Skip to comments.Enemies
Posted on 07/26/2012 8:13:02 PM PDT by Leto
In any conflict, it is a deadly error to mistake or underestimate the adversary's capabilities, will to employ them, or ultimate goals.
Around the globe, what was once confidently deemed Western civilisation is in an end-stage battle with champions of a collectivist and statist ideology which, over the last century, has enacted programs of redistributive taxation, borrowing, and spending whose unsustainability has now become self-evident and which, unless the present course is altered, will collapse in at most ten years. Further, the second- and higher-order effects of these policies have led to demographic collapse in the societies which have adopted them, crippled capital formation and the creation of productive enterprises, and been used as a justification for mass immigration from regions hostile to the culture and values of the West which have been responsible for its prosperity.
Those who would destroy a society, destroy first its language. As Orwell observed, when the terms of discourse are corrupted, the corruption spreads into every domain the language is used to debate. So deep has this language rot penetrated, that it is difficult to write an essay like this without succumbing to itthat is the intent of those who spread the contagion. The present-day culprits identify themselves as progressives or liberals. Take a step back and ponder how manipulative this is: if you're a progressive, then you must obviously be on the side of progress, even though the outcome of the policies you advocate will ultimately roll back all of the advances in individual liberty and prosperity made since the Enlightenment; if you're a liberal, surely you must advocate liberty, notwithstanding that the consequences of your prescriptions will be descent of society into serfdom for the masses, deemed property of the state, ruled by an unelected, unaccountable élite.
These so-called progressives or liberals are not advocates of progress or liberty: they are enemies of them, and the sooner champions of liberty acknowledge what they are, the better our slim chances for defeating them will be. Libertarians and conservatives are inclined toward civil discourse and respect for the rule of law. They must come to terms with the fact that their enemiesnot opponentsare implacable, bent on winning whatever the cost may be, willing to use any means whatsoever to prevail and, once triumphant, to deprive their opposition of the means to reverse or even impede the implementation of their agenda.
They are enemies.
What is to be done?
In the middle of World War II, would it have made sense for Roosevelt and Churchill to have arranged a secret meeting with Hirohito and Tojo to try to work out their differences and find a middle ground where, say, Imperial Japan would be allowed to keep half of its conquests in the Pacific? Of course not: Japan was the enemy, and only its definitive defeat could undo the damage its conquests had wrought.
Enemies of individual liberty control the high ground today in most of the institutions through which they have made their long march in the last half century, and they perceive themselves as winning: with every generation they educate, inform, entertain, and rule, they create more dependent subjects who acquiesce to their rule and groom a new self-perpetuating class of élite. They are not people who have a different vision of how to create a society in which the aspirations of the majority of the people for themselves and their families will be achieved, but rather aspiring rulers of infantilised subjects dependent upon the largesse of their betters.
How does one deal with enemies? To survive and prosper, one does not negotiate with themone defeats them. There is no reasonable, achievable compromise between liberty and tyranny, freedom and slavery. One must vanquish the tyrants and slaveholders and ensure that their spawn cannot reinfect society.
We will never defeat them as long as we view them as opponents who play by the same rules and share the same goals as we. They are enemies, and must be completely defeated and removed from the political stage. That is how they view usthey have no desire to compromise but rather intend to destroy us. Until we take the battle to the enemy with an equal fierceness, we shall have no hope of success. Here are a few things we can do, starting immediately, once we come to terms with the fact we're confronted with an enemy, not a well-meaning opponent.
Reclaim the language from the enemy. We should have a swear jar for every time we utter the words liberal or progressive except in scornful irony. May I suggest statist, collectivist, socialist, or communist as alternatives?
Do not trade with the enemy. Do not patronise businesses which support enemy causes; by doing so you support them yourself. While an individual choosing not to be a customer of a mega-corporation has negligible impact, millions of like-minded people deciding to go elsewhere can. On the local scale, telling the owner of the pharmacy who's posted a petition supporting socialised medicine that he's just lost your business and why does have an impactI did this two weeks ago myself.
Don't be taken in by enemy propaganda. The mainstream media are almost entirely in the hands of the enemy. Help to make them the legacy media by ignoring everything they say, not subscribing to their enemy propaganda. Rely instead on first-hand reporting on the Internet whose veracity you can judge based on a network of trusted sources who comment upon it.
Do not entrust your children to the enemy. So-called public schools (the correct term is government schools, since in recent decades the publicparentshave lost all control over them) have been entirely captured by the enemy and become institutions of indoctrination and moral corruption which fail at teaching even basic skills. It is parental malfeasance verging on child abuse to send one's offspring to these corrupt, corrupting, and nonperforming schools. If you cannot afford a well-run private or religious school (most have per-pupil costs well below that of government schools, but of course you have to pay that tuition on top of your taxes supporting the failed government schools), consider home-schooling your children, perhaps in conjunction with other like-minded parents. Even if you can afford it, don't assume a private or religious school supports your values; talk to parents of students enrolled there and teachers: if they show signs of being enemies, don't send your kids there.
Do not become indebted to the enemy. Higher education is overwhelmingly in the hands of the enemy. One of the greatest scams in recent decades has been the explosion in tuition and fees, which results in graduates of four-year and postgraduate programs burdened with six-figure debt they're forced to pay off in the key years they should be saving to accumulate capital for starting a family, buying a house, educating their children, and retirement. This is not accidental: by blocking capital formation in people's key earning years, they are rendered dependent upon the state for their retirement and health care in old age, which is precisely the intent.
What élite universities and professional schools provide for the exorbitant fee is a credential which offers entry into the ranks of the enemy, and the education they provide is indoctrination in the enemy's belief system. If you need a credential, shop around and get what you require at a price that doesn't sink you into debt throughout your peak earning years. Unless you've bought into the enemy's credential game, where you went to college will be irrelevant after you've had a few years of job experience.
Do not hire the enemy. Are you an employer? Why should you pay those who support the destruction of your livelihood? In our information-intense age, nothing could be easier than determining the political affiliations and contributions of applicants for employment, as well as their sentiments posted on public fora. If they are enemies, don't hire them. You wouldn't hire somebody without a police background check to make sure they weren't a crook, would you? So why should you employ an enemy who will use your paycheck to destroy the values you cherish and spread the enemy's perverted belief system among co-workers?
Roll back the enemy's gains. One of the enemy's key intellectual force multipliers is the concept of the ratchet: that any movement in their direction is irreversible and that consequently the debate is only about how rapidly one will arrive at their destination. Those who view the enemy as an opposition fall for this completelyin effect, their slogan becomes, We'll deliver you unto serfdom, but later than the other guys. This is not how one deals with an enemy: they must be definitively defeated, removed from all positions of influence, and their pathological beliefs cleansed from the society. Any politician who speaks about reaching across the aisle or intellectual who grants any legitimacy to the anti-human, liberty-destroying nostrums of the collectivists is a fool at best and a collaborator at worst. Failing to acknowledge that an enemy is an enemy is to preemptively surrender.
We do not compromise with enemy politicians; we defeat them, regardless of the political party from which they hail. If they're enemies of freedom and the other party's candidate is worse, challenge them in the primary.
We do not consent to enemy occupation of the media. These are businesses, and we will withdraw our support from them by letting subscriptions lapse and withdrawing advertising from them. This will provoke a circulation collapse death spiral for them. All public funding and subsidies for media must be defeated.
We choose not to fund enemy occupation of our educational institutions. All taxpayer-supported institutions must have their funding made contingent upon abolition of tenure (from kindergarten through university professorships) and retention based upon objective measures of merit by third parties outside the academic system.
In the U.S., many state judges are elected; Federal judges are not, and have lifetime tenure. But their courts are funded by the legislature, which can abolish them with the consent of the executive. Abolish abusive and misbehaving courts, and create new ones, and let that serve as a lesson to those who would legislate from the bench. Dealing with the enemy
Over the last century, much of the enemy's success has been due to the partisans of individual liberty being unwilling to acknowledge that their opponents are implacable and ready to resort to any tactic that advances their cause. I won't stoop to their level is simultaneously staking out the high ground and then preemptively surrendering it to the enemy. Now, I am not suggesting that we do stoop to their level, but rather acknowledge that the enemy's tactics have been working, and that they must be countered head-on, not around the margins. We must do this in a manner consistent with our morality and respect for the truth, but keeping in mind that the enemy operates under no such constraints.
With elected politicians, there must be no compromise whatsoever with the enemy, and enemies in elected offices must be forced, through strategic votes, to disclose their true beliefs and agendas, then defeated by candidates who call them out on the pernicious consequences of the enemy policies they advocate. As enemies are removed from elected office, policies can be adopted to identify and replace enemies in the judiciary, state-funded educational institutions, and taxpayer-supported cultural institutions. Complete deregulation of all media will allow the market to sort out the messages people choose to hear.
I am certain this paper will be denounced as strident and divisive. Bring it onit is both, and that is precisely my intent! If I had changed the introduction and globally replaced a few words in the body of the document, this screed could seamlessly slot into what passes for polite discourse in the fever swamps of the collectivist slavers. You may find it distasteful to look upon them as enemies, but that's how they see you, and they have no difficulty whatsoever talking about silencing you, removing you from positions of influence, and shutting down the means by which you organise.
We believe in a multitude of voices speaking in a free arena, with the best argument winning. The enemy believes in an echo chamber where only their message is heard. This conveys upon them an asymmetric advantage, where we're inclined to let them speak in favour of shutting us up. Fine: we should not sacrifice our principles, but at the same time we must come to terms with the fact that they are the enemy, and must be defeated and dispersed in disarray, not accommodated, lest we forfeit everything in which we believe. Enemies and allies
In identifying the enemy, it is crucial to distinguish the enemy: the collectivist/statist ruling class and its partisans in the media, academia, and rent-seeking crony capitalist industries and financial institutions, from the electorate who support enemy politicians. We should view those voters not as enemies, but allies we haven't yet recruited. Most voters pay little attention to politics and have little appreciation for the consequences, social and economic, of policy choices. This is not so much due to laziness, but rather rational ignorance: since a single vote has a negligible chance of influencing the outcome of an election, a rational voter will spend a negligible amount of time investigating the candidates and researching the consequences of the policies they advocate.
Consequently, elections often turn on the amount of money candidates can raise, the extent they can attack their opponents with negative advertising, their hair styles, and what party the parents of the voter preferred, as opposed to substantive issues. You may find this dismaying, but there is abundant evidence that this is the fact. In addition, enemy occupation of education and media ensures that the bias of voters who do not choose to independently inform themselves will be toward enemy candidates. This was the premise of an underappreciated 2008 book which breathlessly and approvingly forecast the calamity the recent enemy resurgence has brought upon us.
These uninformed and unengaged voters are not the enemy, but is it their votes which bring the enemy to power. So we must approach them as potential allies, to whom we must explain the ultimate consequences of the policies of the enemy to themselves and their families, and why it is in their own self-interest to defeat the enemy. The present situation is sufficiently dire that one need no longer appeal to long-term arguments such as Hayek's in The Road to Serfdom: the apocalypse so ardently desired by the enemy, as it will present the ultimate crisis to be exploited to secure their power, is now just a few years away, and this is evident to anybody acquainted with the numbers.
Our goal must be to defeat the enemy. In a democratic society, this means apprising those who vote the enemy into power of their true nature, breaking the hold of the enemy media on the populace, and reversing enemy infiltration of education. The enemy strategy depends upon an uninformed, unengaged, and passive electorate. We must turn this around by communicating, by all means possible, the true nature of the enemy and the cataclysmic near-term consequences of their triumph.
by John Walker April 15th, 2011
More like 3, I suspect around 2015
The fuel of Capitalism has been squandered.
It will collapse, and there is no other known system
that is as efficient to do the greatest good for the greatest number
Socialism is far less efficient, as well as Fascism, and Barter
Debt Slavery is already upon us and
the Banks are laughing at the pitiful attempts
of whole country's to escape the snares
I Hate Banks more than I Hate The Government
The Siren Call of Money has placed
Huge populations in Indenture Servitude
Saving this. Thank you for posting it. Compared to what passes for “truth” these days, this is an elegant example of what real truth is and I, for one, appreciate it very much.
Thursday, January 10, 1963
Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
At Mrs. Nordman’s request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following “Current Communist Goals,” which she identifies as an excerpt from “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen:
[From “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen]
CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.”
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture—education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [”]united force[”] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.
In a democracy, the Left will always have a strategic political advantage over Conservatives.
Among our highest values are personal initiative, personal responsibility, and stoicism in the face of adversity.
The Left responds with emotional outbursts and mob rule.
Although Conservatives are among the first to organize against military or criminal threats, we are among the last to organize against political threats.
Mugawd, Leto, I can’t pick one single passage that I liked above all; the whole treatise was THAT good.
Now, you need to send this to each and every GOPe member at Federal and state level. Send it registered mail, so you can verify they got it. And hope to gawd they read it.
Thanks for bringing it here. I’ll find time to read it over a few times myself.
One of the best articles posted here ever! Pass it around.
It’s about time someone changes the language we used to refer to “Liberals” and “Progressives.”
-—”Liberals” are not about “Liberty” at all. Rather they’re “Fascists” because they truly want extreme social regimentation. They don’t realize that their offering of “free stuff” to their preferred classes of society requires ENSLAVING others. Or maybe they’re so hateful that they do want to enslave more successful members of society just as a parasite attacks a host organism.
-—”Progressives” are really not progressive, they’re REGRESSIVE (to a more totalitarian state).
The Left has been brilliant in infiltrating modern language with “feel-good” terms for truly evil policies.
For example: so-called “affirmative action.” There is NOTHING “affirmative” about such State-sanctioned racism. Nothing at all.
And “Politically Correct” is a term for “policed speech.”
This article ought to be a rallying cry for Freepers. It is EXCELLENT because it spells out a somber strategy for fighting what we’re up against.
I applaud the author’s term “Government Schools” rather than “Public Schools” and he presents the notion that there is nothing liberal or progressive about so-called “liberal/progressives.”
I think the title is uninspring as one word “Enemies” so it probably doesn’t get much eyeballs.
Can you draw attention to this or write a classic Jim Robinson article to direct people to read the article and adopt the strategy?
“In the middle of World War II, would it have made sense for Roosevelt and Churchill to have arranged a secret meeting with Hirohito and Tojo to try to work out their differences and find a middle ground where, say, Imperial Japan would be allowed to keep half of its conquests in the Pacific?”
In fact they did exactly that, meeting with Stalin and giving him Eastern Europe (including Poland, for which Britain had gone to war originally). The wars in Korea and Vietnam must always be seen through that prism.
Roman statesman and political theorist Marcus Tullius Cicero
Yes, true, BUT, Roosevelt at the time was ailing and what was not known was the influence that the commie Alger Hiss had on FDR and how the outcome of the results were skewed in favor of that regime which he secretely worked for, the Evil Empire.
Much the same can be said today as the Muslim Brotherhood insinuates itself (as it has been doing for some 50 years now) within every aspect of our Government Agencies (as well as our media, education system, courts, etc.) and the influence it has had on our Republic which if we don't wake up soon and face that reality and try to reverse the gains they have made, could easily speel our doom.
Churchill was furious at what was given away by Roosevelt; his people had died for nothing and lost their empire in the process. Roosevelt was simply a socialist (Commie-lite).
There is absolutely no comparison between the threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood to our republic to that posed by American Bolsheviks; the former is a potentail domestic threat representing a very real global enemy, while the latter is a very real domestic threat, representing a very real global enemy, which has successfully dismantled just about every aspect of American life in the last 50 years. We share some common moral values with the Muslim Brotherhood; I share none with the American left.
“For example: so-called affirmative action. There is NOTHING affirmative about such State-sanctioned racism. Nothing at all.”
As a white guy, nothing (with the exception of abortion) is more critical than overturning these policies which encourage companies and government agencies NOT to hire someone on the basis of their skin color and gender (or let them into colleges). The “beneficiaries” are reduced to the status of feebleminded tokens (and act the part well), while the American family is disappearing because of the lack of access to jobs and education. The demographic evidence of this is clear for all to see; while white women whine about finding “Mr. Right”, he has been reduced to barely making ends meet (certainly nothing to provide for a family).
The secular wars against Islam, the tax debate in this country, “gay marriage”, all of the other “issues” (as determined by the left’s media) mean NOTHING as long as affirmative action is the law of the land. The media portrayals (through movies, commercials, etc.) of the descendants of those who built this country is disgusting; I’ve taught my children how to “read” these things (for example, the only good white fathers on TV are those that are acting as fathers to children that aren’t their own - as for fathers with their own children, they are childish, stupid, and often outright bad people). Living between Newark & Jersey City, my children have plenty of opportunity to see how blacks & others raise their children.
What affinity could we feel for a country that allows this? Let those that have “inherited the earth” go through the motions of spreading “our” ideals globally at the point of a gun (these certainly aren’t my ideals), cheering for “our” Olympic athletes (with their Red Chinese uniforms), etc.
Do you send your children to government schools? If you do, then all the hard work you are doing at home is being undone by their government teachers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.