The following essay by our Israeli correspondent MC serves as an appropriate companion to H. Numan’s piece posted earlier tonight. It’s good to have persepctives from abroad on what’s happening here in the Nation Formerly Known as the United States of America.
American Socialism is like playing Russian Roulette with an automatic pistol: there are just too many individualists and too many pistols for a quiet transition to the average socialist utopia.
We have loaded the Biden bullet into the magazine of our 1911 pattern Colt along with a few blanks, and we put it to our collective temple thinking that the blanks are benign.
So here we are, all set. What chance do we have of surviving?
The USA is on the brink of a full-scale Fascist bullet in the bonce, but through ignorance and misdirection, they are unaware that even the blanks are dangerous. One can, if one is stupid enough, play Russian roulette with a revolver and get away with it most of the time, but a semi-automatic pistol is going to kill you every time you pull the trigger (sic), blank or ball.
I lived under socialism for decades; I saw it creep and corrode society until it destroyed the mechanisms that allowed the poor to prosper and the intelligent to be fulfilled.
It starts with education, the process of giving men and woman an asset that they can sell in the employment marketplace, an asset that does not go away, and can be sold and resold on a daily basis.
I profited enormously by being selected for an academic education, and from being groomed as a manager of men, as an intellectual capable of self-learning. But that door, the one that I came through, was eventually slammed shut by socialists, socialists who wanted the utopian equality of outcomes rather than the achievable equality of opportunity.
My paternal grandfather was a coalminer from Yorkshire (the other one, the Jewish one, was a Stoker in the Royal Navy). The miner was a convener of the ILP (Independent Labour Party); whereas the ‘Labour’ party was a country club for rich gentlemen who could not make it in the Liberal or Tory parties of the time, the ILP wanted to get real actual working men and women into Parliament. Arthur, my grandfather, believed in education, and he got his four sons and one of his two daughters through to ‘school certificate’ (high school graduation). My father’s education was interrupted by the War, but his younger brother went on to get a bachelor’s degree, unheard of at the time.
Socialism, with its roots in 19th-century romanticism, cannot admit to being wrong. Pragmatically, we all have different IQs and abilities, but within the socialist romance we are all born equal. Romance is a genre where outcomes follow predictable and desirable courses and the heroes and heroines all live happily ever after, but in politics, romanticism is dangerous, and the outcomes can be dire.
‘Equality’ is always a hard and elusive master. The romantics pictured a happy state led by an elite (themselves) of ‘virtuous’ administrators. A lovely comfortable picture — for cows and sheep!
Joseph, he of the ‘technicolor’ dreamcoat, was set apart by his father who recognized his potential. But his brothers just saw what they perceived as his, Joseph’s, arrogance. So they sold him into Egyptian slavery, they squandered their greatest family asset through petty jealousy.
But Joseph was blessed by Yahovah, and as such, he would have succeeded in any situation. His brothers would have prospered greatly if they had been a little less self-obsessed.
Imagine, if the brothers had revered Joseph instead of despising him, then Egypt would have come begging to them for food rather than their having to go to Egypt.
I lived in South Africa during the final years of Apartheid. It was an eye opener. Whilst apartheid stifled growth, it preserved identities and allowed cultural interaction at a level that was ‘defined’ by the idea that high walls made good neighbours; Africans were allowed to defecate in the gutter, whites were not. Apartheid has inbuilt elements of paternalism and socialism; as well as preserving cultural integrity, it gave a defined role to the Afrikaner (Boer = farmer).
The British banned slavery in the Cape Colony in the early 1800s. This ban was not managed well; it sent an economic shockwave through the mainly Afrikaner rural communities, thus provoking the Great Trek northwards, bringing the Afrikaner into collision with the Angoni peoples (Zulu, Swazi, Xhosa) who were migrating southwards at the time. The Cape Colony had been settled by the Dutch in the 1490s; the Great Trek happened in 1836, so the Afrikaners had been settled in the area for some 350 years, longer than any of the southwards-migrating African tribes (who now rule as a communist government placed there by European and US white liberals — ANC included, because they are considered to be the ‘indigenous’ people and the Afrikaner as the incomer).
After the Boer War in the early 1900s, the British Governor tried to expunge the Afrikaner culture and language from the then-Union of South Africa, leading to mass starvation and even more hostility.
The Afrikaner Nationalists won the vote from the Unionists in 1947 and imposed the ‘Apartheid’ system of cultural separation, which ensured the survival of the Afrikaner people by creating a special ‘safety net’ for them (Afrikaners also suffered the consequences of many years of inbreeding, and there were many who were basically unemployable).
The Liberals in the Republic of South Africa and elsewhere handed power to the (relative) immigrants purely based on skin colour, so now we find Afrikaners still under genocidal pressure — Social Engineering always has unintended consequences.
The huge elephant in the South African room is that the economy of South Africa was and is totally dependent on those Afrikaners, those same people that the communists want to erase from history.
This is a much-repeated tale when communism or socialism takes over. The history of the USSR is one long struggle to make the socialist religion work, trying to persuade the farmers to hand over their produce for zero return. They ended up executing the competent farmers (kulaks) and then hoping for an agricultural miracle. It was the cost of having to constantly buy grain on the world market that ruined their planned Socialist Utopia.
When Man believes that he can control ‘nature’, including human nature, he finds that that ‘nature’ pushes back. Human-centered (political) religion wants human gods who can control nature and implement utopia. They may even be very well-meaning; Hitler sincerely though Jews were responsible for the Communism that had already shown the world its terrible fangs. The Holodomor (1932/33), which exterminated many millions in the Ukraine, actually had a precursor in 1919 when Lenin sent Stalin to Tsaritsyn (Stalingrad/Volgagrad) to get grain for Moscow. The Bolshevik Coup was falling apart because the workers were starving — still no bread!
Stalin went to extremes of brutality and murder to get farmers to part with their grain, without payment. It had been decided that the (political) needs of Muscovites came before the financial needs of the farmers.
As a short-term measure, grain was squeezed out of the Tsaritsyn environs, but, of course, the long-term damage was done. Commercial farming is a skill. Interfere with the farmers and food production drops dramatically. (AOC, take note.)
Adolf would have known this. Quite correctly, he saw Marxist Communism as a failed theory that produced political and social mayhem, and he saw Jews (Trotsky & co.) as responsible, and feared that they would also stymie his statist form of that same collectivism. His answer was industrialized murder, and a ‘Hunger Plan’ (der Hungerplan) to recreate the Holodomor in Poland and eastwards.
Hitler and his crew would also have lived through the ‘Turnip Winter’ of 1916, and would have been well aware of the political consquences and perils of food shortages and of sending farmers (and their horses) to the front. But they, the Nazis, still felt that they needed to inflict their almost identical political religion on all Europeans.
Most of the anglophone world still has some freedom of religion, with a big exception: the political religions are out of control once more, particularly Islam and Socialism. Islam because it is considered racist to criticize, and Socialism because it is not perceived as ‘religious’ and therefore slides under the radar. Indeed, secularists of all sorts seek to impose their own religious viewpoint on everybody, even to the extent of debarring others, particularly Christians, from holding office. They seek to achieve in the USA what the Nazis did to Jews in Germany:
The rise of white Christian nationalism is a national security threat. We recommend you: encourage the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice to dedicate resources to deradicalization programs aimed at hate groups, including, but not limited to, white nationalists; increase monitoring of such groups, including the online environment, and take action to address increased hate crimes toward minority faith communities; and shift rhetoric to label violent white nationalist extremists as terrorists.
Is secularism just another religious alternative? What gives them the right to use a racist hate expression such as “white nationalist extremists” whilst condemning that kind of speech from everybody else? Our problems with violence have been mainly leftist/secularist in nature: BLM, Antifa and Islamism. Quite appropriate then that Democratic secularists should accuse their victims of what they themselves support in true Alinsky fashion.
I tend to see the secularists as just another religious sect with its own set of dogmas and rituals, but which deny the existence of non-human god(s), but cannot prove it. The problem with secularists is that they either have to appropriate somebody else’s morality or else become amoral and assume that the ends justify the means. It does not escape me that the mass murderers of the 20th century all espoused and enforced the many aspects of secularism.
President Biden is going to have his work cut out to gain credibility. He will have to drag the burden of consequences of the last few months into his administration over the next few years. His election as POTUS lacks credibility; whether the election was rigged or not, the perception of a huge portion of citizens is that the Democrat Party robbed them of a free and fair election.
Actions have consequences. To remain in power, President Biden is going to have to demonstrate to angry Americans that he is legitimate, but as more and more truths of election fraud trickle into the public arena, he must live with the consequences, whichever way public opinion may swing.
If we look at Venezuela as a model, and if indeed we assume that elections there were rigged in much the same way (maybe fraudulent software was enough, and there and less need for actual ballot manipulation in the nefarious early morning hours). Sleepy Joe is going to have to pay through the nose to keep power. Too many debts, too many villains to be paid off, and too many palms need to be crossed and itchy fingers greased.
To cheat is to open doors to blackmailers, and blackmailers need to be paid off. Has Sleepy Joe got what it takes?
The more HE indulges in the same old, same old, the deeper the USA will sink into the same Venezuelan mire, and the more resources will have to be expended on suppressing and coercing the people who pulled off the fraud.
There will probably not be a civil war. Whilst the opposition growls and bears its teeth, it is unclear at the moment whether it is the posturing of a rottweiler or a Chihuahua. “People with full bellies don’t make revolutions.”
Secession is a possibility, and President Biden is no Lincoln, but more likely than secession is a simmering hatred between Flyover America and Urban America. Here we return to food production, for flyover America produces food, and urban America does not. Stalin sent his thugs into the rural farming areas to enforce government theft of grain to feed the cities. But the peasants then were not armed and could not effectively fight back, although they tried.
I suspect Biden and his Democrat thieves have stolen one election too many. History tells us that JFK may have stolen the 1960 election — but if he did, he did not prosper from it, and what goes round comes around.
So we have the gun at our temple. We know the position of the Biden bullet in the magazine, and like the great and the good in 1933 Germany, we think we can control the outcome of giving dictatorial powers to the strutting groping little wannabe.
We pull the trigger, and we find the hard way that blanks, too, are lethal at close range, but we also find that we also have no brain left to process this information anyway, so it does not matter.
Only Pinochet has ever stopped the leftwards rush into tyranny. Do any of us have the position and the guts to do the same as he did? And then to face the almost universal condemnation that comes as a consequence?
I am not an American citizen, but this could be America’s finest hour. Yet who would want the job of shepherding a bickering gaggle of alt-right ‘cats’ against an established and disciplined group of leftist thugs and their ‘journalist’ lackeys?
In 1775 the mainly English-born patriots fought off Hanoverian-born King George’s German mercenary army to save the country from the King’s desire to re-establish the divine right of kings in the colonies. To do this they had to avoid pitched battles and shoot from cover, exploiting the accuracy of their long rifles over the inaccurate short range weight of lead from Black Bess muskets in volley fire.
What can be used this time around?
Americans can either ‘unite’ behind Biden and follow the Venezuela pathway to poverty, or unite behind a yet-to-be-revealed alt-right leader and fight back, or just die quietly household by household as the SWAT teams come to call.
MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.