technical colony to be expolited by a few high-powered American financiers and corporations under their control.” He postuled the theory that the West’s economic power elite have a “long-range program of nurturing collectivism” and fostering “corporate socialism” in order to preserve their wealth.

      This is merely a more scholarly version of the John Birch Society’s “conspiracy behind communism” theory, which has its roots in the Jewish-Masonic conspiracy theory. It is a cleaned up, post-holocaust, version of this same theory, with similar explanations as given by Karl Marx, for the idea that capitalism is an oppressive (or neo-imperialist) world system. In essence, Sutton has a great deal in common with Lenin’s thinking about “imperialism,” and later writers who alleged that capitalism amounts to an international form of neo-colonialism.

      Strangely, Sutton’s conclusions mirror both Nazi and communist characterizations of the capitalist system. The reasons for this similitude needs to be explained. In fact, I do not think Sutton was a closet communist. I rather suspect a more right wing tendency.

      Think of it this way: When an antisemite says there is a conspiracy of Jewish Cabalists, who rule the world through the banks and masonic lodges, he is giving the uneducated man’s version of Sutton’s theory. On the other side, Sutton’s theory offers a scholarly argument to support such opinions. Is this merely a coincidence? I cannot say, but it is something to think about.

      Professor Virgil D. Medlin of Oklahoma City University reported finding numerous factual errors in Sutton’s “Wall Street” series. Sutton also included rumors and unsubstantiated claims in his books. Howard Dickman of the Manhattan Institute said that “Wall Street and FDR” was a “weak specimen of conspiracy history.” Professor S. Leiberstein initially praised Sutton’s work, but reversed himself after more careful consideration, noting that Sutton had cherry picked his facts, ignoring serious counter-evidence.

      On close examination, Sutton does not give us any proof of his theses. In all that he presents there is no smoking gun. Of course, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But, the absence of evidence is not something we need to take seriously.

      If an elite conspiracy has been operating for over one hundred years, I submit that there would some credible direct evidence to offer. But in all my research, I have not seen this kind of proof. I have merely happened upon people who think they have evidence, only to find that they do not even understand what evidence is, or what their “facts” actually signify. The idea that there is a better explanation of the facts, and that there is a large body of evidence substantiating other explanations, is entirely missed. Conspiracy believers won’t even look at other material. Give them a conspiracy book and they are happy. Have them read a serious book showing a more plausible explanation for historical events and they will denounce the book as part of the coverup. I am sorry to say, this is not an honest approach.

      When you learn more about the history of the “sealed train,” Lenin’s arrival at Finland Station, and the plans of the German government to end the war in the east (in 1917), you see a different picture than Sutton offers. With western businessmen rushing in to the new Soviet Russia, and incidents like the Lockhart Plot, you realize that things are not what they seem; that Sutton does not have the real story at all. Then came Lenin’s NEP, in which the Bolsheviks openly turned capitalist themselves. They engaged in Operation Trust to fool the Western capitalists, to promote further investment in Soviet Russia. Was this, also, a capitalist plot to colonize Russia? Here is where my credulity is stretched to the breaking point.

      Basically, with Sutton as with many conspiracy theorists, there is very little to disprove because they are offering an interpretation without real substance. You will notice many half-baked people, furiously dumping mountains of poorly digested “fact” on me. They hope to overwhelm me with their “evidence.” They become more and more shrill as they go. They accuse me of covering up the faccts, of censoring them. I just do not want this discussion board taken over by their nonsensical interpretations; for they would blot me out of my own website. All over the Internet their ideas wash over the empty-headed public like a flood. Everyone is infected with this stuff. I get it from my friends all the time. We are immersed in this stuff as much as we are immersed in Marxism. In fact, this teaching about the evils of capitalism aligns with Marxism.

      In the end, ten million “factual” misinterpretations do not, in sum, make one correct interpretation. Am I obligated to work through all this trash? No. I have been there, I have done that. You imagine I have dismissed Sutton’s body of work “easily.” Believe me, I wish I could get the months of wasted time back; for every time I condescend to check these things out, I come up with nothing. I did suspect there was nothing there, but not knowing I had to check into it. Always and ever, this elite capitalist conspiracy thing is a dead end. I say it until I am blue in the face. But you and other true believers like you, do not accept my many points (constantly offered). You are mentally stuck on this thing. I will never convince you that your unpoven, unvalidated convictions are UNTRUE. Somehow, I am still obligated to PROVE you are wrong. You believe without proof, which means YOU WANT TO BELIEVE IT.

      If the onus is on me to “disprove” every odd fact that is dumped on me, I will never do anything in life but explain that your facts do not prove your theory. We shall go round and round, to what end? You will just get more upset with me, and I will lose my patience with you. Since most people who believe this sort of thing violently believe in it, every fact is going to appear as a proof to them. That they do not possess the larger knowledge, or the native judgment, to interpret facts corrrectly, or to suspend judgment, merely serves up an insult to you. I am not a full-time conspiracy debunker. I am trying to figure out what is really happening, and that means I am looking for the truth without getting lost in the conspiracy theory weeds. I am not looking to argue with hundreds of convinced conspiracy buffs, hurtling thousands of badly interpretted facts at me.

      More than thirty years ago I spent three months in a research library going through conspiracy books, analyzing their “proofs.” One key book was called “The Shadows of Power.” I found three allegations there that would constitute proof. When I traced the footnotes of these three claims, one was a misstatement of an admission by two of Jacob Schiff’s children about the financing of the Bolshevik Revolution. Turns out, he did not finance the Bolshevik Revolution at all. The other two proofs came from German, and then Japanese, propaganda literature produced during WWII. They were simply anti-American claims with no citations.

      So I gave conspiracy theory three months back then, and several days here and there researching claims. Nothing that would prove the conspiracy, that I have looked at, ever panned out. In the sense that you cannot prove a “negative,” these non-proofs need not be refuted; for that which is unlikely, and which has not been proved, need not be disproved. The assertions are, after careful anlaysis, a tissue of illusion. You have to believe in the conspiracy before you can see it. And once you have seen it, everything begins to look like proof.

      1. Sort of like the archaeologist who said, “I never would have seen it if I hadn’t believed it.”

  41. The clown is indeed aloof, and mostly aloof about his own ridiculous and suffering condition. Comedy has always been often been about laughing of other’s misfortunes. The clown laughs as if his misfortune is one to laugh at as if it was another’s. Liberal clowns on TV perfectly match this schizophrenia.

  42. Fidel was sending degenerates to labour camps. Not only homosexuals, but also prostitutes and their customers. Today’s Cuba is spitting his legacy. They are lost.

    1. The thing is, it was a political purge expedient of the days, not of today. This makes the eso-communists more flexible and strategic and thus less ideological than the Nazis who were exo-communists. Where it gets more dicey for the apprentice sorcerer is when his created monsters run amok. Paranoia rises as a system relies more on threat than actual knowledge and authority. What makes Russia control China that it knows the Chinese will not switch off somewhere on the Communist plan wifi and carry out a threat, One could surmise that the West did not create a split between China and Russia with détente, but actually saved Russia from a China on the border of a sort of schizophrenic breakdown!

      Now unfortunately it is us in that position…

    2. The gays of Cuba in the 50s are not the same gays of today’s Cuba. The same thing happened to Germany. Bismark anihilated the cultural support of each region and sought to unite Germany, and instead people resorted to ideology to find quick and dirty reorientstion. The homosexuals of the 50s in Cuba were Indians who participated in the culture, had knowledge of it and many were actual healers that competed with Castro’s “medical benefits” communist politics. Nowadays the homosexuals of Cuba are fully dependent on ideology, have completely lost their cultural ancestry and medicinal knowledge and they are sexual schizophrenics, while schizophrenia does not exist in “primitive” cultures. Let us not confuse homosexual with modern sexual schizophrenia rejecting reality and embracing ideology, a Peter Pan syndrome.

      1. The fact that there are gays in a socialist society is alarming. Legalizing those elements is a road to counter revolution. GDR was the first socialist country to do this, the wall fell shortly after.

  43. “My kind has influence on your country?”

    Your kind is basically running our country. Temporarily, hopefully.

  44. I think it was a psychologist who said science produces landfills and ideology produces human garbage. Ideology, in psychology, basically was prevalent according to him because it was not real ancestral knowledge earned for thousands of years by societies aiming at creating sense amongst and within people. Psychoanalysis to him was struggling with its own ideology against other methods and psychiatric discoveries more than it was actually doing genuine work of treating patients.

  45. Bolsonaro indeed erred in complete vacuuous Bush-Trump type speech on peace etc. The salient issue is to reorganize people. People fail to comprehend too that in America that the Constitution as a document is only half of it. What really organize the nation was getting together to write a document and “dream” of a future nation. That activity, future seeing and looking, was the magic which made it happen. Had the Founders dwelt on the past prowess of previous philosophers or good kingdoms, they would have failed. Communists succeed despite their stupidity simply because they are forward looking, they appeal to the youth. Of course, they knowing that magical ingrdedient, they do not bother cynically with the “overhead” of devising a virtuous constitution and document. Communism is meant to never happen for that reason , and it is meant to keep destroying for that reason, because, if it were established, it would immediately die replaced by the next forward looking goon. The Lenin fight against the “counter-revolution” was the key. The whole Soviet deception is based on them being assured that we have stopped fighting a “counter-revolution” against British or modern french influence (sadly). We have stopped tarring and feathering Anglicans making prayers to King George, that is there the problem.

    England should have never been our ally in WWiI, in a way, the crown, that is. The crown should have always been our eternal symbolic enemy in order to get back this “forward future oriented” brand appeal, especially amongst the youth. It is almost like the Soviets wanted it that way intuitively.

  46. BRILLIANT speech by Konstantin Kisin before the Oxford Union!! Agree with LadyfromLibertyGarage… his eveery point is excellent, full-stop.

    As always Jeff, your usual tour de force article. Thanks, as always.

  47. Books,
    in the manner
    of submarines, that
    book is undependable below that depth.

    your search
    for wisdom was
    set to music, would the
    music sound as intense as these men?

    1. It is somebody’s idea of a forecast, and it got a lot of attention because of its sensational nature. This site is predicting economic circumstances so bad in the U.S., that most people will leave the country. The methodology for gathering the data is not scientific and is not even shown. The economic and population projections are obviously part of a game of questionable taste.

Comments are now closed.