| Question Everything!Everything!! |
Welcome to Truth, FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience. , is an alternative media and news site that is dedicated to the truth, true journalism and the truth movement. The articles, ideas, quotes, books and movies are here to let everyone know the truth about our universe. The truth will set us free, it will enlighten, inspire, awaken and unite us. Armed with the truth united we stand, for peace, freedom, health and happiness for all
Question Everything!
This blog does not promote
This blog does not promote, support, condone, encourage, advocate, nor in any way endorse any racist (or "racialist") ideologies, nor any armed and/or violent revolutionary, seditionist and/or terrorist activities. Any racial separatist or militant groups listed here are solely for reference and Opinions of multiple authors including Freedom or Anarchy Campaign of conscience.
MEN OF PEACE
"I don't know how to save the world. I don't have the answers or The Answer. I hold no secret knowledge as to how to fix the mistakes of generations past and present. I only know that without compassion and respect for all Earth's inhabitants, none of us will survive - nor will we deserve to." Leonard Peltier
Sunday, August 23, 2020
From Lockdown to Police State: The “Great Reset” Rolls Out
From Lockdown to Police State: The “Great Reset” Rolls Out
Mayhem in Melbourne
On August 2, lockdown measures were implemented in Melbourne, Australia, that were so draconian that Australian news commentator Alan Jones said on Sky News: “People are entitled to think there is an ‘agenda to destroy western society.’”
The gist of an August 13th article on the Melbourne lockdown is captured in the title: “Australian Police Go FULL NAZI, Smashing in Windows of Civilian Cars Just Because Passengers Wouldn’t Give Details About Where They Were Going.”
Another article with an arresting title was by Guy Burchell in the August 7th Australian National Review: “Melbourne Cops May Now Enter Homes Without a Warrant, After 11 People Die of COVID — Australia, This Is Madness, Not Democracy.” Burchell wrote that only 147 people had lost their lives to coronavirus in Victoria (the Australian state of which Melbourne is the capital), a very low death rate compared to other countries. The ramped up lockdown measures were triggered by an uptick in cases due to ramped up testing and 11 additional deaths, all of them in nursing homes (where lockdown measures would actually have little effect). The new rules include a six week curfew from 8 PM to 5 AM, with residents allowed to leave home outside those curfew hours only to shop for food and essential items (one household member only), and for caregiving, work and exercise (limited to one hour).
“But the piece de resistance,” writes Burchell, “has to be that now police officers can enter homes with neither a warrant nor permission. This is an astonishing violation of civil liberties…. Deaths of this kind are not normally cause for government action, let alone the effective house arrest of an entire city.” He quoted Victoria Premier Daniel Andrews, who told Victorians, “there is literally no reason for you to leave your home and if you were to leave your home and not be found there, you will have a very difficult time convincing Victoria police that you have a lawful reason.” Burchell commented:
[U]nder this new regime you can’t even remain in your house unmolested by the cops, they can just pop ‘round anytime to make sure you haven’t had Bruce and Sheila from next door round for a couple of drinks. All over a disease that is simply not that fatal….Last year more than 310,000 Australians were hospitalised with flu and over 900 died. By all metrics that makes flu a worse threat than COVID-19 but police weren’t granted Stasi-like powers during the flu season. Millions of people weren’t confined to their homes and threatened with AUS$5,000 fines for not having a good reason for being out of their homes.
At an August 19th press conference, Australia’s second most senior medical officer said the government would be discussing measures such as banning restaurants, international travel, public transport, and withholding government programs through “No Jab No Pay” in order to coerce vaccine resisters.
An August 13 article on LifeSiteNews quoted Father Glen Tattersall, a Catholic parish priest in Melbourne, who said the draconian provisions “simply cannot be justified on a scientific basis”:
We have a curfew from 8 pm to 5 am, rigorously enforced including by the use of police helicopters and search lights. Is the virus a vampire that just comes out at night? Or the wearing of masks: they must be worn everywhere outside, even in a park where you are nowhere near any other person. Why? Does the virus leap hundreds of metres through the air? This is all about inducing mass fear, and humiliating the populace by demanding external compliance.
Why the strict curfew? Curfews have been implemented recently in the US to deter violence during protests, but no violence of that sort was reported in Melbourne. What was reported, at least on social media, were planes landing in the night from the Chinese province of Guandong carrying equipment related to 5G and the Chinese biometric social credit system, which was reportedly being installed under a blanket of secrecy.
Angelo Codevilla, professor emeritus at Boston University, concluded in an August 13th article,
“We are living through a coup d’état based on the oldest of ploys: declaring emergencies, suspending law and rights, and issuing arbitrary rules of behavior to excuse taking ‘full powers’.”
Questioning the Narrative
Melbourne has gone to extremes with its lockdown measures, but it could portend things to come globally. Lockdowns were originally sold to the public as being necessary just for a couple of weeks to “flatten the curve,” to prevent hospital overcrowding from COVID-19 cases. It has now been over five months, with self-appointed vaccine czar Bill Gates intoning that we will not be able to return to “normal” until the entire global population of 7 billion people has been vaccinated. He has since backed off on the numbers, but commentators everywhere are reiterating that lockdowns are the “new normal,” which could last for years.
All this is such a radical curtailment of our civil liberties that we need to look closely at the evidence justifying it; and when we do, that evidence is weak. The isolation policies were triggered by estimates from the Imperial College London of 510,000 UK deaths and 2.2 million US deaths, more than 10 times the actual death rate from COVID-19. A Stanford University antibody study estimated that the fatality rate if infected was only about 0.1 to 0.2 percent; and in an August 4th blog post, Bill Gates himself acknowledged that the death rate was only 0.14 percent, not much higher than for the flu. But restrictive measures have gotten more onerous rather than less as the mortality figures have been revised downward.
A July 2020 UK study from Loughborough and Sheffield Universities found that government policy over the lockdown period has actually increased mortality rather than reducing it, after factoring in collateral damage including deaths from cancers and other serious diseases that are being left untreated, a dramatic increase in suicides and drug overdose, and poverty and malnourishment due to unemployment. Globally, according to UNICEF, 1.2 million child deaths are expected as a direct result of the lockdowns. A data analyst in South Africa asserts that the consequences of the country’s lockdown will lead to 29 times more deaths than from the coronavirus itself.
Countries and states that did very little to restrict their populations, including Sweden and South Dakota, have fared as well as or better overall than locked down US states. In an August 12th article in The UK Telegraph titled “Sweden’s Success Shows the True Cost of Our Arrogant, Failed Establishment,” Allister Heath writes:
Sweden got it largely right, and the British establishment catastrophically wrong. Anders Tegnell, Stockholm’s epidemiologist-king, has pulled off a remarkable triple whammy: far fewer deaths per capita than Britain, a maintenance of basic freedoms and opportunities, including schooling, and, most strikingly, a recession less than half as severe as our own.
Not restraining the populace has allowed Sweden’s curve to taper off naturally through “herd immunity,” with daily deaths down to single digits for the last month. (See chart.)

The Pandemic That Wasn’t?
Also bringing the official narrative into question is the unreliability of the tests on which the lockdowns have been based. In a Wired interview, even Bill Gates acknowledged that most US test results are “garbage.” The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology used in the nasal swab test is considered the “gold standard” for COVID-19 detection; yet the PCR test was regarded by its own inventor, Nobel prize winner Kary Mullis, as inappropriate to detect viral infection. In a detailed June 27th analysis titled “COVID-19 PCR Tests Are Scientifically Meaningless,” Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter conclude:
Without doubt eventual excess mortality rates are caused by the therapy and by the lockdown measures, while the “COVID-19” death statistics comprise also patients who died of a variety of diseases, redefined as COVID-19 only because of a “positive” test result whose value could not be more doubtful.
The authors discussed a January 2007 New York Times article titled “Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t,” describing an apparent whooping cough epidemic in a New Hampshire hospital. The epidemic was verified by preliminary PCR tests given to nearly 1,000 healthcare workers, who were subsequently furloughed. Eight months later, the “epidemic” was found to be a false alarm. Not a single case of whooping cough was confirmed by the “gold standard” test – growing pertussis bacteria in the laboratory. All of the cases found through the PCR test were false positives.
Yet “test, test, test” was the message proclaimed for all countries by WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom at a media briefing on March 16, 2020, five days after WHO officially declared COVID-19; and the test recommended as the gold standard was the PCR. Why, when it had already been demonstrated to be unreliable, creating false positives that gave the appearance of an epidemic when there was none? Or was that the goal – to create the appearance of a pandemic, one so vast that the global economy had to be brought to a standstill until a vaccine could be found? Recall Prof. Codevilla’s conclusion: “We are living through a coup d’état based on the oldest of ploys: declaring emergencies, suspending law and rights, and issuing arbitrary rules of behavior to excuse taking ‘full powers’.”
People desperate to get back to work will not only submit to a largely untested vaccine but will agree to surveillance measures that would have been considered a flagrant violation of their civil rights if those rights had not been overridden by a “national emergency” justifying preemption by the police powers of the state. They will agree to get “immunity passports” in order to travel and participate in group activities, and they will submit to quarantines, curfews, contact tracings, social credit scores and informing on the neighbors. The emergency must be kept going to justify these unprecedented violations of their liberties, in which decision-making is removed from elected representatives and handed to unelected bureaucrats and technocrats.
A national health crisis also a necessary prerequisite for relief from liability for personal injuries from the drugs and other products deployed in response to the crisis. Under the 2005 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREPA), in the event of a declared public health emergency, manufacturers are shielded from tort liability for injuries both from the vaccines and from invalid or invasive tests. Compensation for personal injuries is a massive expense for drug companies, and the potential profits from a product free of that downside are a gold mine for pharmaceutical companies and investors. The liabilities will be borne by the taxpayers and the victims.
All this, however, presupposes both an existing public health emergency and no effective treatment to defuse it. That helps explain the otherwise inexplicable war on hydroxychloroquine, a safe drug that has been in use and available over the counter for 65 years and has been shown to be effective in multiple studies when used early in combination with zinc and an antibiotic. A table prepared by the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (below) found that the US has nearly 30 times as many deaths per capita as countries making early and prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

The latest international testing of hydroxychloroquine treatment of coronavirus shows countries that had early use of the drug had a 79% lower mortality rate than countries that banned the use of the safe malaria drug. Lowering the US mortality rate by 79% could have saved over 100,000 lives. But an effective, inexpensive COVID-19 treatment would mean the end of the alleged pandemic and the vaccine bonanza it purports to justify.
The need to maintain the appearance of a pandemic also explains the inflated reports of cases and deaths. Hospitals have been rewarded with increased fees for reclassifying cases as COVID-19. As deaths declined in the US, the numbers of cases reported by the Centers for Disease Control were also gamed to make it appear that America was in a “second wave” of a pandemic. The reporting criterion was changed on May 18 from people who tested positive for the virus only to people who tested positive for either the virus or its antibodies. The exploding numbers thus include people who have recovered from COVID-19 as well as false positives. The Loughborough and Sheffield researchers found that when controlling for other factors affecting mortality, actual deaths due to COVID-19 are 54% to 63% lower than implied by the standard excess deaths measure.
Ushering in “The Great Reset”
Forcing compliance with global vaccine mandates is one obvious motive for maintaining the appearance of an ongoing pandemic, but what would be the motive for destroying the global economy with forced lockdowns? What is behind the “agenda to destroy Western society” suspected by Australian commentator Alan Jones?
Evidently it is this: destroying the old is necessary to usher in the new. Global economic destruction paves the way for the “Great Reset” now being promoted by the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the International Monetary Fund and other big global players.
Although cast as arising from the pandemic, the “global economic reset” is a concept that was floated as early as 2014 by Christine Lagarde, then head of the IMF, and is said to be a recharacterization of the “New World Order” discussed long before that. It was promoted as a solution to the ongoing economic crisis triggered in 2008.
The World Economic Forum – that elite group of businessmen, politicians and academics that meets in Davos, Switzerland, every January – announced in June that the Great Reset would be the theme of its 2021 Summit. Klaus Schwab, founder of the Forum, admonished:
The world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed.
No country will be allowed to opt out because it would be endangering the rest, just as no person will be allowed to escape the COVID-19 vaccine for the same reason.
Who is behind the Great Reset and what it really entails are major questions that need their own article, but suffice it to say here that to escape the trap of the globalist agenda, we need a mass awakening to what is really going on and collective resistance to it while there is still time. There are hopeful signs that this is happening, including massive protests against economic shutdowns and restrictions, particularly in Europe; a rash of lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the lockdowns and of police power overreach; and a flood of alternative media exposés despite widespread censorship.
Life as we know it will change. We need to ensure that it changes in ways that serve the people and the productive economy, while preserving our national sovereignty and hard-won personal freedoms.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Ellen Brown is an attorney, chair of the Public Banking Institute and author of thirteen books, including her latest, Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “It’s Our Money.” Her 300+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com. She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: A woman walks her dogs in Fitzroy Gardens park as police and defence force officers patrol in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia [David Crosling/EPA]
The original source of this article is Global Research
Obscene Pandemic Profiteering: Largest Consolidation of Wealth in American History
Obscene Pandemic Profiteering: Largest Consolidation of Wealth in American History
While the Lockdown Triggers Unemployment, Poverty and Despair, the Wealth of The 12 Richest Americans has increased by $283 billion, an Increase of almost 40%
According to the Institute for Policy Studies: “Since March 18, the beginning of the pandemic,” the 12 richest Americans “have seen their combined wealth increase $283 billion, an increase of almost 40 percent.”
Those 12 people primarily benefited from the two-party unanimously approved CARES Act, which was an unprecedented looting of taxpayer wealth under the guise of being a “taxpayer relief bill.”
Meanwhile, poverty, debt, hunger, depression & suicide rates have all skyrocketed. Primarily because tens of millions of people have had their livelihoods destroyed by mandated government policies.
In response to all of this, Congress has now gone on an extended vacation without doing ANYTHING to help their constituencies survive or recover from the direct policies that they enacted.
Meet the “Oligarchic Twelve / Despotic Dozen:”
- [numbers measured in billions of dollars]
- Name | Wealth 3/18 | Wealth Now | Gain
- Jeff Bezos 113b | 189b | +76b
- Bill Gates 98b | 114b | +16b
- Mark Zuckerberg 55b | 96b | +41b
- Warren Buffett 68b | 81b | +13b
- Elon Musk 25b | 73b | +48b
- Steve Ballmer 53b | 71b | +18b
- Larry Ellison 59b | 71b | +12b
- Larry Page 51b | 67b | +16b
- Sergey Brin 49b | 66b | +17b
- Alice Walton 54b | 63b | +9b
- Jim Walton 55b | 62b | +7b
- Rob Walton 54b | 62b | +8b
Never let a crisis go to waste!!
Do you grasp how unprecedented & obscene this is?
For the richest people to increase their net worth by 40% over such a short time period, while the country is in quarantine & the economy is locked down, is a Crime Against Humanity.
While “56.2 million workers sought unemployment aid” during a pandemic, these people experienced the greatest wealth increase rate ever!!
BOTH parties are completely on board with all of this… while children are starving, while tens of millions of people are buried in debt that they will never get out of, our political class is vacationing, cruising on yachts and playing golf while Rome burns!!
Wake up America, BOTH parties have thrown us overboard!!
This coming election will be a logistical fiasco / disaster that will emphatically prove our corrupted failed state status to those who are still in denial. The election will result in further chaos, confusion & division.
This will lead to a significant percentage of the population calling for and falling into compliance with increasing authoritarian order.
We are being drowned in divide & conquer propaganda while global technocratic imperialists rob us all blind and exploit the virus to implement a wickedly oppressive economic, “health” and surveillance system.
The window of opportunity to solve things peacefully is closing fast. We need to focus on forming groups to more effectively disseminate vital information & form self-sufficient communities to defend our families.
The extent to which you think I am exaggerating is an accurate measure of how propagandized you are.
I say all of this out of love & respect. It is all so hard to wrap your head around how obscenely corrupt our society has become.
The hour is late… but it is not too late…
We are gaining solid traction in uniting people with opinions across the political spectrum.
As shockingly corrupt & crazy as things have become, we may be at a tipping point where people with diverse perspectives come together against the core of systemic corruption.
Due to the virus having such personal impact on everyone, and because the systemically power-crazed forces are exploiting it to such an extreme degree, this could be the point in which real changes takes root.
Obviously it won’t be easy, and this election will be a total fiasco / disaster… but, there is HOPE.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
The original source of this article is Global Research
Saturday, August 22, 2020
America's Lost Frontier
America's Lost Frontier
What has gone wrong with America? It's a question that many people are asking, but one approach is to look at what the present day America has lost. Its frontier. The frontier once defined America. It was the frontier that allowed English colonists to experiment with liberty. The march Westward, from the frontier settlements braving Indian raids to the Oregon trail, the Gold Rush and the Wild West, created a constant frontier for the country to rediscover what it means to be an American. The frontier kept America vital and as the frontier began to be lost, so did the spirit of America itself.
A civilization has two fundamental forces that define its nature. The Centralizing force and the Expansionistic force. The Centralizing force contracts the civilization inward into large and densely packed cities under a centralized government that is always growing larger and more complex. The Expansionistic force by contrast pushes outward into new frontiers that expand the size of the civilization and its sense of self.
The Centralizing force marks the maturity and decline of the civilization. The Expansionistic force represents its youthful vitality and energy. A civilization that can transition from the Centralizing to the Expansionistic has another shot at life. A civilization that has no more frontiers will begin to fossilize into a great centralized mass that becomes unwieldy, decadent and eventually falls.
Where the Centralizing phase is marked by rigid government control, taboo breaking and cultural sophistication, the Expansionistic phase is marked by little government control, strong taboos and an emphasis on religion over culture. The Expansionistic phase mixes together cultures, but in the Centralizing phase, the existing culture is slowly replaced through migration from colonies and less developed parts of the world, drawn to the sophistication and wealth on display there.
This does not only apply to America, it applies equally well to Europe, and to global cultures dating back thousands of years. From the fall of Rome and several Greek city states to the decline and fall of Israel in the Second Temple period, to several Chinese dynasties and even to some degree modern day Japan. A nation without frontiers, only foreign colonies, is a nation without a future. As excess wealth concentrates in a handful of urban centers, decadence and corruption become endemic. The mores and values of the culture begin to implode. Sophistication begins to center on taboo breaking. Taxes increase, the size of government grows to unwieldy levels and foreigners increasingly push out the natives. By the time the actual collapse takes place, the society has already been a shell of itself for centuries.
The important thing to understand is that these two forces help balance out a civilization. The Expansionistic force creates a check on the Centralizing force. If the Centralizing force attempts to impose too much centralization, the frontier rebels against it. That for example is how America was born. Because the Expansionistic force is to some degree a push against the Centralizing force, the energy from these counter-opposing forces keeps a civilization active and vital.
The Centralized civilization needs the frontier, because without that it instead begins to push at cultural frontiers, breaking taboos and destroying its own value system. The youth who might otherwise seek their fortune in wilder and untamed lands, instead become a disruptive social force at home. The frontier might make men and women out of them, but the static homeland and its increasingly centralized authoritarianism instead redirects their freedom seeking into political and social radicalism. Because free cultural energy will always be harnessed, a problem to which the frontier provides a solution.
Without the frontier, there is no check to the Centralizing force which begins the process of contracting the society in on itself. Government becomes both outsized and corrupt. Domestic turmoil increases as government expands. The traditions that created respect for the political and social institutions are wiped away by the cultural turmoil, which increases the probability of coups and violent takeovers. This process feeds on itself until all semblance of civility and law have been lost, submerged beneath the competing aims of struggling factions.
It is also natural, for the Centralizing force to often resent and seek to quash the Expansionistic force. The cultural differences lead the former to label the latter as ignorant backward prudes who are secretly scheming against the government, while the latter view the former as decadent authoritarians taxing them to fund their own corruption. In America, the usual label for this is Blue States vs Red States. In Israel, it's Haifa and Tel Aviv vs the Settlements. In historical Israel that same conflict inspired the story of Chanukah. In historical America, the Revolution.
In present day America, the gradual loss of the frontier, ended any real check on the Centralizing force. But it is incidentally telling that recent populist Republican Presidents like Roland Reagan and George W. Bush attempted to associate themselves with the cowboy culture and the frontier. And Sarah Palin, currently embodying the political spirit of Red State resistance comes from Alaska, the closest thing America still has to a frontier.
This goes all the way back to the start of the Republican party with Abraham Lincoln, billed as the quintessential frontier candidate, who ironically proved to be a centralizing figure instead. But as the Republican party has increasingly become the voice of opposition to the Centralizing force, at least on paper, its candidates and base of support have tended away from the centers of centralization. For the last 50 years, with the exception of the accidental Presidency of Gerald Ford, Republican Presidents have been West Coasters. And every Republican President in the last 78 years was either born or elected from California or Texas.
During that same period, with the exceptions of Bill Clinton and the accidental presidencies of Harry Truman and LBJ, Democratic Presidents have tended to be associated with centralized urban elites. Barack Obama is not the exception to the rule. He picks up on a pattern set by FDR and JFK. Both FDR and JFK attempted to use government centralization as a metaphor for the frontier. JFK did it literally with "The New Frontier". Of course there was no actual new frontier. What JFK meant was that government solutions were the New Frontier of mankind. This same rhetoric was exploited by Obama in his own run, with the addition of marketing his own rise to power as an act of taboo breaking that was appealing to a younger audience.
The Centralizing force is rooted in urban environments because it finds its own natural logic there. 10,000 people living in 1 mile need much more extensive government and can enjoy far fewer freedoms, than 100 people living in 1 mile. Population density breeds centralization. In turns centralization provides a network of services that increases population density. These services require a constant growth in personnel, which helps promote migration and population density. This is an example of how the Centralizing force acts to increase its own concentration, much as a black hole sucks matter inside it.
In the heavy urban environments where the Centralizing forces are based, interdependency seems perfectly natural. By contrast the Expansionistic force promotes independence and individualism, attitudes more typical of the frontier.
In a healthy civilization, the Centralizing force gives the Expansionistic force something to push against... and the Expansionistic force gives the Centralizing force new frontiers to manage and the imagination fuel to dream bigger dreams, instead of wallowing in its own cultural decadence. This Push and Pull process helped make America great, but the loss of a frontier has made the Centralizing force dominant in American government and culture.
And so the Centralizing force is creating a massive pile of government that cannot even afford to fund itself. The free cultural energy is being used to smash taboos, eliminating traditional values, while radicalizing politics. The pitched battle of Red States and Blue States is still weighed in many ways toward the Red States, because Americans are still more Main Street than Broadway, but given enough cultural influence and immigration that will change. As it has already changed dramatically over the last century.
America needs a new frontier. Not Kennedy's New Frontier of social justice, but a frontier where the Expansionistic force can redefine America again. Such frontiers are possible, some require technology, others imagination. But like most living things, America must grow or die. And while the Centralizing force offers a congealing cancerous growth in the middle, it is the Expansionistic force that America needs to revitalize itself once again.
A civilization has two fundamental forces that define its nature. The Centralizing force and the Expansionistic force. The Centralizing force contracts the civilization inward into large and densely packed cities under a centralized government that is always growing larger and more complex. The Expansionistic force by contrast pushes outward into new frontiers that expand the size of the civilization and its sense of self.
The Centralizing force marks the maturity and decline of the civilization. The Expansionistic force represents its youthful vitality and energy. A civilization that can transition from the Centralizing to the Expansionistic has another shot at life. A civilization that has no more frontiers will begin to fossilize into a great centralized mass that becomes unwieldy, decadent and eventually falls.
Where the Centralizing phase is marked by rigid government control, taboo breaking and cultural sophistication, the Expansionistic phase is marked by little government control, strong taboos and an emphasis on religion over culture. The Expansionistic phase mixes together cultures, but in the Centralizing phase, the existing culture is slowly replaced through migration from colonies and less developed parts of the world, drawn to the sophistication and wealth on display there.
This does not only apply to America, it applies equally well to Europe, and to global cultures dating back thousands of years. From the fall of Rome and several Greek city states to the decline and fall of Israel in the Second Temple period, to several Chinese dynasties and even to some degree modern day Japan. A nation without frontiers, only foreign colonies, is a nation without a future. As excess wealth concentrates in a handful of urban centers, decadence and corruption become endemic. The mores and values of the culture begin to implode. Sophistication begins to center on taboo breaking. Taxes increase, the size of government grows to unwieldy levels and foreigners increasingly push out the natives. By the time the actual collapse takes place, the society has already been a shell of itself for centuries.
The important thing to understand is that these two forces help balance out a civilization. The Expansionistic force creates a check on the Centralizing force. If the Centralizing force attempts to impose too much centralization, the frontier rebels against it. That for example is how America was born. Because the Expansionistic force is to some degree a push against the Centralizing force, the energy from these counter-opposing forces keeps a civilization active and vital.
The Centralized civilization needs the frontier, because without that it instead begins to push at cultural frontiers, breaking taboos and destroying its own value system. The youth who might otherwise seek their fortune in wilder and untamed lands, instead become a disruptive social force at home. The frontier might make men and women out of them, but the static homeland and its increasingly centralized authoritarianism instead redirects their freedom seeking into political and social radicalism. Because free cultural energy will always be harnessed, a problem to which the frontier provides a solution.
Without the frontier, there is no check to the Centralizing force which begins the process of contracting the society in on itself. Government becomes both outsized and corrupt. Domestic turmoil increases as government expands. The traditions that created respect for the political and social institutions are wiped away by the cultural turmoil, which increases the probability of coups and violent takeovers. This process feeds on itself until all semblance of civility and law have been lost, submerged beneath the competing aims of struggling factions.
It is also natural, for the Centralizing force to often resent and seek to quash the Expansionistic force. The cultural differences lead the former to label the latter as ignorant backward prudes who are secretly scheming against the government, while the latter view the former as decadent authoritarians taxing them to fund their own corruption. In America, the usual label for this is Blue States vs Red States. In Israel, it's Haifa and Tel Aviv vs the Settlements. In historical Israel that same conflict inspired the story of Chanukah. In historical America, the Revolution.
In present day America, the gradual loss of the frontier, ended any real check on the Centralizing force. But it is incidentally telling that recent populist Republican Presidents like Roland Reagan and George W. Bush attempted to associate themselves with the cowboy culture and the frontier. And Sarah Palin, currently embodying the political spirit of Red State resistance comes from Alaska, the closest thing America still has to a frontier.
This goes all the way back to the start of the Republican party with Abraham Lincoln, billed as the quintessential frontier candidate, who ironically proved to be a centralizing figure instead. But as the Republican party has increasingly become the voice of opposition to the Centralizing force, at least on paper, its candidates and base of support have tended away from the centers of centralization. For the last 50 years, with the exception of the accidental Presidency of Gerald Ford, Republican Presidents have been West Coasters. And every Republican President in the last 78 years was either born or elected from California or Texas.
During that same period, with the exceptions of Bill Clinton and the accidental presidencies of Harry Truman and LBJ, Democratic Presidents have tended to be associated with centralized urban elites. Barack Obama is not the exception to the rule. He picks up on a pattern set by FDR and JFK. Both FDR and JFK attempted to use government centralization as a metaphor for the frontier. JFK did it literally with "The New Frontier". Of course there was no actual new frontier. What JFK meant was that government solutions were the New Frontier of mankind. This same rhetoric was exploited by Obama in his own run, with the addition of marketing his own rise to power as an act of taboo breaking that was appealing to a younger audience.
The Centralizing force is rooted in urban environments because it finds its own natural logic there. 10,000 people living in 1 mile need much more extensive government and can enjoy far fewer freedoms, than 100 people living in 1 mile. Population density breeds centralization. In turns centralization provides a network of services that increases population density. These services require a constant growth in personnel, which helps promote migration and population density. This is an example of how the Centralizing force acts to increase its own concentration, much as a black hole sucks matter inside it.
In the heavy urban environments where the Centralizing forces are based, interdependency seems perfectly natural. By contrast the Expansionistic force promotes independence and individualism, attitudes more typical of the frontier.
In a healthy civilization, the Centralizing force gives the Expansionistic force something to push against... and the Expansionistic force gives the Centralizing force new frontiers to manage and the imagination fuel to dream bigger dreams, instead of wallowing in its own cultural decadence. This Push and Pull process helped make America great, but the loss of a frontier has made the Centralizing force dominant in American government and culture.
And so the Centralizing force is creating a massive pile of government that cannot even afford to fund itself. The free cultural energy is being used to smash taboos, eliminating traditional values, while radicalizing politics. The pitched battle of Red States and Blue States is still weighed in many ways toward the Red States, because Americans are still more Main Street than Broadway, but given enough cultural influence and immigration that will change. As it has already changed dramatically over the last century.
America needs a new frontier. Not Kennedy's New Frontier of social justice, but a frontier where the Expansionistic force can redefine America again. Such frontiers are possible, some require technology, others imagination. But like most living things, America must grow or die. And while the Centralizing force offers a congealing cancerous growth in the middle, it is the Expansionistic force that America needs to revitalize itself once again.
A Critical Race Tale Told by Leftist Idiots Signifying Nothing
A Critical Race Tale Told by Leftist Idiots Signifying Nothing
In 1932, the Folger Shakespeare Library was dedicated on Shakespeare’s birthday with President Herbert Hoover and Robert Frost in attendance. The Library would house the world's largest collection of Shakespeare First Folios, and and hundreds of thousands of volumes gathered across the centuries.
"In almost unbelievable fullness and richness, we assembled books, pamphlets, documents, manuscripts, relics, curios," James Quincy Adams Jr, its first director, wrote. "The library is thus more than a mere library; it is also a museum of the Golden Age of Elizabeth, and a memorial to the influence that Shakespeare has exerted upon the world's culture."
These days, the Folger Shakespeare Library has a new mission. And it isn’t Shakespeare.
After George Floyd died during a confrontation with police, the director of the Folger Shakespeare Library declared that, "the fight against racial injustice is essential to what we do as an institution."
What does Floyd have to do with Shakespeare and what does racism have to do with the Folger Library?
In the Soviet Union or Mao's China, every subject, no matter how abstruse, had to be studied through the lens of Marxism-Leninism or Maoism. Shakespearean characters, according to the Communists, were revolutionary figures, and were trying to solve the "central problems" of a "bourgeois society."
But what the Communists did to Shakespeare was nothing compared to the Folger Library.
The Folger Shakespeare Library, once known for being able to display medieval lutes, classic playbills, and theatrical costumes, is now hosting Critical Race Conversations.
The Critical Race Conversations are the outcome of a formerly respected institution declaring that diversity is "central" to its mission with a focus on race, sexual orientation, and gender identity.
Its current fellows include the likes of Wan-Chuan Kao, who claims to be a "queer medievalist of color" and applies Robin DiAngelo's racist White Fragility tract to characters in Chaucer turning pale.
The Critical Race Conversations are built around Critical Race Theory, a Marxist idea taking root in an institution founded by a Standard Oil executive, which reduces all human society to racial tribalism.
Much like Soviet analyses of Shakespeare, the current crop have nothing to say about the Bard, and, like their Communist counterparts, they don’t especially care about the Bard. Communist academics was roughly divided between censored scholars who knew that the only way they could discuss their favorite subject was by cloaking it in Communist jargon, and hacks who knew that they could get through any topic by reciting clichés about class, bourgeois society, and the inevitable triumph of Communism.
There’s still enough academic freedom that the racialist hacks inevitably fall into the latter category. They don’t know anything about the subjects they’re stomping over and they don’t remotely care. And anyone objecting to the jackboots on the folio will be accused of white privilege, fragility, and racism.
And so, the Folger Shakespeare Library, or its name, currently being used by institution with all the intellectual credibility of a Communist academic explaining that Hamlet was an indictment of capitalism, presented, “The Sound of Whiteness, or Teaching Shakespeare’s ‘Other ‘Race Plays’ in Five Acts.”
What other “race plays” you might be wondering.
One of the two participants in this farce, Jennifer Lynn Stoever is a white woman who writes about hip-hop, and the other, David Sterling Brown, is a Shakespeare critical race studies scholar, who apparently insists that Cleopatra is black and accuses Antony of racism. If you know anything about Greek and Roman history, you officially know more than Dr. David Sterling Brown.
A summary of Brown's lecture includes nonsense like, “Caesar taking advantage of Cleopatra’s black body for profit” and Cleopatra committing suicide to reject "the white supremacy of Caesar".
Brown also denounces the bigotry of Shakespeare critics who failed to hear the “canonization of sexual violence against black men” in the Merchant of Venice. That one might have made even Shakespeare scratch his head since Brown is referring to the Prince of Morocco, the ruler of an Arab country who is described as “tawny”, and whose sexual violence consists of being rejected by Portia. Like all her suitors.
But in Soviet Shakespeare studies, you didn’t need to know anything except that Communism was good and America was evil, in its modern academic counterpart all you have to know is that whiteness is evil and blackness is good, and everything and anything consists of the former oppressing the latter.
Critical race studies in Shakespeare just consists of inventing black characters and their oppression. Paint over Arab and Greek characters as black and the rest of the sophomoric dualism all but writes itself.
Emily Folger, a Shakespeare scholar in her own right, and the wife of the Folger Library's founder, who helped subsidize the building, described the Bard as "one of the wells from which we Americans draw our national thought, our faith and our hope.”
But the Folger Library now aims to teach Americans despair.
The Folger Library's Shakespeare Quarterly, once a good source for scholarly material, is now filled with identity politics detritus like “Aaron, Othello, and Renaissance Refashionings of Race”, and “Beauty and the Beast of Whiteness: Teaching Race and Gender”.
The latter includes a sentence that insists, "we must help initiate discussions of race and whiteness, especially in Renaissance classrooms, where students may least expect it."
The real purpose isn’t Shakespeare: it’s the tedious struggle sessions of political indoctrination.
The dawn of the computer age gave us the term GIGO or Garbage In, Garbage Out. The premise of GIGO was that the process was good, but the material was flawed. Social justice academia reverses the equation. The material may be good as gold, but it always comes out as garbage on the other end because the process is fundamentally bad and all it does is turn everything into bad copies of itself.
Academia has become a system for feeding anything from the body of human knowledge into an idiot fax machine that turns it into racial dualism. The process isn’t analytical, it is, ironically, colonialism.
Take one of America’s national intellectual treasures and the greatest playwright in history, and then colonize them by replacing the richness of their scholarship and ideas with the same generic cant as every other academic field, and what you have is the intellectual equivalent of McDonalds.
Critical race studies has nothing to say about anything outside itself. Its meta-analysis is really an echo chamber and the only thing its lens sees is its own reflection in the mirror. Academics turn to it, not because it might reveal new unexpected insights, but because they know exactly what they’ll get.
A critical race reading of Shakespeare isn’t daring and shocking, as its perpetrators like to pretend, it’s another tedious outpost of the franchise that has gobbled up academia, politics, and the entire culture. Once you know it’s there, it has nothing new to say. It isn’t breaking new ground, but dressing up old pieties in ruffs and hose, or spacesuits, togas, and any other costume that covers its nakedness.
Once upon a time, class readings were provocative and shocking. And then they became as exciting as a Soviet machine shop. What had once been a revolutionary idea had become a set of ossified clichés coming down the assembly line of a totalitarian system justifying its abuses with revolutionary slogans.
The Soviet elite turned to racial critiques to invigorate their political messages. Our own leftist elites likewise turn to racial radicalism every time they sense that their propaganda is growing stale.
They dress up the same old clichés in a racial message in the hope that it will buy them another year.
The Folgers had no children. They collected everything of Shakespeare that they could with the vision of building the Shakespeare Library. And, even out of the ashes of the Depression, it rose. And now, fell.
The Folger Shakespeare Library no longer has anything to say about Shakespeare, but many of the same things to say about race and leftist politics. It offers the same clichés that countless institutions in its vicinity and around the country have on tap at every level making it hopelessly redundant.
An institution about the world’s greatest playwright has a reason to exist, but yet another social justice outpost with Shakespeare’s name on it, a dead white man who must be denounced as a racist, doesn’t. The Folger Shakespeare Library’s lighted fools strut and fret, telling their ideological idiocy, full of sound and fury, but signifying nothing except the destruction of everything that their radical politics touch.
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





