this is an opinion piece... but does point out some areas for thought... is it truth? well apparently this person thinks so... and puts forward a not unreasonable case for that belief... .."should blame itself for the rise of Trump" I have not been writing much concerning the U.S. election this November, and with good reason — elections are always a distraction from tangible solutions. They are an anathema to honest debate; a circus of delusions and prefabricated talking points. They offer the illusion of choice in order to placate the masses. They are a theater of false hopes. That said, elections do accomplish one thing very well — they are great for mobilizing large numbers of people into opposing camps and pitting them against each other over ideologies and political celebrities. Sometimes, these elections can lead to internal war. This is where we stand in 2016. In my article Will A Trump Presidency Really Change Anything For The Better, published in March, I outlined why I believed that the election of 2016 would revolve around a Trump vs. Hillary free-for-all. The two sides are perfectly diametrically opposed. At least, as far as public image is concerned, one is the exact antithesis to the other, and I don’t think this is a coincidence. Over the course of the past century social instability and outright internal conflicts have in most cases been the product of a specific catalyst — namely various flavors of Marxism and communism. That is to say, communists attempt to socially or economically sabotage conservative or free market based systems with civil unrest and political chicanery, and in response, nations are either overrun by color revolution or they swing to the other side of the collectivist spectrum and resort to fascism. This is often by design. As I have examined in detail in numerous articles in the past, it is the financial elite that tend to play both sides of this modern battle between the communists and the “nationalists,” usually promoting or supporting groups with communist leanings, radicalizing them and exploiting them to drive normally level headed conservatives to respond with anger and totalitarianism to keep them at bay. Of course, these totalitarian regimes also end up under the control of the establishment. Today, we have a similarly pervasive communism in the West funded by the same kinds of elites, only in the form of a more subversive style of cultural Marxism. One need only examine the cash infusions by billionaires like George Soros and his Open Society Institute into Black Lives Matter as well as other “social justice” organizations. Under the guise of philanthropy, global financiers exploit mindless followers and the entitlement mob like a heavy bludgeon, swinging them wildly at any cultural mainstay that represents the bedrock of the target nation. Apparently, the irony is completely lost on the social justice warriors, who completely ignore the fact that rich white guys are bankrolling their battle against… rich white guys. It is important to note that while the financial establishment is the very core of the problem and the primary instigator and manipulator of the public psyche (they have this down to a science), their success in these endeavors would not be as frequent without so many mindless followers and academic idiots to perpetuate the momentum of chaos. These groups share almost as much blame as the elites in the destruction of civility and prosperity. In this age of unstable economies and societies, there are many people who are desperate to be told what to do rather than lead themselves. However, none are quite as horrifying as the social justice cultists. These people are, in my view, nearly the pinnacle of the communist ideal. They are die hard collectivists, and are willing to rationalize almost any action as long as they believe it is being done in the name of the “greater good.” Usually, this greater good is based on entirely arbitrary determinations rather than any inherent moral code, making it vaporous and easily changeable. A “greater good” without principles based in inherent conscience or natural law can be shifted on a whim to suit any evil imaginable. They believe fervently in the purity of their world view. Most of them are not open to even the slightest question or concern over their ethos. Their blind faith is unshakeable, even in the face of extensive empirical evidence and superior logic. Such people are the ultimate cannon fodder for the elites. Social justice cultists act on the assumption that history is on their side, and that they will one day be seen as heroes for their deeds. They not only seek to promote and spread their ideology — this would merely make them a new form of religion. No, they are not just evangelists, they also want their own version of a caliphate; an all dominating cult that crushes any embers of dissent and destroys its philosophical opponents trapped within its borders. A recent and starling example of this mentality can be found in the following video of a BBC show called “The Big Questions.” The subject of the debate — “Does social media reveal men’s hatred for women?” Milo Yiannopoulos faces off with a crowd of mouth breathing true-believers and barely gets a word in edgewise as they do what cultural Marxists do best: use the mob to shout down their opponent and attack the person’s character rather than confront his arguments and evidence: this is a very long piece so if your still interested the rest is here... The social justice cult should blame itself for the rise of Trump - Personal Liberty®
I agree with the thinking, but I'm gonna' pass on watching twenty minutes of SJW's filming an Alinsky training video.
"Will A Trump Presidency Really Change Anything For The Better"? Compared to Billary? Anything would be an improvement and Trump could not be in any way, shape, or form, worse. "These people are, in my view, nearly the pinnacle of the communist ideal. They are die hard collectivists, and are willing to rationalize almost any action as long as they believe it is being done in the name of the “greater good.” Usually, this greater good is based on entirely arbitrary determinations rather than any inherent moral code, making it vaporous and easily changeable. A “greater good” without principles based in inherent conscience or natural law can be shifted on a whim to suit any evil imaginable." Absolutely true. Look around. Expose the left and see what happens to you. "Usually, this greater good is based on entirely arbitrary determinations rather than any inherent moral code" so that the laws or written rules that EVERYONE is supposed to follow is just a suggestion to the overlords and they feel free to "bend the rules", lie about, or just plain ignore the written laws, regulations, or guidelines when it suits them and lie to/about, cheat or screw over anyone who points out the dictator has no clothes. For the greater good of course.
One thing to be noted is prior to 2007 people looked for hope and change and it was not just Democrats, by this point on a new election in 2007 we were tired of the wars, and tired of 9/11 and wanted a fresh start. I saw many conservatives vote for Obama only a few will admit it now. Many perhaps voted because of white guilt or of change but they did. Now its reversed many a democrat are either not going to vote or are seeing Trump as hope and change. I think there is much more going on this election in that really allot of people are tired really tired of high taxes and fines, fees and well thats not new but a new elite millennials are not paying taxes, or fees or fines and are in fact getting free everything. I think this sparked a huge fire and Trump stepped in to Validate the feeling of being crapped on and no one gives a crap feeling we all have and he stood up was pissed off and said he cared. Is this true, I know we all hope it is. But we also many hoped the first black president wouldnt be the world wide embarrassment he is today. Not sure how it was done in just 8 years but it was like many gave up hope took a few more years regrouped and now it feel too late the great hope we may have is Trump. Now we have a NWO in D.C. or at least they want this to be the feeling you have. I have not seen in 50 years a presidential race where a suspected felon was running for office not only is running but people opposing her are dropping like flies and no one seem to be stopping it. This feels like mob hits and oversees influences guiding her to the oval office. Trump gives hope, theoretically and possibly realistically but we are reaching to hold on to what he is promising seems more so then in previous decades we need help.
Personally I feel as a prerequirement to running for public office you should take a course in constitutional law, have to teach the same course for one year and if during your term in office you attempt to violate the constitution or actually due violate it you should be removed from office and summarily executed. Any candidate should have to sign this document before tendering his/her application to run. And lying to your constituents should be considered treason...same punishment
