The Necessity of Populist Revolution
The System no longer serves The People, but has become a Machine for All Tyrants. In those circumstances, the People either rise, or die.
I’m only interested now in people who want a radical populist agenda and are prepared to support it being ruthlessly applied. This means being prepared to hurt the other side, to be unfair, unjust, to use power intended for one use for other uses, to silence them, ban them, ostracise them, sack them, humiliate them, ruin their lives, to distribute public funds for our causes instead of intended uses, to censor progressive and Marxist views, to put them in prison solely for their ideas, to do everything to them that they do to us.
Only more.
I want McCarthyism now. I know now that he was a hero.
The slightest toleration of Marxists in any form (and Globalists are Cultural Marxists) is fatal.
Technocracy, Progressivism, Trans Activism, Islam, all forms of Communism and radical leftism, Globalism, Corporatism, Transhumanism, the political interference of the Billionaire Class, the Green Apocalypse Cult, the total thought control wanted now by every mainstream political party….all of these exist because we started laughing at the idea of protecting ourselves from Communists. Fascism and Nazism, too, were also the children of Communism, a movement of the tyrannical instinct which in all forms except Absolutist Monarchy and a handful of military juntas is a form of leftism.
All of these are versions of the political reality where the majority of people have no power at all, and are slaves. All of them end up as systems where business, education, the State, consider nothing inviolate, nothing sacred, and nothing to be yours and yours alone.
Those who hate the mass of their own people, or consider them things to be experimented on and controlled, will come up with as many names for what they do as they come up with excuses for what they do. And at their worst, they will always wrap what they do in the most utopian dreams and the most positive language you can think of. But the aim is always total control of everything, especially of every human being.
In reality, then, you either oppress them or they ruin your nation and oppress you.
Of course the great political question is the same one that haunted the Founders of the USA-how do you empower the People enough to make sure that the Tyrants never get what they want? Somebody has to politically represent the people, somebody has to have power in their hands, and how do you make sure that the person empowered to prevent tyranny doesn’t use that power to enslave the people?
For our freedom to exist, we must ignore the rights and freedoms of the people who seek to enslave us. We must be worse than them, to defeat them. And then we must retain enough power and belief to keep them down, without becoming absolute monsters or slipping slowly into yet another group of decadent elites unconcerned by what the people want and sneering at what the people are.
The Founders thought that you give that power to mutually exclusive branches of government, you set up a system of checks and balances between these branches, and you create by that division of power a sort of equilibrium where the representatives have the power to prevent Tyranny without any one group of them having the power to enact Tyranny. Constitutional Monarchy, when it works, actually enacts the same idea as that held by the Founders. The Anglo instinct of liberty reached similar conclusions in the UK and the US, even though a revolutionary war divided the particular solutions that would be tried.
But to work these separate branches must not have shared interests against the interests of the people. They must never collude with each other against the people. That collusion represents the breaking of the equilibrium and the birth of fresh tyranny. They must be formed of moral representatives who put the interests of the people before their selfish interests, and before their class interests and the interests of any institution. This is what both the moral collapse of the West and the growth of a permanent administrative State directed by a Deep State broke. The careful balanced machine of the Founders, or of the unwritten settlement of the UK, became, gradually, just another Machine looking to its own interests.
Globalists are nothing so much as they are the current incarnation of agents of the Machine who have lost all connection to the People, and thus all conscience and humanity too. They represent System before Nation, State before individual, and Transnational Body before any particular place. Biden’s America is the final breaking of the balances set in place by the Founders, and we see it in the collusion of judiciary and executive against the People. But it applies to the whole of the West.
A human conscience, individualistic but grown from a moral culture, became replaced with an artificial intelligence, an awful kind of intelligence in the System itself, only interested in protecting itself, with representatives being the zombie like infected agents of the System, instead of the living, human and humane champions of the People. All bureaucracies become living things protecting themselves, whilst the members of those bureaucracies become less and less human. NATO, for example, now exists for the protection and perpetuation of NATO, and not the protection of the people of its member states.
This is why a government, a bureaucracy, an institution, and all their members, must always be subordinate to a morality that can control their actions via individual self control when no other impediment exists, and that depends on politicians, judges and bureaucrats coming from the kind of culture in which concepts like honour, shame, responsibility, noblesse oblige, and more than anything else love of the people are commonplace in the ruling class.
This is, given human nature, an almost impossible thing to ask for. To be strong enough to break tyrants, without becoming tyrants. Only the most moral people, only the most clear headed people, can do it. Only a perfect clarity of thought and conduct can sustain it through a lifetime, or through several lifetimes, a deep, rooted love of people and place, and a deep religious awareness of the things that are sacred and the things that are monstrous. That awareness of the sacred and profane can only come as a separate moral system of a religious nature, and it is this which also tells each person the difference between innocent and guilty behaviour, in themselves and others.
Not targeting the innocent, and very much targeting the guilty, and the discernment of knowing the difference, is what moral conscience supplies and what purely institutional loyalty or purely corrupt self interest destroys. In Joe Biden we see absolute corruption reached through pure self interest, but in those who facilitated the theft of 2020 we see absolute corruption in the form of institutional loyalty. A Mike Pence or a Bill Barr placed loyalty to the System above the interests of the People. Barr in particular was most concerned about the reputation of the FBI and the reputation of the US electoral system. So concerned that he was happy to sign off on these things being utterly corrupt. Only a traditional moral code (which the pious ‘Christian’ Pence clearly lacks as anything other than a gesture) makes such men regulate themselves.
Modern western society has never been less moral and less clear headed and less in love with their own people and place, nor have they ever been less aware of what is sacred and what is monstrous. Which is why we are giving birth to a million Tyrants and why we are prey to so many enemies, at home and abroad, while the People are apparently incapable of rising against them.
You had me with “I want McCarthyism now.” The greatest triumph of the left in the 20th century was in tarring McCarthy so successfully in our media and in our universities.
I read your articles because they are excellent, but on some of this one, I must respectfully disagree with you. You were right at the end of this article when you advocated for moral clarity and commitment to the service of the general public. However, at the start of this article you were advocating for McCarthyism and for doing-unto-them-as-they-do-unto-us,-but-worse. This does not seem to me to be congruent with the moral clarity and integrity you were rightly praising in your final paragraphs.
If we destroy our enemies using the same cruel and immoral tactics they use against us, then we corrupt ourselves and become like them. In the long run, we would only succeed in replacing one tyranny with another.
You correctly point out that they are successful because they do not limit themselves with scruples: we must find another way to be successful, because we must keep what sets us apart from them, our scruples, our honour, our integrity and commitment to justice and fairness.
Thank you for all your articles, which are always worth reading and debating over.