People typically find the premises and practices of religions they don’t believe in to be preposterous. However, their own faith is familiar; they understand the deeper meanings of (or can hand-wave) all the mummery. Hebrew hardtack, Popery’s infallibility, Mohammedan ninja suits, Mormon magic underwear, and anything about Scientology—either it seems absurd, or it makes perfect sense, all according to one’s own beliefs. The exceptions are atheists, who consider all religions different flavors of baloney.

It’s like that with politics, too. Today’s globalist regime has zero justification for rule, but its mythology is about as weird as anything dreamed up by L. Ron Hubbard’s fertile imagination. Here are some examples.

1. The Russians hacked the election

Before the 2016 US Presidential election, the MSM was crowing about Hillary’s certain victory. According to some talking heads, The Donald ‘s odds were merely 1%. Oops! Democrats were weeping, and the sour grapes became a fine whine. The Deep State crowd’s champagne turned to vinegar; for the first time in decades, someone who wasn’t an anointed proxy got nominated and elected.

So the next fallback was pooping in the punch bowl: attacking Trump’s legitimacy by spreading a fairy tale about Russians hacking the election. There’s no actual evidence beyond alphabet soup agencies speculating, “Well, that’s just the sort of thing the Russkies would try!” Still, the MSM dished out this thin gruel, generating liberal outrage. Meanwhile, the Democrats aren’t boasting much about their own campaign’s dirty tricks!

In concept, paperless balloting actually is a potential risk. Could someone fudge the numbers behind the scenes? That would be pretty foul, but anyone with the right password can manipulate databases, and who would know? Further, it’s an unnecessary gimmick. For over two centuries, the USA did without it. Liberals once sneered at these concerns as tinfoil hat stuff.

Most troubling, there are no more ballots that voters can check, or that election officials can tabulate in case of technical difficulties or disputed results. Easy solution: voting machines could include small printers, meanwhile storing results in memory. The technology exists now. The nation’s cash registers process millions of transactions daily, updating servers instantaneously and then printing receipts.

What’s unspoken: If they believe someone overseas can hack an election, why aren’t they trying to fix the problem? The Democrats blustered about Russian tampering (despite zero evidence), so why aren’t their Congressmen demanding safeguards—like what’s described above—before Vladimir Putin “steals” the USA’s 2020 election too?

2. The security state makes everyone safer

The Utah Data Center is designed to store exabytes of information and “is alleged to be able to process “all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Internet searches, as well as all types of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, and bookstore purchases”

This tall tale is a big hit with the neoconservatives. During Bush the Younger’s years, we got the War on Terror, more federal agencies, and two spit-in-your-eye wars. Obama campaigned promising to dismantle the security state, but did bupkiss about it for eight years. Instead, The Lightworker kicked a few more anthills during the Arab Spring. I certainly won’t shed a tear for Libya’s Gadhafi. However, Syria’s Assad is probably the best asshole dictator that can be expected. In both cases, the end results made it easier for the Soros outfits to colonize Europe with “migrants”.

Perhaps all that seemed like a good idea then. However, the implementation was horribly ineffective. What did we get for all the extra trillions spent on alphabet soup agencies and making the military-industrial complex wealthier? Further, domestic spying is pretty troubling. Although Americans are monitored more thoroughly than Soviet citizens were, terrorism is far from over despite all the security theater. Mass surveillance grotesquely violates the Fourth Amendment; court-issued warrants are needed for prying into just one citizen’s life. However, legal mumbo jumbo works around that, and the unaccountable agencies are out of control.

What’s unspoken: With a cost/benefit ratio as lousy as that, it’s time to rethink strategy. As Benjamin Franklin put it:

Loading...

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

This watchword captured the spirit of the times, but today things are a little different. The ultimate image of security is a baby in a crib, wrapped in a blanket, sucking a pacifier, and under Mommy’s watchful gaze. That’s fine for infants, but not free adult citizens.

3. The media is balanced and accurately informs the public

A free and independent mass media—dispassionately informing the public and telling both sides of the story—long has been lauded as a pillar of democracy. The press is free from government censorship, but how independent is the “Fourth Estate”? Thirty five years ago, 90% of the USA’s media outlets were in the hands of fifty companies. Even then, they were generally concentrated in New York City (with similar ownership characteristics) and had a liberal bias, allowing for selective information blackouts.

Because of deregulation—thanks, Congress!—it’s now merely six mega-conglomerates owning the TV networks, Hollyweird studios, newspapers, magazines (even comic books), radio stations—and also some ISPs. Of these, five have toxically leftist corporate cultures, but hide the full extent fairly effectively. That’s why the news is bullshit and today’s entertainment is pozzed-out with cultural Marxism. The other one has a neocon angle, representing the “controlled opposition” opinion.

Journalistic integrity, balance, and objectivity are as mythical lately as the Easter Bunny. Most presstitutes are little better than Social Justice Warriors. Some are even directly in cahoots with politicians. Because of their routine “advocacy journalism”, important issues get a highly biased presentation, or are never discussed. The neocon news outlets have a longer leash, but they still won’t touch many vital topics. The public’s confidence in the MSM is falling steadily. Even liberals are catching on. That’s bad news for the Lügenpresse.

What’s unspoken: Corporate abuse of monopoly power to propagandize the public is little better than government censorship. To believe otherwise is the libertarian fallacy of “something is bad only if the state does it to you.”

4. “Bomb the world, invite the world” will spread global peace and democracy

The security state myth has a deadly synergy with the diversity myth. This afflicts most Western countries. For example, several years back, the Germans were beginning to realize that you can’t have both freedom and mass immigration. Not long after, Angela Merkel exemplified the “double down on a failed strategy” shtick, becoming the worst German political figure since the Weimar Republic.

The nation-wrecking cycle goes:

  • Invade a country that the neocons don’t like. If another spit-in-your-eye war is politically unpalatable, then destabilize it by giving lots of money and weapons to crazy militants who later will bite the hand that fed them.
  • Let in millions of refugees displaced by the chaos, opportunists claiming to be, and other hard-luck cases, all against the public’s wishes. Whether they’ll fit into their host cultures, not consume welfare, prefer “liberal democracy” over theocracy, or are intelligent and peaceful—these are no concerns for the politicians, because they’re not serving the public.
  • When problems inevitably happen from this imported underclass, give the security apparatus more money and expanded powers.
  • Instead of using this power to control the unwanted pests colonizing their nations, crack down on critics of these population replacement policies. Team up with like-minded social media billionaires to squash dissent.
  • Repeat.

What’s unspoken: The unassimilable migrants have a well-deserved reputation as troublemakers. However, the globalists who instigate this nonsense are worse pests and also deserve deportation. After several rounds of spreading democracy one bomb at a time, their good intentions are becoming questionable.

Conclusion

Atheists can mock religion incessantly without facing heresy charges. However, dissidents against the globalist regime and its strange beliefs can be censored or face retaliation. Still, pointing out the absurdity relentlessly is important. They can’t shut up everybody, once a critical mass of the public becomes aware. Then we can get the globalists and their toadies off the gravy train and start fixing the problems they’ve caused. Apathy is no solution; some people don’t follow politics, but politics follows everyone.

Read More: What Is The Hegelian Dialectic?

Loading...