Woke Fascism

The Real Threat to Democracy

Jon Tarr
Disclaimer
This book is based on the author's interpretation of facts publicly available
and represents his personal opinion. Readers should not assume that any
individual mentioned in this book is a fascist. However, the author may
interpret various actions and activities by individuals, groups, and
organizations that he believes, in his considered personal opinion, appear to
the author, as similar to current or historical fascist behavior or statements
or which, again in his opinion, have the effect of inadvertently or
deliberately furthering the “fascist” or “Woke fascist” cause in the United
States or other countries. The reader is responsible for determining whether
or not a given person or organization is actually a fascist or intends harm to
others and is responsible for his or her own behavior or statements to that
effect.
Originally published as The Fascists Next Door: How Woke Fascism and
Progressives are Destroying America
Copyright © 2022 Jon Tarr All rights reserved. ISBN: 979-8-369-
86950-5
121222

FOR LIZZIE AND LISA WITH A LIFETIME

OF GRATITUDE
.

CONTENTS
 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... i
1 AMERICA’S FASCIST MOMENT....................................... 1
2 WHO ARE THE FASCISTS NEXT DOOR?.................... 10
3 THE FASCIST SPECTRUM............................................... 17
4 A QUICK LOOK AT FASCISM IN ACTION ................... 20
5 AMERICA AND REVOLUTION....................................... 26
6 UTOPIAN DREAMS ........................................................... 34
7 FASCISM AND HATE ........................................................ 38
8 CRUSHING THE INDIVIDUAL...................................... 49
9 FASCISM PERVERTS ORIGINAL SIN............................ 55
10 THE WAR ON AMERICAN CULTURE ........................ 59
11 ATTACKING THE ROOTS OF CULTURE................... 66
12 DESTROYING THE RULE OF LAW............................. 82
13 RACE AND FASCISM........................................................ 93
14 RACISM AGAINST SOCIETY.......................................... 99
15 RACISM, REVENGE, AND RETRIBUTION.............. 115
16 BIG TECH CENSORSHIP BY PROXY ........................ 127
17 BIG MEDIA CENSORS AMERICA............................... 141
18 PROPAGANDA: SELLING FASCISM........................... 152
19 THE ATTACK ON CIVIL LIBERTIES ........................ 170
20 MAKING SELF-DEFENSE ILLEGAL ......................... 176
21 SCRAPPING THE SECOND AMENDMENT ............ 185
WOKE FASCISM
22 DISARMING THE POLICE .......................................... 195
23 CHAOS IN THE STREETS ........................................... 207
24 EMERGENCIES AGAINST LIBERTY ........................ 226
25 A CALL TO ACTION...................................................... 240
APPENDIX A: SAMPLE CODE WORDS.......................... 249
APPENDIX B: ABOLITION OF SLAVERY TIMELINE254
APPENDIX C: RITTENHOUSE BASIC FACTS ............. 258
APPENDIX D: WHO IS AN FND...................................... 259
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND READING LIST.......................... 262
SOURCE NOTES................................................................. 265
ABOUT THE AUTHOR...................................................... 279

INTRODUCTION
 Student to professor: "Where has communism ever actually worked? "
Professor: He pauses, smiles, and says, "For a few months in Barcelona
[Spain] in 1936." Student: "Just a few months? If it failed everywhere else,
why try it again?" Professor: "Because if we keep trying, we’ll get it right."
To apply communism is an aspiration; in fact it has never been applied
anywhere; it is really still a utopia. — Alejandro Castro Espin
This bizarre conversation between myself and a Marxist
professor of literature reveals the naivete and complacency of the
progressive movement. In effect, the professor said, "Yes, my Utopian
dreams have failed again and again at great cost in human misery. Yes, I
have learned nothing from those endless failures. Yes, I am willing to
subject countless millions of people to the endless repetition of physical,
social, political, and economic disaster in the name of my personal dream of
justice."
Safe and sound in a comfortable office, it was easy for a tenured, solidly
upper-middle-class professor at an ultra-liberal college to be complacent.
Not that the professor was an evil man. On the contrary, he was intelligent,
well-educated, and a decent person. Yet, he was willing to impose his
personal fantasies by force, if necessary, on the rest of us. In his view,
America was and is a terrible place, and therefore it is mandatory to
fervently pursue the destruction of our country, culture, faith, and history.
As you will see, the professor and a great many others like him are
indispensable enablers of fascism. They are the "Fascists Next Door"
(FND), Americans who knowingly or unwittingly support doctrines that
have generated more human misery and death than any other social or
political system in history. In the hands of ruthless politicians and activists,
people who think like the professor are the bricks and mortar of fascism's
Utopian fantasies. Without these zealous followers, fascism is just another
nasty political theory.
FNDs are strongly committed – emotionally and otherwise – to ideas,
tactics, and goals that are inimical to democracy and liberty. They generally
describe themselves as Democrats, progressives, Marxists, anti-fascists, or
woke. FNDs support or justify ideas and behavior common to fascism.
Most claim to believe in democracy, justice, equality, and so forth, but how
can that be if their values are shaped by the warmed-over features and
poisonous ideals of historical fascism?
 "Woke fascism" is the term I use to describe today's "postmodern"
version of the old fascist "isms" – communism, Nazism, socialism, and
anarchism. Woke-fascist FNDs have adopted many of their predecessors'
core tactics and values, usually without fully understanding the
implications. For example, they are often racist, abhor Western
individualism, despise limits on power, attack civil liberties, and hate the
Constitution and Bill of Rights. They hold their enemies in contempt and
use violence, economic coercion, censorship, deception, and intimidation
against opponents. They undermine democracy, abuse government power,
and increasingly employ the criminal justice system against political
enemies. They are on a quest for absolute control over society and
American culture.
This book documents and exposes Woke fascism's assault on America.
It shows how progressives and left-wing politicians have adopted many of
the strategies and tactics used by Nazis, communists, and other fascists.
Much of this adaptation of fascist ideas stems from a conspiracy of values
among Marxist academics, politicians, activists, and hundreds, even
thousands, of organizations. The gradual infiltration by FNDs of
government, corporations, journalism, media, and education is the result of
decades of activity predicted and encouraged by 20th-century European
Marxists. (See Chapter 10)
What, then, is fascism? The answer is any political party or movement
that rejects virtually all rival social, economic, and cultural values and is
willing to do whatever it takes to dominate society completely. Its goal is to
create and maintain a permanent one-party state. All tactics are acceptable,
including violence, propaganda, racism, mass indoctrination, deception,
secret police, and persecution of opponents. It is Utopian in nature and
promises to rebuild the world as an earthly paradise. Fascism views the
"masses" not as individuals but as groups or classes of people expected to
conform to the party's wishes and support the state without question.
Liberty, freedom, and the rule of law receive little more than lip service.
The party, state, and ruling elites rule supreme. The masses obey.
The various flavors of communism, Nazism, and Italian Fascism, at first
glance, seem very different. However, the supposed differences between
them, which scholars have spent decades emphasizing, are far less
significant than the similarities. Academics claimed Nazism and
communism were dramatically different. They focused on Nazism's racism,
nationalism, and "cooperation" with "capitalism. " Left-wing historians
played down the role of race and nationalism in the Soviet Union. Instead,
they emphasized its seizure of all private property and the imposition of
Marxist-style economics on society. This distinction reflected a desire by
pro-Soviet professors to protect the "good name" of Marxism, which so
many of them use as the basis of their work. Since Nazism was
unquestionably awful, it was necessary to build a protective wall of
scholarship around the Soviet Union and to exaggerate the differences
between the two.
In fact, despite the apparent differences, both systems followed similar
patterns. Both persecuted innocent people for political reasons. The Nazis
exploited racial bias to generate support among voters. Jews were
scapegoats and blamed for everything wrong in the world. The Marxist
Soviet Union targeted wealthy "capitalists" and the middle classes, who
were depicted as evil, selfish exploiters. Communist leaders used relentless
propaganda against their "class" enemies to rally people behind their
oppressive policies. And, like the Nazis, the Soviet Union used race as a
weapon. It conducted massive assaults on various non-Russian minorities,
including Poles, Koreans, Karachays, Volga Germans, Ukrainians, Uzbeks,
Kazaks, and Chechens. These minorities faced executions, imprisonment,
starvation, and brutal treatment that killed thousands or hundreds of
thousands of adults and children.
There were many other similarities. Both systems used secret police to
crush and eliminate political opponents. Both states controlled the national
economy – the Nazis through state capitalism and monopolies, and the
Soviets through the direct seizure of factories, farms, and homes. Both
rigorously censored and controlled journalism, publishing, and all aspects
of culture. Both used education to indoctrinate children and convert them
into politically reliable servants of the state. The list of similarities could go
on, but the point is made for now.
My goal is to identify day-to-day examples of how Woke fascism has
adopted the convenient and useful techniques, tactics, and strategies of
earlier totalitarian parties. I catalog its unapologetic racism, assault on free
speech, violence, Utopian thinking, attack on the rule of law, and the Bill of
Rights. In short, this book is about the war on Americans and American
culture.
 Woke fascism is not a massive, centrally controlled conspiracy but
rather a conspiracy of values shared by most FNDs. Yes, the Democratic
Party has been actively conspiring to undermine elections. Yes, there is a
very real organized political assault on Donald Trump and Republicans.
There is indeed a conspiracy by Democratic politicians, Deep State
officials, and their helpers in Big Tech and the mainstream media. However,
Woke fascism does not have a "Leader" or depend on a small cabal of
hidden revolutionaries issuing orders to highly organized agents. It is an
amorphous political movement of FNDs who have adopted various fascist
behaviors and ideas with the goal of transforming society. Biden is not the
political mastermind of fascism. He is merely the placeholder. Our
president is a political opportunist whose ambition led him to adopt
progressive causes for political reasons. He is a fascist by default, not a true
believer, merely a power-hungry politician.
Few, if any, FNDs, Democrat politicians, corporate big shots, left-wing
professors, or network executives think of themselves as "fascists." Every
progressive and Democrat on earth sincerely believes they are "anti-fascist"
to the core. Still, in my opinion, their behavior and goals tell a different
story. You don't have to call yourself a "fascist" to behave and think like
one. Certainly, some FNDs are hardcore fascists, but many merely "go
along" with Woke fascism without understanding the full implications of its
attack on American democracy and civilization.
It is indeed ironic that Woke fascists accuse Republicans and "MAGA"
voters – all seventy-four million of them – of being fascists. Biden, as a
presidential candidate, promised to "unify" and "heal" America, but since
taking office, he has unleashed the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the
FBI on his political opponents. His notorious Soul of America speech,
delivered during prime time on September 2, 2022, accused half the
American people of being "semi-fascists" and "extremists." The lurid red
lighting and inky black background, complete with menacing Marine
guards, lent a Hitlerian tone to his angry facial expressions and
gesticulations. How ironic that Biden accuses others of being fascist while
he uses the DOJ to persecute political opponents and secretly encourages
Big Tech to censor his rivals!
In August 2022, the FBI conducted the first "raid" on a former president
in US history. The same month, Twitter blocked Libs of Tik Tok, a popular
account that gives people a chance to see the often bizarre and extreme
posts of "liberals. " Also, in August 2022, the CEO of Facebook publicly
admitted to Joe Rogan that he blocked the Hunter Biden laptop story just
before the 2020 election after the FBI warned him to beware of "Russian
disinformation." At almost the same moment, the Democratic governor of
New York publicly called on the five million Republican residents of the
state to move out. In Florida, the Democratic candidate for governor told
millions of Republicans he didn't want their votes. In the summer of 2022,
Google refused to allow Trump's Truth Social website on its platforms.
Meanwhile, some January 6 trespassers have been rotting in jail without
bail, some in solitary confinement, for over a year without trial. These are a
few of the many facts discussed in this book that show clearly that this
country's real fascists are not "MAGA," conservative voters, or
Republicans. The Fascists Next Door are America's authentic homegrown
fascist movement.
This book is based on my interpretation of publicly available facts. It
represents my personal opinion. I do not accuse any individual mentioned
in this book of being fascist except selected politicians. I am not a mind
reader and cannot look into another person's soul. However, I identify
possible activities of individuals, groups, and organizations that, in my
personal opinion, say or do things that appear similar to current or historical
fascist behavior or that, in my opinion, accidentally or perhaps deliberately
help the fascist cause in this country. That, of course, doesn't prove a
particular person or organization is a Woke fascist. It may or may not be my
opinion. The reader is welcome to decide for him or herself.
Anyone who calls out Woke fascism is inevitably subject to the
possibility of personal attacks designed to intimidate, humiliate, and punish.
FNDs feel free to use any imaginable accusation or manufactured evidence
to silence the opposition. In my view, Woke fascism's willingness to employ
intimidation, deception, economic pain, censorship, and occasional violence
confirms their fascism and verifies my analysis of events.
The baseline assumption of this book is that American civilization, its
democracy, Constitution, culture, economic system, and way of life are
utterly superior to any other country larger than a postage stamp. Woke
fascist attacks on American society are a direct assault on the original
concept of the United States as a place where individuals have protected
liberties and an absolute right to have a say in how they are governed. As
Gouverneur Morris, one of the Founders, once said, "the people are the
king" (S1) – not Joe Biden, billionaire political donors, corporate
executives, political activists, The New York Times, BLM, Antifa, or
Marxist professors at Sarah Lawrence College. Democracy, despite the best
efforts of FNDs, is the only form of government worth having, and we need
to protect it.
December 15, 2022
A Word About Notes: notes labeled S1, S2, S3, etc. contain references
for readers who may wish to see where many (but not all) particular facts,
data, or quotes referred to in the text originated.

1 AMERICA’S FASCIST MOMENT

The social and political glue that binds Americans together is under
attack. Officials, courts, and politicians ignore or undermine the
Constitution. Elections are rigged. American history and culture are
relentlessly attacked. Racism has become an official policy. Schoolchildren
are taught contempt for their own country and families. Government and
Big Tech censor and crush dissenting opinions. Our borders are wide open
and virtually undefended. Violent crime is soaring. Worst of all, millions of
Americans openly despise and hate their own country and wish to destroy
it.
How did this happen? Who or what is responsible for this cascade of
national failure circumstances explains this conflict, oppression, and
hypocrisy?
The answer is fascism – perhaps the ugliest, dirtiest word in politics and
history. It is alive and well in the United States, aggressively promoted by
Americans who deliberately, cynically, or naively use it to attack American
society.
This book explores the nature of that attack and reveals how it
systematically attempts to transform our society into a fascist state. We
discuss the behavior and ideas of politicians, leaders, elites, and millions of
ordinary Americans who actively or indirectly support fascism. We show
how progressives, left-wing Democrats, and Woke fascists are attacking
every aspect of American life, from family structure to language.
Everything is under assault. Nothing will survive unless ordinary
Americans fight back.
and disaster? What bizarre set of
extraordinary decline into chaos,
What is Fascism?
This book broadly defines fascism as any political movement that uses a
variety of toxic, often violent tactics to establish a one-party state. Its
purpose is to transform society and culture into an idealized and intolerant
Utopia. Fascism insists on controlling how every citizen should and must
live. It is radical, revolutionary, and utterly intolerant of other ideas.
Fascism is ruthless and uses whatever tactics help it seize and hold on to
power. It coerces society, culture, and ordinary people into compliance with
its Utopian ideals. Democracy, individual liberty, economic freedom, and
normal cultural values are crushed. Fascism is undemocratic and unfree. It
dominates or seeks control of every aspect of life: family structure,
sexuality, economics, education, language, lifestyle, work, and religion. It's
the opposite of everything decent and good in American democracy and
culture.
The Bottom Line
Fascism generally combines six essential elements. First, it is relentlessly
idealistic and is dedicated to transforming society into a Utopia — a sort of
Earthly paradise. Second, it is ruthless and has little or no regard for
whether people want a fascist Utopia or not. It uses force, intimidation,
propaganda, racial hatred, rigged elections, or any other tactic, to get its
way. Third, it deliberately appeals to our darkest, ugliest instincts and
emotions: racism and class hatred. Fourth, it is entirely undemocratic. It
transfers political and social authority to a centrally controlled, powerful
state. Fifth, it treats everyone in society as members of groups or classes
and not as individuals. Sixth, in the long run, it makes life worse for the
average person, usually economically but also psychologically and
emotionally, as individuals are stripped of their humanity, dignity, and
human rights.
1 Fascism is Utopian and Idealistic
Fascism aspires to total control of every aspect of life. It crowds out all
rival systems, tolerates nothing, and is not satisfied until all opposition is
crushed. It imposes its version of Utopia on everyone and everything within
its reach. (The Utopian impulse of fascism is discussed further in Chapter
6.) Fascism always claims the moral high ground. It is a dangerous
combination of idealism, cynicism, and hunger for personal power. Its
followers arrogantly assume they are smarter, more moral, and more sincere
than everyone else.
Consequently, fascists believe their idealized vision of Utopia gives
them the moral right to persuade and force society to accept their goals and
dreams. Their certainty makes them intolerant of others and eager to impose
their values regardless of cost. Fascists disregard the opinions of others.
They lie, censor, intimidate, and use violence to get their way. Deep inside
every fascist, there lurks a Utopian fantasy ready to impose its will on one
and all.
Karl Marx (1818 - 1883), the 19th-century intellectual who invented
modern communism, was convinced that he had discovered the underlying
principles of history. Marx viewed the whole movement of human history
as an inevitable progression from capitalism to a Utopian form of socialism.
He fervently believed socialism would solve all of the problems and
troubles of mankind, but only after a worldwide series of violent
revolutions and civil wars. His followers, revolutionaries like Vladimir
Lenin, Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Fidel Castro, shared his Utopian
fantasies. They were willing and eager to use the many coercive tools of
fascism to turn Marx's dreams into reality — and they did their best (or
worst) to do so. Their Utopian dreams brought war, oppression, and disaster
to dozens of countries.
Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945), the creator of Nazism, and Benito Mussolini
(1883 - 1945), the founder of the Italian Fascist Party, believed they could
run their countries better than anyone else. Like the followers of Marx, they
planned Utopias that would transform and regulate society to match their
vision of reality. Also, like the Marxists, they used many of the same
coercive and violent methods to create their Utopias with disastrous results.
2 Fascists are Ruthless Bullies
The Utopian impulse motivates and justifies a bullying attitude toward
non-believers. Fascists adopt a wide range of coercive measures. They are
ruthless and willing to construct their paradise on the ruins of existing
society. Dedicated fascists have much in common with religious fanatics.
Intoxicated by their self-righteous dreams, they sometimes behave
irrationally. Fascists believe they are fighting to save the world. Therefore,
they are willing to lie, cheat, steal, intimidate, and attack those who stand in
their way.
 Communists (Marxists) are confident that their classless Utopia is
predestined to come into being and will be much better than the world we
live in today. They are convinced that the new Utopian state will be purer,
better, and more righteous than the existing society. The Nazis also were
sure that their Utopian Germanic superstate would last a "thousand years"
and change the history of the world. Italian fascists sought to build a
modern version of the old Roman Empire.
Fascists believe they have the right to impose their will on society. This
narrow-minded, myopic view of the world makes them ready and willing to
use virtually any form of coercion and intimidation needed to build their
Utopia. The end – Utopia — justifies the means.
Like most religious fanatics, fascists don't consider non-believers fully
human – at least until they convert to the new political movement – often
not even then. Dehumanization makes it much easier to adopt the tactics
and weapons characteristic of fascism. Nazis treated Jews as genetically
defective sub-humans. Russian, Chinese, and other communists considered
capitalists and their supporters to be "depraved" "bloodsuckers" hardly
more than animals.
Fascists are bullies. They assume they have the right and privilege to do
whatever it takes to get their way. They deny the rights of individuals,
groups, or organizations to hold competing views or live by other rules.
Fascists want it all. They believe it is their duty and right to transform
society. Your hopes and dreams simply don’t matter. Sounds woke, doesn’t
it?
Hitler used his” Brownshirts” to attack rallies of rival political parties.
These Nazi Party thugs were proud to chase their enemies from the streets.
Lenin (1870 – 1924), the founder of the Soviet Union, felt he had the right,
even the duty, to create a secret police force. Non-communists who resisted
the establishment of a "classless" society were arrested, tortured, and killed.
Joseph Stalin (1878 – 1953) and Mao Zedong (1893 – 1976) did the same
by arresting, torturing, imprisoning, and murdering millions of opponents.
In America, woke progressives attack people who deviate from political
correctness and do their best to ruin their lives. The Biden administration
weaponized the Department of Justice and the FBI against its political
enemies. Big Tech billionaires ban and censor ideas on Covid-19 or politics
different from their own. Black Lives Matter (BLM) leaders encourage
demonstrators and looters to run wild in American cities. Pro-choice
activists openly call for violence against Supreme Court Justices who voted
against Roe v. Wade. Scores of pro-life offices across the country have been
burned or trashed. Looting is legitimized as a form of "reparations." Rioters
pull down statues and attack police. Progressive officials release hundreds
of thousands of felons, rapists, and arsonists from jail in the name of justice.
No bullying outrage, no whim, is out of bounds when Utopia is at stake.
Fascists always feel justified in imposing their will on others.
3 Fascism Appeals to the Basest of Human Emotions
Fascist politicians and intellectuals shamelessly appeal to people's
lowest instincts and feelings. They nurture and encourage hate, envy,
jealousy, and narcissism because ugly emotions help them manipulate their
followers.
Hate is the most powerful negative emotion and always plays a
significant role in the rise and perpetuation of fascism. Fascist leaders use it
relentlessly to manipulate and energize their followers. Hitler and the Nazis
used antisemitism, a virulent form of racism, to excite and energize their
supporters. Jews were scapegoats used to excuse Germany's defeat in World
War One. Communist leaders in the Soviet Union used racial and ethnic
hatred against minority groups like the Cossacks and Volga Germans. The
Chinese Communist Party currently persecutes Tibetans, Moslems, and
Uighurs and encourages racial prejudice against non-Chinese citizens.
American progressives, Democrats, and Woke fascists use racism as their
political weapon of choice. Their racist rhetoric and propaganda targets
whites and Asian Americans. Democratic politicians, corporations,
universities, and schools use racism relentlessly against people because of
their skin color. (Chapter 7 discusses the role of hatred in fascism. Part 3
examines the fascist exploitation of racism.)
4 Fascism Creates an All-Powerful State
Fascism relies on creating a vast and powerful state to crush opposition
and carry out its Utopian program. After seizing power, fascists convert and
expand the existing government structure into a tool capable of bullying
society into submission. The police become the enforcement arm of the
newly created fascist state. Opponents of the regime are arrested,
imprisoned, or otherwise isolated from their followers and friends. High
officials and bureaucrats are replaced by politically reliable followers who
unquestioningly carry out the orders of the fascist leadership. New and
often harsh, even extreme, laws begin the transformation of society. The
goal is a oneparty state.
Hitler began building the Nazi super-state as soon as he was elected in
1933. His followers and allies in the Reichstag (German parliament) forced
through an "Enabling Act" that gave him the authority to rule by decree and
ignore the constitution. He replaced top government officials with hardened
and loyal Nazis. Hitler appointed his closest associate, Hermann Goering,
as head of the largest police force in Germany. Goering Nazified the police
and organized the Gestapo, famous for its brutality and efficiency in
crushing political opposition. The courts lost their independence. Nazi
officials took control of news and other media and imposed censorship.
Hitler outlawed all rival political parties. Within months the rule of law in
Germany was utterly destroyed.
A similar process took place in other fascist countries. Legitimate
governments were taken over or destroyed and replaced by an allpowerful
super-state. In Russia, Lenin and his Communist supporters destroyed the
existing government and replaced it with a politicized state run by the
"Communist Party." The new state, backed by the secret police and military
force, controlled every aspect of society. Millions of political opponents
were eventually arrested, tortured, imprisoned, or shot. The new
government suppressed freedom of speech and the press. Private property
was outlawed. The government nationalized all significant industries and
land. The state banned independent unions. Resistance was crushed.
A remarkably similar process took place in most fascist countries.
Whether fascists seized power by force, as in Russia, China, and Cuba, or
through some quasi-democratic process, as in Italy and Germany, an
oppressive super-state quickly appeared. The new state enforces the edicts
of fascism and crushes political opposition. It supplants civil society
through direct ownership or control of the economy and ends the rule of
law. Existing culture and social practices are abolished and re-constructed
in the name of building the promised communist, socialist, or people's
Utopia. Individual rights are suppressed. Dissent is crushed, and democracy
becomes a sham.
5 There are No "Individuals"
Fascists claim there is no such thing as an "individual." There are
people, of course, but individuals are treated merely as members of a social,
economic, or racial group. Fascists insist that people, except perhaps the top
leaders, have only the rights associated with the group or class to which
they "belong" – Jew, worker, woman, white supremacist, transsexual, black,
and so on. Individuals are nothing but members of a class with as many or
as few rights as government officials dictate. Rights, if granted, originate
with the fascist state, which alters or voids them at will. Individuals within
groups are entirely dependent on the state at all times: the state giveth and
the state taketh away. There are no rights because no one has any
constitutional or legal independence or autonomy. Nothing is permitted to
stand in the way of building the fascist Utopia(s).
America's Founders viewed things differently. In their minds, there was
an implicit social contract between a government and the individuals who
make up society. Each person has what are called "natural rights" that
precede the rights of government and officials. For example, every person,
according to the Founders, has an inherent "right to life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness." The state has no legal right to take that away from its
citizens. As a nation of individuals in a democracy, each person concedes a
portion of his or her natural rights and autonomy to make it possible to have
a government. In return, all enjoy the benefits of a functional and competent
government. But the transfer of rights is limited by a written constitution
that sets reasonable restraints on the power and authority of government and
protects our rights.
By contrast, fascists of all types, communist/Marxist, socialist, Nazi,
woke-progressive, or left-wing Democrats, deny ordinary people individual
rights that restrain the government from imposing its will on society.
Fascists believe only the "Party, " its leaders, and the government have
absolute rights. Their Utopian dreams justify top-down control of society
and the abolition of individual rights. In effect, they tacitly acknowledge the
existence of natural rights but strictly for themselves and privileged
followers.
6 Sooner or Later, the "People" are Worse Off
All fascist states rely on some combination of force, censorship, and
propaganda. There are no exceptions. What does this tell us? Regardless of
whatever limited economic and other benefits fascists eke out for their
oppressed populations, the people always want OUT. A soulless
dictatorship may be able (at times) to improve diet, housing, education, and
other factors, but it will inevitably collapse without relentless, soul-crushing
oppression.
 Fascists always promise a better, happier, and more just society. Leaders
promise "transformative" social and economic change that will —
eventually — solve every problem. In effect, they say, "put us in power,
support our plan, help us crush the opposition, and all will be well. "
Hitler, for example, promised Germans full employment and only
delivered it through massive government spending on armaments which led
to a devastating war. The depression-era economy and standard of living
improved temporarily. The shortterm gains were offset by an oppressive
police state, persecution of minorities, and complete control of arts and
culture. Despite shortterm improvements in lifestyle for the average
German, the Nazi Party relied on force and propaganda to ensure its control
of society. Six years after taking power, Hitler began the Second World
War, which resulted in a catastrophic military defeat that killed millions of
Germans and led to the collapse of his racist "Utopia."
The 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union illustrates how fascism fails to
deliver on the bulk of its promises. The Russian Communists promised
Soviet citizens a dramatically better life. Their seizure of political power by
force (1917) led to a bloody, three-year civil war that killed millions. There
were limited improvements in education and housing in the early years. On
the other hand, the secret police state crushed individual rights. Inefficient
collective farming replaced private farmers and led to severe food shortages
and famines that killed millions. Food was sometimes so scarce that the
government enacted special laws to prevent farmhands from stealing a few
ears of corn for their starving families. At least 5,000 people were executed
for stealing small quantities of grain. During the 1930s and 1940s, industrial
workers were subjected to criminal penalties for laziness, poor work, and
tardiness. (S3) Workers who showed up late too often were sent to prison.
Most workers lived in crowded conditions in communal apartments with
other families. By 1976, the Soviet standard of living was one-third of the
capitalist US and about half that of France and West Germany. (S4)
After decades of social malaise and economic stagnation, a new Soviet
leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, decided that the only way to revive the country
was to end the police state and make socialism more efficient. Gorbachev,
however, was hopelessly naive. He completely underestimated how
thoroughly ordinary people despised communist rule. After seventy years of
communist fascism, the Soviet Union collapsed. Sooner or later, people
always want out of fascism.
 Fascism: All the Same?
This book focuses on the similarities between various forms of what used to
be called "totalitarianism" – an all-powerful Utopian state that crushes
individual freedom and tolerates no dissent. Oldtime fascism/Nazism and
communism/socialism are two sides of the same totalitarian coin. The
optics and words on each side may look different, but they are essentially
the same beneath the surface. In fact, they have a great deal more in
common than they have differences.
Fascism communism/socialism. Stripped of academic nit-picking, their
impact on individuals is fundamentally similar. Both utilize virtually the
same methods, tactics, and strategies directed at essentially the same goal –
power. Arguments over their different Utopian dreams of class warfare and
racism are useless. Why argue about the unattainable? The real issue is
what fascism does before and after gaining control over a country. Once
fascism is in power, the fate of individuals is grim. Call it communist, Nazi,
fascist, socialist, Marxist, progressive, or woke; in the end, it produces vast
amounts of misery and far less good than promised.
The term fascism originally referred to the "Fascist Party," founded in the
early 20th century by dictator Benito Mussolini of Italy. In this book, we use
the terms "fascism" and "fascists" more globally to describe political
movements seeking to build a comprehensive Utopian state in the name of
empowering the "people." This book focuses on the similarities between
communism, socialism, Nazism, and Italian Fascism. We show how many
of their shared ideas, tactics, and goals play an essential role in the anti-
American activities of progressives, Marxists, left-wing Democrats, and the
woke movement. The question is, who are America's fascists?
and Nazism are not significantly different from

2 WHO ARE THE FASCISTS NEXT DOOR?

Fascism has a terrible reputation, and therefore, few people would ever
own up to being "fascist." Yet millions of Americans fervently support
fascist tactics and goals. These are the same people who want to punish
conservatives and libertarians for exercising their constitutional rights to
free speech. They are comfortable with the public humiliation of hundreds
of thousands of working Americans by race-baiting consultants for the
crime of being white. They practice left-wing antisemitism and blandly
accept anti-white racism as normal and desirable.
The same people applaud Biden administration officials who consider
Republicans and Trump supporters criminals in need of "re-education."
Millions of progressives and woke Americans fanatically endorse the fascist
radicalization of society, law, and government. These are the "Fascists Next
Door" (FND). They are the people who are tearing America apart.
The assault on American society is not just about politicians, activists,
and college professors promoting extremist ideology; it is about many
Americans who actively or passively support the war on American culture.
Fascism is about behavior, not labels or namecalling. It's about the
intolerance motivating progressive fascism. Riots, election rigging,
violence, censorship, and cancel culture are examples of behaviors that
have become familiar to most Americans since 2020. Our home-grown
fascists act out and support behaviors pioneered by the totalitarian excesses
of the 20th century.
Fascism is not always obvious – at least at first. Hitler and the Nazis
usually come to mind when people think of fascism, but in 21st-century
America, fascism is not always so straightforward. Few people are "card-
carrying," easily categorized fascists. Many, probably most, supporters of
fascist ideas don't understand that their belief system is totalitarian. They
may not grasp the implications of their ideas and behavior. Germans who
supported the Nazis failed to recognize the essential evil of their political
views. Today, many Americans are equally blind to the implications of their
support for American fascism. Regardless of what they call themselves,
progressives, left-wing Democrats, and "woke" Americans are hostile to
genuine democracy and freedom. They may not think of themselves as
fascists, but their belief systems tell a different story.
The term "fascism" means the beliefs, actions, and words that promote
the goals of fascists as defined in this book. Wellestablished political terms
like "progressive" and "Democratic Party" have lost their original meaning.
Today the Democratic Party and many of its hard-core supporters and
associated organizations take an arguably fascist position on the economy,
culture, race, and the Constitution. The old "liberal" Democratic Party is
dead and has been replaced by something relatively new –warmed-over
fascism that abhors freedom and liberty. The inner thoughts and motives of
fascist leaders and their supporters may not be obvious, but the change is
real. The result is that one of our two major political parties and many of it
allies have morphed, intentionally or not, into embracing beliefs and
behaviors that are fascist. They would angrily insist on their innocence and
deny the complicity, but their attitudes and ideas are never-the-less fascist in
content and action.
Why, for example, does the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU),
once a strong supporter of the rule of law, oppose rational election laws to
prevent voter fraud? What motivates them to support laws that undermine
democracy beyond all recognition? For example, the ACLU doesn't like
voter identification laws. It argues that the poor, elderly, and minorities
"cannot obtain the underlying documents that are a prerequisite to obtaining
a government-issued photo ID card." (S5) Although it sounds plausible, is it
true that identification is unobtainable? Government ID is generally needed
to drive a car, board an airplane, get medical care, find a job, use food
stamps, cash a check, and buy a beer or a cigarette. If requiring ID is unfair
to minorities for voting, why is it acceptable when buying an alcoholic
beverage or driving a car? The ACLU says it's hard or expensive to get IDs.
If so, why not insist that states issue free voter IDs to low-income or
disabled people?
Why does the ACLU oppose laws that prevent fraudulent voting? Their
position undermines one of the most basic principles of a functioning
democracy – the legal principle of "one man, one vote." Perhaps, as some
argue, the ACLU wants to eliminate voting laws to benefit their progressive
and Democrat allies. They claim they want to ensure minority rights.
Whatever their alleged motives, the effect of their behavior weakens
democracy by encouraging voter fraud on a massive scale. Is that their
intent? Does fascism influence the ACLU? The author cannot answer the
question. What does seem clear is that their behavior, in this case, looks a
great deal closer to fascism than democracy. No democracy can survive
open tolerance of voter fraud. Their support of a policy that undermines
democracy suggests the ACLU, some of its leadership, and many of its
employees may be behaving like FNDs.
So, let's dig a bit deeper. Sometimes fascism is obvious and naive; other
times it is concealed behind lies and misdirection. Sometimes FNDs
embrace fascist ideas while innocently believing, like voters in Nazi
Germany or Fascist Italy, that they are doing something good. Yet, claims of
good intentions, sincere or not, don't excuse fascism. Direct or indirect
support of fascist tactics, goals, and ideals accurately measures whether a
person thinks like a fascist. The more fascist goals and tactics a person
embraces, the more likely they think like a fascist. Americans, comfortable
with fascist goals and tactics, reject democracy and freedom.
Ordinary Americans who accept or excuse one or more of the measures
listed below are behaving like fascists regardless of whatever they call
themselves:
• Undermining the Constitution
• Supporting one-party rule
• Rigging the outcome of elections
• Attacking the rule of law
• Persecuting political rivals
• Intimidating political opponents
• Seizing private property without compensation
• Persecuting people and organizations for their religious beliefs
• Censoring free speech
• De-platforming "politically incorrect" or "extremist" websites
• Race-baiting against political and social opponents
• Persecuting people for political crimes or offenses
• Retaliating against political opponents with threats or violence
• Firing "politically incorrect" people
• Humiliating or stigmatizing Americans for their beliefs
Those are some of the activities contemporary FNDs support. There are
others.
For example, top Democrats are trying to turn America into a de facto
one-party state — perhaps the principal tactical goal of all forms of fascism.
It's an attack on many fronts. Big Tech actively censors political speech on
the internet. Biden ignores wellestablished Federal laws and misuses the
Department of Justice and the FBI to persecute political opponents.
Congressional Democrats plan to eliminate the Senate filibuster and "pack"
the US Supreme Court. Blue state governors and other officials selectively
enforce laws. Corrupt Democratic leaders and wealthy donors who violate
the law are rarely, if ever, prosecuted. Constitutional rights like the First and
Second Amendments are under attack. These are a few of the examples this
book will document in the context of American fascism.
Let's be clear. Left-wing claims that conservatives or Republican
presidents are "fascists" are completely unfounded because the latter do not
behave like fascists or practice the tactics listed above. Likewise, ordinary
liberals (a disappearing breed) who support food for the homeless or free
medical care are not necessarily fascists. Welfare and government programs
are not automatically fascist in origin or intent. Racism, though nasty, is not
fascist unless it is used for political or propaganda purposes by a fascist
party. Supporting or opposing a war or military spending is not fascist.
Hitler was not identifiable as a fascist because he ordered the construction
of the German autobahn highway system. He was a fascist because he used
government power to implement fascist goals and tactics similar to those
listed above.
Government is not inherently fascist. Every society needs some, but not
too much, government to ensure a free, fair, well-ordered, peaceful, and
prosperous society. The abuse of government power is often a sign of
fascism. For example, in April 2021, a California man (and a Democrat)
used the internet to criticize left-wing congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-
Cortez for not being tough enough on important issues. He made no threats
and merely stated his opinion. The Washington DC Police flagged him for
making "threats." A few days later, California State Police detectives
showed up at his door – fascist behavior, pure and simple. (S6) It's not clear
whether Ocasio-Cortez called in a complaint against the offender or
whether DC police took it upon themselves to investigate free speech using
what can only be called "Gestapo" like tactics. Perhaps the police wanted to
please a powerful politician. Perhaps she or someone associated with her
decided to silence a critic. This incident demonstrates how fascism directly
or indirectly acts to suppress political opponents. Behavior is what counts.
One way or another, Washington DC and California police sent a message
to opponents of a powerful fascist politician, open your mouth, and face the
consequences.
Seduction of the Innocent and Naive
Some people support fascist goals or tactics unwittingly or at least naively.
They succumb to the endless drumbeat of fascism in schools, universities,
news programs, and the internet. Awash in a sea of misinformation and
propaganda, they are unable or unwilling to think critically and
independently.
Naive FNDs of this type are gradually seduced into totalitarian thinking,
often without understanding the implications of what they support and
believe. Their mental confusion is the result of relentless media
propaganda, educational malpractice, censorship, and suppression of
controversial information and news. Propaganda works. FNDs blithely
accept the fascist condemnation of traditional democracy and cultural
values. Many claim to support "democracy" but accept it in name only. All
too often, they passively accept the fascist goal of de facto one-party rule
disguised as a two-party democracy. They imagine themselves as open-
minded yet are intolerant of other viewpoints. They blandly accept
governmental coercion as long as it is for a "good cause."
FNDs observe with satisfaction the ruthless persecution of the
"Insurrection" of January 6, 2021, where hundreds of trespassers and a few
actual rioters in the Capital are treated like war criminals. Untroubled, they
don't understand that they may be next as fascism intensifies, as it usually
does.
A shockingly large number of naive FNDs are well-educated. Many
consider themselves and often are the educational "elites" of liberal society.
They are often smart, successful, well-off, and enjoy the privileges that go
along with living in the wealthiest, most prosperous country on earth. Yet
despite their advantages, they adopt the world view of unthinking fascism.
FNDs accept, with little critical thought, many of the basic assumptions of
fascism — hostility to real democracy, contempt for the Constitution, and a
vulnerability to the attractions of racial scapegoating. Even cynical
journalists and businesspeople succumb to the attractions of naive fascism.
Wealth, privilege, and education offer little psychological or moral
protection against the fascism that dominates America's public schools and
universities. The seductions of the cancel culture and the internet are too
strong for many naive FNDs to resist.
The Seducers
Committed FNDs are the heart and soul of American fascism. As a group,
they are a major driving force behind Woke fascism. Unlike naive FNDs,
they usually have a clear idea of what they want. Many self-identify as
"Marxists" rather than use the older, less fashionable terms "communist" or
"Neo-Marxist." Some are anarchists of various flavors who advocate
communal ownership of all property. Still, others, including Senator Bernie
Sanders, call themselves "Democratic Socialists" who believe democracy
means socialism and nothing else. But, as former Soviet agent Whittaker
Chambers observed, "What else is socialism but Communism with the
claws retracted?"
Marxists, in one form or the other, dominate Woke fascism. And all variants
of communism follow the teachings and quasi-religious prophecies of Karl
Marx. In a nutshell, Marxism, and its numerous offshoots, believe in a one-
party state which includes the pretense of democracy, a massive central
government, and confiscation of private property like factories, land, and
housing. Committed FNDs are generally willing to endorse the use of
propaganda, control of public education, and the use of force, if necessary,
to secure power. Their attitude towards education is similar to that of Fidel
Castro (1926 - 2016), founder of Communist Cuba, who remarked, "The
universities are available only to those who share my revolutionary beliefs."
Culturally, their goal is to reconstruct society and culture along extremist
lines.
There are millions of FNDs. Their age, race, origin, or degree of infatuation
with fascist goals and tactics vary widely. Not all are racists, haters, or
violent. Many mean well. Some do not. They share a few unifying ideas.
First, they dislike or even hate the United States and what it represents.
Second, they want to reform or radically reconstruct it according to various
forms of what amount to fascist Utopian ideals. Some even wish to abolish
it. Third, they are extremely intolerant of people and ideas they don't like.
Fourth, they have little real respect for the rights of others.

3 THE FASCIST SPECTRUM

One of the greatest intellectual disasters of our time is the portrayal of
"fascism" as a generically "right-wing" phenomenon. For decades,
academics, intellectuals, and left-wing ideologues condemned Nazism and
Italian Fascism while simultaneously excusing or justifying the dark side of
socialism and communism. Nazi Germany was characterized as purely
"right-wing," ignoring its many similarities to socialism and communism.
Political partisans used right-wing to label Republicans, conservatives, and
libertarians, grouping them on the same alleged political spectrum as Nazis.
The public was taught to think that conservatives and Republicans act like
Nazis and fascists. The media routinely labeled Republican presidents and
leaders as Nazis, Hitlers, or fascists. By contrast, the left-wing media
portrayed progressives, Democrats, socialists, and communists as the good
guys and anti-fascists. This simple-minded logic has been used endlessly in
education and politics to discredit the right and laud the left.
Academic malpractice led to a sustained, long-term effort to cover up
and excuse the massive political oppression and disastrous failures of
socialism and communism. Many left-leaning, often naive (and sometimes
cynical) educators, writers, journalists, and celebrities rationalized,
minimized, excused, and ignored the totalitarian aspects of socialism-
communism. Today, our schools and universities rarely mention the violent,
oppressive dictatorships of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and other famous left
fascists. Instead, students are regaled with tales of the alleged successes of
Castro’s Cuba or the failed Soviet Union.
Ironically, despite relentless disinformation to the contrary, Republicans,
libertarians, and conservatives are actually the natural opponents of Nazism
and fascism. On the other hand, progressives and the Democrat Party have
adopted many of the goals and tactics of hardcore fascism — which this
book documents.
Conservatives and libertarians view government as a necessary evil.
They reject or at least strive to minimize coercion and political deception.
They generally defend the rights of individuals and the rule of law.
Libertarians oppose unlimited government power and go further than
conservatives in defending individual liberty. Conservatives and most
libertarians believe capitalism is the only economic system that protects and
encourages individual liberty. They champion free elections and genuine
democracy. They seek to protect the "People" from arbitrary governmental
power as a matter of conviction. Violence, intimidation, and deception are
rejected. They oppose the idea of a soul-crushing government that seeks
complete control of daily life. It's bizarre that conservatives and libertarians
on the right are unfairly associated with fascists who believe in an all-
powerful state.
Modern-day fascism — communism, socialism, progressivism, and left-
wing Democrats— belong on the same political spectrum as Nazis and old-
fashioned European fascists. The similarities to fascism are far more
important than the differences. They all desire a total expansion of
government authority to mold culture and the economy into their version of
a Utopian ideal. All fascist Utopias share the same fundamental outlook and
goals. The individual serves the state, and the state obeys the wise and
benevolent "leaders."
 In fascism, the state decides who wins and who loses. The state controls
or directs the economy. Officials dictate whether private property is
abolished or severely limited. The people are disarmed, and the government
has a monopoly on both force and political power. There is no rule of law
because the government can change or ignore it at will. A fascist state
exploits selected ethnic, racial, religious, and economic groups as
scapegoats to manipulate public opinion. All forms of fascism use violence,
intimidation, and propaganda, as necessary, to obtain and remain in political
power.
The many similarities in goals and methods of Nazism, fascism,
communism, socialism, and progressive Woke fascism are generally
ignored by Big Media and university intellectuals. The relatively small
differences are exaggerated. Yet, they have a great deal in common.
Consequently, it makes sense to group the various forms of fascism together
on the "Fascist Spectrum, " showing their relative hostility to individual
freedom.
The Fascist Spectrum (below) demonstrates the relative degree of
freedom found in fascist, pre-fascist, and non-fascist countries and parties.
The graph illustrates how the various forms of fascist and non-fascist
political groups, like the Republicans, compare to the increasingly fascist
Democratic Party. For convenience, fascist or unfree countries and
movements appear on the left side. The nonfascists are democratic and free
and appear on the right side. Prefascist parties trending towards fascism are
in the middle of the graph. Fascist oppression increases to the left, and
freedom increases to the right. The relative position of each country,
movement, or party is based on the features of fascism described in Chapter
1.
A glance at the Fascist Spectrum shows the gradual slide of the
Democrats from their traditional role as a liberal, non-fascist political party,
as it existed in 1980, to Woke fascism in 2022. Progressives over the last
decade, especially since 2016, have dragged the Democratic Party into
direct but still somewhat concealed fascism. Contemporary North Korea is
the most extreme and unfree fascist state on earth. Libertarians are the most
freedom-oriented party. Trump and Reagan Republicans are strongly pro-
freedom, but their conservative outlook in specific policy areas like
abortion affects their position on the diagram.
4 A QUICK LOOK AT FASCISM IN ACTION
The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in
others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the
country by means of its corporate, social, and educational institutions, and
all the political, economic, and spiritual forces of the nation, organised in
their respective associations, circulate within the State. — Benito Mussolini
(S315)
The alphabet soup of fascism is confusing at first glance. Millions,
perhaps billions of words, have been written about the various forms of
totalitarian government and its ruling parties. There are many differences in
outlook, doctrine, and organization, but they share essential features as
described earlier in this book. They are generally rivals or even enemies —
Nazis hate communists, who in turn hate Nazis (who doesn’t?). Different
brands of communists hate each other. Anarchists hate them all. However, if
one looks at what these groups have in common, rather than engage in
academic hair-splitting and ideological posturing, their true nature becomes
apparent.
In the early 20th century, most European countries had both fascist and
Communist parties. They remained "crazy" fringe groups until the
catastrophe of World War One (1914 - 1918) brought economic and
political ruin to Russia, Germany, and Europe. Economic and political
disasters opened the door to extremism. The war killed millions and
brought financial ruin and political chaos to most of Europe. The
generalized misery made it easy for communists and fascists to persuade
millions of discontented, unemployed veterans and financially distressed
working and middleclass families to join their ranks. Fascism became
political cancer that metastasized across Europe with disastrous results and
directly led to World War Two (1939 - 1945). Eventually, even as Nazism
and Italian Fascism perished in 1945, communism flourished and spread
until the final collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. We will look at how
they took power, what they did once in control, and how older extremists
compare to our homegrown Woke-fascist movement. The following brief
descriptions provide a little background on some of the worst forms of
fascism.
 The Soviet Union
Communism is the first fascist party to succeed in seizing control of an
entire country. The Russian Communist Party, led by full-time, professional
revolutionary Lenin, seized power by force in 1917 after the virtual collapse
of the old Russian Empire during World War One. It took three years of
bloody civil war and mass murder for the Communist Party to crush its
enemies. The Communists abolished all rival political parties and murdered
or imprisoned every conceivable political opponent. They outlawed private
ownership of land, factories, and businesses and assumed control of every
aspect of the national economy. The educational system was nationalized.
Every institution of higher learning was communized. Government officials
took direct control of all newspapers, magazines, public libraries, and radio
stations. The military and police became political enforcers. The Party
created a secret police force charged with arresting, imprisoning, and
murdering dissenters. A vast network of political prisons was established,
known as the infamous "Gulag." Millions of people were jailed, and
millions more were executed or starved to death. After World War Two, the
Soviet Union went into a long decline. Its inefficient economy and
oppressive political system led to systemic failure during the Cold War
(1946 - 1991) and to its complete collapse.
Fascist Italy
Italy in the 1920s was one of the "winners" of World War One but suffered
heavy casualties and financial difficulties that made it politically unstable.
Mussolini, the founder of the Italian Fascist Party, was a former socialist
newspaper editor and journalist. He organized a militia of followers and
thugs known as the "Blackshirts" — named after their uniforms. Blackshirt
gangs used violence and intimidation to terrorize political opponents, and
voters and kill thousands of people. In 1924, Mussolini and his Fascist
militia "marched" on Rome, Italy's capital, and seized power. Mussolini and
his Fascist Party were not as bloody-minded as Lenin and his Communists,
but they transformed Italy into a fascist state.
Mussolini abolished all rival political parties. Individual freedom
disappeared. The Fascist Party took control of the educational system and
dictated a fascist-friendly curriculum. Fascists controlled the army, police,
government bureaucracies, newspapers, and other media. Private property
was partially nationalized, but the government managed and controlled the
economy. During World War Two, Italy sided with Germany against Britain
and France. (American involvement came later.) After numerous military
defeats, the Italians deposed Mussolini and fascism in 1943, and Italy
gradually became a real democracy once more.
Nazi Germany
Germany collapsed at the end of World War One after military defeat, and
its government was replaced by a weak, constitutional democracy known as
the Weimar Republic. A virtual civil war broke out during the first few
years of its existence. Extremists of every variety schemed, marched, and
fought each other in an effort to seize power. Against all odds, the
unpopular Republic survived the 1920s despite political chaos and
economic collapse. Hitler, after a failed coup attempt in 1923, rose to power
"legally" in 1933 using mass meetings, street violence, and the help of pro-
Nazi news media.
Hitler, leader of the Nazi Party, gradually emerged as Germany’s most
powerful and popular political leader. Hitler and the Nazis won the 1933
elections and immediately began transforming Germany into a fascist state.
Once in charge of the government, Hitler abolished the constitution,
scrapped democracy, and imposed an extreme dictatorship on the country.
The Nazis quickly took over the police and government bureaucracies.
They Nazified the entire educational system, replaced labor unions with
Nazi Party organizations, and rewrote the laws to extend control over all
aspects of German culture, from art to medicine. Rival parties were banned,
opponents arrested, and sent to concentration camps. The Nazis reorganized
all media — radio, newspapers, magazines, movies, publishers, theater, and
sports — and silenced all opposition. Private property though not abolished,
was brought firmly under the influence and control of the government.
Property owned by rivals, especially Jews, was seized without
compensation and used by the Nazi Party. Harsh racial laws were enacted.
Jews, along with Gypsies, the chronically ill, and others, were persecuted
and murdered. Germany rearmed and began World War Two by invading
Poland. After two years of military victories, the tide of war turned against
them, and by 1945 Germany surrendered to the Allies, who occupied the
country and rebuilt German democracy. Six million Jews were murdered,
and another thirty million Europeans died from wounds, injuries, starvation,
and disease during the war.
Communist China
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was founded in the early 1920s with
the help of the Soviet Union. At the time, China was wracked by poverty,
chaos, and civil war, which gave the CCP its chance to grow and develop a
power base. The Party grew rapidly. By the 1930s, it was an important
player in the struggle for political power. For tactical reasons, the CCP
cooperated with its rival, the Kuomintang (Chinese Nationalist Party), for
several years, but the relationship quickly deteriorated. Nationalists,
Communist guerrillas control of several remote provinces and built a
Soviet-style ministate. During World War Two, the Communists used these
areas as a power base, and after a long civil war, the Nationalists were
driven from the country (1949). China became a Communist dictatorship.
Unlike Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, the Communist victory in China
was a military operation. Fundamental changes took place after the CCP
assumed power. Mao and his followers utterly transformed China. Private
ownership of land was phased out. Mao reorganized all agricultural land as
Soviet-style collective farms where individual farmers owned nothing and
merely worked the land. The process of collectivizing the farms led to the
murder of at least one million landlords and their families. Communist
officials "invited" business owners to ask the government to assume control
of their companies – or else. Privately owned stores, factories, and other
enterprises transitioned to government ownership. The state reorganized
and expanded the educational system imposing strict "content" control to
ensure children grew up supporting the CCP. Communist-approved social
changes replaced traditional Chinese culture and religion.
Government bureaucrats took control of the entire economy. Following the
Soviet model, "Five Year Plans," imposed top-down control on all aspects
of the Chinese economy. Mao ordered a dramatic "Great Leap Forward"
program of industrialization, which failed disastrously. Government control
of agriculture resulted in a Initially defeated by the under Mao Zedong
seized severe rural famine that killed at least thirty million people.
The country gradually recovered from these disasters, but a few years later,
Mao began the "Cultural Revolution" (1966 - 1976) to destroy any
"remnants" of capitalism and pre-communist culture. In 1966, Mao
encouraged students and workers to publicly humiliate and intimidate
teachers, professors, journalists, managers, and authority figures to force
them to "confess" their "errors." Even senior CCP officials became victims.
This was "cancel culture" on a scale that our Woke fascists must secretly
envy. Historians estimate that over a million Chinese people were killed
during the Cultural Revolution.
After Mao's death, China gradually recovered and eventually adopted a new
model. The CCP retained control of the state while allowing capitalist
methods to create wealth. Today, the CCP still imprisons or executes
political opponents or rivals of the government. "Undesirable" minorities
are actively persecuted and imprisoned. The CCP rents out slave labor to
big international corporations (many run by progressive CEOs) in the US
and elsewhere. Civil liberties like freedom of speech, freedom of the press,
the right to protest, free elections, and the rule of law do not exist.
These historical examples of fascism in power share some common
underlying themes:
1 No Respect for Human Rights or Liberty
The first is the ruthless indifference to human rights that Americans (at
least until recently) have taken for granted. The right to vote, speak, write,
worship, own a business, own a gun, and live freely are subject to arbitrary
governmental authority. Fascists despise individual liberty as a political
obstacle to their power. Secret police forces keep people in line. Every
fascist state has its own version: Germany had the Gestapo, Italy the
OVRA, and the Soviets the KGB. Today, China has the Ministry of State
Security.
2 All-Powerful, Centralized State
Second, political, administrative, law-making, and police power is
centralized in an all-powerful state. The rulers of the state are the source of
all authority. They are not legitimately elected. Elections, if held, are merely
a sham. The duty of a citizen is to obey and enthusiastically support the
party or at least passively accept detailed external control by government
authorities.
3 Scapegoats, Racism, and Identity Politics
Third, fascist states use identity politics as a political and cultural
weapon to scapegoat selected groups. Racial groups, like Jews, Slavs,
Uighurs, and many others, are persecuted. Hate is a powerful way to control
or motivate the "masses." Fascists always have a favored racial or economic
group, and a targeted victim group. Nazi Germany singled out Jews for
persecution and passed laws that favored "full-blooded" Germans. China
currently gives ethnic Chinese racial preferences while brutally maltreating
Tibetans and Uighurs. The Soviet Union systematically oppressed non-
Russians and persecuted "class enemies" in favor of "proletarians"
(industrial workers).
4 Intimidation and Violence Against Citizens
Fourth, fascists use violence and intimidation to gain and keep power.
Once in control, fascist parties resort to various forms of police — secret
and otherwise — to dominate and intimidate ordinary citizens. In Germany
and Italy, well-organized party militias, Nazi Brownshirts and Fascist
Blackshirts terrorized political opponents and voters. Communists in
Russia, China, and Cuba armed and organized military forces to defeat
existing governments and impose their will on the country.
5 Complete Control of Culture and Society
Fifth, fascist states claim the absolute right to control all aspects of the
economy and culture. Leaders use censorship, force, intimidation,
propaganda, economic pressure, and the media to shape society. The state
uses its power to determine fundamental human values and uses its
influence and authority to ensure ordinary citizens obey the rules. As we
will see, America's progressives, homegrown communists, and Woke
fascists are ready and willing to adopt many of the methods of their fascist
predecessors. They appear increasingly willing to use some or all of these
tactics in their quest for absolute political power.

5 AMERICA AND REVOLUTION

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose
our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. — Abraham
Lincoln
All forms of fascism are revolutionary, but not all revolutions are
fascist. The American Revolution replaced a distant English monarchy with
a republic — a truly revolutionary change. America became a democracy
without a hereditary aristocracy or king. The new government protected
liberty without scrapping America’s economy and essential culture. Daily
life changed little. Families remained the center of social life. Farmers still
plowed their fields. Shopkeepers tended their shop counters. The economic
system focused on America rather than Britain. America became
fundamentally open and free of government coercion. No secret police here.
 Fascist revolutions always decrease liberty. Nothing remains the same.
Fascism radically alters or destroys existing political and social culture
arrangements beyond recognition. An authoritarian state replaces
democracy and social order. The lives of ordinary people become harsher
and more restricted. Fascism transforms the economy and curtails the right
of individuals to make independent financial decisions. The government
seizes private property or takes effective control of business and industry.
Unions lose the right to strike and disappear. Education may sometimes be
cheaper or more accessible, but its goal becomes churning out obedient
citizens of the state.
Fascism converts the arts, media, science, journalism, and entertainment
into servants of the state. Even the most fundamental relations between
people and families may be altered dramatically. In Nazi Germany, virtually
all older children were enrolled in the Hitler Youth Movement and
indoctrinated into Nazi political and social culture. German public
education aimed at producing fascists who accepted the dreadful ideology
of Nazism regardless of parental influence. Carefully indoctrinated young
Nazis made obedient citizens and excellent cannon fodder for Hitler's wars.
In America today, fascism in schools and higher education downgrades the
traditional curriculum in an effort to indoctrinate children into rejecting
their own heritage, families, sexuality, and democracy. Fascism seeks to
undermine and transform most aspects of social and cultural life to turn
society into a permanent fascist Utopia — the primary goal of every fascist
revolution – our own included.
A revolution in the fascist sense relies on tactics that use violence,
coercion, and propaganda to overpower existing civil society and alter
cultural practices and values. A fascist revolution is a radical attempt to
obliterate or transform all aspects of society from top to bottom. Naturally,
there is resistance. Fascists have many ways to coerce, intimidate, deceive,
and sometimes incentivize citizens into accepting the new culture —
although people usually have little choice — that, after all, is the point.
Revolutionary Assault on American Society
Top leaders of fascist movements invariably consider themselves
revolutionaries. Hitler viewed himself as the leader of the "National
Socialist Revolution." Lenin, the founder of the Soviet Union, considered
the greatest theoretician of revolutionary tactics of all time, called himself a
"professional revolutionary." Karl Marx thought of himself as a
revolutionary who created modern communism. Marx viewed radical
revolution as the basis of change. Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Castro, and other
dictators considered themselves, first and foremost, revolutionaries
dedicated to overthrowing traditional "bourgeois" society. They sought to
upend social values in the name of social justice and coincidentally
obtained supreme political power over their respective societies for
themselves.
Progressives use fascist revolutionary tactics in their attempt to radically
transform American society, culture, and even racial composition. Until
2020, they relied more on "constitutional means" than earlier fascists. In
2019, progressives and Democrats adopted a broad range of fascist tactics
to defeat President Trump and traditional society. They abandoned their
formerly mild political tactics and adopted revolutionary techniques
employed by Hitler and Mussolini. Specifically, they used BLM and Antifa
to violently disrupt civil society and governance using the pretext of
"racism." Progressive governors and politicians in many states used the
Covid19 pandemic to crack down on constitutional liberties. Freedom of
association, worship, travel, commerce, and even free speech were
curtailed. Millions of Americans found the emergency lockdown
indefinitely extended, often for dubious scientific reasons. People trapped at
home witnessed a vast nationwide orgy of violence and protest unleashed
by BLM with the connivance of government officials and biased news
media. Progressives unleashed a flood of race-baiting. They used race to
justify broad attacks on American culture in a deliberate effort to disorient
and intimidate ordinary citizens. As in so many other revolutions, civil
society seemed on the edge of collapse. Many Americans were cowed,
intimidated, or guilted into silence.
Like Hitler, progressives in 2020-2021 mixed constitutional means — such
as elections — with street violence, propaganda, and mass demonstrations.
Hitler's rise to power relied on "constitutional" means like elections
combined with intimidation, censorship, tireless race-baiting, and
propaganda. Since a direct, violent coup d'etat against the state was unlikely
to succeed, he sought control of the state through the electoral process.
Once elected, the Nazis planned to subvert the "forces of law and order"
and dispose of elections once and for all. Here is what Hitler said about his
constitutional revolution:
 The National Socialist movement in this state seeks its goal by using
constitutional means. The Constitution determines our methods, but not the
goal. We will use constitutional ways to achieve the relevant majorities in
the legislative bodies. However, the moment we achieve that goal, we will
mold the state into the shape we hold suitable. (S8)
"Constitutional means" involved winning elections with the help of
street violence, mass demonstrations, censorship, and propaganda to
intimidate opposition voters and encourage Nazi supporters. Hitler's attitude
towards democracy and elections was similar to that of progressive
Democrats in 2020. Their electoral efforts were preceded by BLM riots and
demonstrations that threw political opponents into a state of confusion.
Democrats and progressives took full advantage of Covid-19 to weaken
voter ID laws and convert election day into a virtual election month.
Ironically, in some ways, Democrats in 2020 exceeded Hitler's tactics by
successfully subverting the electoral process itself through legal
manipulations, lawsuits, mail-based voter fraud, and repeat voting by
supporters. They won "battleground states" by manipulating the electoral
process.
Biden and progressives, like Ocasio-Cortez, openly promised to
"transform" (their word) American society from top to bottom. Their
Utopian wish list included:
• Replacing equality under the law with openly racist "equity"
• Strengthening institutional racism (in this case against whites and Asians)
• Packing the US Supreme Court
• Abolishing the Senate filibuster
• Shutting down oil, gas, coal, and nuclear energy
• Eliminating jail sentences for criminals
• Defunding the police
• Eliminating the heterosexual nuclear family
• Opening the border
Perpetual Revolution
The conquest of power is a never-ending process. — Adolf
Hitler (S9)
Fascism's primary revolutionary goal is to hold on to power forever,
literally forever. The political logic of Utopian perfection excludes all rivals
and justifies a perpetual revolution: that which is perfect must be
permanent. More selfishly, fascists are pumped up by success and enjoy
their role as all-powerful masters of society. They cling to power by any
means necessary. History provides numerous examples of fascist leaders
who were dictators for life. Lenin, Stalin, and Brezhnev each ruled the
Soviet Union until they died in office. Hitler was the absolute master of
Nazi Germany until he committed suicide after losing the Second World
War. Mussolini ruled Italy from the early 1920s until overthrown and killed
in 1945 after American and Allied troops conquered the country. Castro, the
self-styled "ultimate leader" of Communist Cuba, reigned for half a century
until forced to retire by ill health in 2008. Kim Il Sung was the Communist
dictator of North Korea from 1948 until he died in 1994. His descendants
have ruled ever since. Mao was the absolute master of Communist China
from 1949 until he died in 1976. Three months after taking office as
President, Joe Biden, age 78, surprised reporters when he announced his
intention to run for a second term
– which, because of his advanced age, amounts to "president for life."
Fascist leaders sincerely believe they can transform society into an
earthly paradise. Since, by definition, a Utopia is a just and perfect society,
it logically should last forever. Revolutionary leaders, in general, and
American progressives, in particular, dismiss dissenting opinions about the
wisdom, practicality, and fairness of their fascist Utopias. Dissent is an
obstacle to be removed. The evils of the past will be banished, and the
masses will live righteously according to fascist ethics and economics. Such
perfection should and must never end. Hitler called his Utopia the
"thousand-year Reich." Every fascist leader views him or herself as a
combination of saint and prophet fighting for the betterment of the human
race — a modern-day Moses leading the people from bondage. Key
supporters and followers seek their share of reflected glory and power.
After Lenin came Stalin, after Biden, who and what?
Perpetual revolution, an endless wandering in the desert like Moses and
the ancient Hebrews, is made necessary, according to fascism, by the
extreme inequity of capitalism and racism. In 1850 Karl Marx wrote:
Our task [is] to make the revolution permanent until all the more or less
propertied classes have been driven from their ruling positions… not only
in one country but in all the leading countries of the world. (S10)
Victory in one country is merely a prelude to carrying the Utopian
struggle to another and then another non-fascist state. This may be why
"globalism" is so dear to the increasingly autocratic rule by Western
political, governmental, and educational elites. Even if the entire world is
communized or Nazified, the battle continues until social and economic
perfection has been attained — which of course, is never.
Decades of "fixing" the injustices of American culture and society didn't
satisfy the left. The 1960s Civil Rights movement that did so much to
correct racism is now utterly rejected by progressives as a mere facade for
more alleged racism. Their goal is not to make the US a better place. Their
purpose is to make America into a Globalist Utopia led by an "enlightened"
group of revolutionary academics, Democrat politicians, their allies, and
supporters.
Leon Trotsky (1879 - 1940), a famous and controversial Marxist
revolutionary, wrote about permanent revolution after the failure of the first
Russian Revolution in 1905. (S11) Trotsky, whose writings, like those of
most Marxists, are stuffed with cant and pseudoscience, believed
communism was a worldwide class struggle of workers and peasants
against everybody else. Revolution has to be permanent because it is not
over until the communist idea of Utopia has triumphed worldwide. Just ask
the self-described "trained Marxists" who run BLM.
Chairman Mao, supreme leader of the CCP, made perpetual revolution a
fundamental tenant of the Marxist doctrine he imposed on China. The
Communists took over China in 1949 and spent decades transforming the
country politically, socially, and economically. Once in power, Mao
committed a series of ruinous blunders. His Marxist fantasies about
economics and culture nearly destroyed Chinese society. He extended
Communist influence into every aspect of life with disastrous and bloody
consequences. In 1958, an impatient Mao implemented a centralized
economic plan known as the "Great Leap Forward" in industry and
agriculture. Mao decided to use his own revolutionary ideas to transform
China. He planned to use China's vast labor pool as a cheap substitute for
modern factories, bypassing economic and technological realities. His
policies failed utterly. China was plunged into a financial and agricultural
crisis that starved tens of millions of people to death.
Like good revolutionaries and Utopians everywhere, Mao was
undaunted by facts. Thanks to his belief in Marxism (and himself), he
committed one foolish error after another. A few years later (1967) — with
the death of the Great Leap Forward hardly buried — he launched the
catastrophic Cultural Revolution, which resulted in yet another gigantic
debacle. Mao insisted that revolutions must always move forward in a
perpetual "struggle" for Utopian perfection. No backsliding is allowed. Like
sharks, fascist revolutions must always move forward and never stop, or
they drown themselves and society in their own incompetence and
delusions.
Years before Lenin founded the Soviet Union, he wrote that revolutions
need to be led by "experienced revolutionaries and trained professionally."
(S12) He held amateur revolutionaries in contempt. Only ruthless men and
women, steeped in Marxist theory and dogma, could and should lead the
"workers" to victory over their enemies. Perpetual revolution requires
perpetual revolutionaries — people devoid of "bourgeois" values and
culture. Lenin and the Communist Party (then known as "Bolsheviks")
spent years building up a network of dedicated activists inside Russia.
Following ideas suggested by Marx's famous The Communist Manifesto
and Das Capital, Bolsheviks devoted themselves to undermining the
Russian government and society. Their revolutionary tactics included
spreading propaganda, organizing strikes, inciting riots, committing acts of
violence, and raising funds through criminal activities like robbery and
extortion. They made little progress until Russian society was engulfed by
disastrous defeat in World War One. It took a terrible crisis to propel the
Bolsheviks into power. Is it a coincidence that the progressive electoral
victory in 2020 took place during America's Covid-19 and BLM crisis?
America's Perpetual Revolution
Fascist organizations, like Antifa and BLM, view themselves as
professional revolutionaries, more or less along the lines described by
Lenin. News reports suggest wealthy progressive billionaires like George
Soros provided financial help to BLM and Antifa, who in turn allegedly
supplied financial subsidies to a network of activists. In the late summer of
2020, the US government finally realized Antifa, BLM, and other fascist
organizations were allegedly using money donated by wealthy progressives,
craven Fortune 500 companies, and fascist-friendly Democrats to organize
protests and riots. The Federal investigations failed to deal effectively with
the problem. According to published reports, a loose network of
semiprofessional or subsidized, would-be revolutionaries played a role in
many violent and destructive riots.
It hardly matters whether activists call themselves "progressives,"
"anarchists," Antifa, BLM, or "Marxists." Most adopted some mix of fascist
goals and objectives. They all dislike or even hate the US. They want to
transform it into a communist or left-wing anarchist society run by
themselves according to "revolutionary principles."
Our perpetual revolution began in the 1960s. America's progressive
movement slipped into fascism gradually. During the Vietnam War, a new,
more powerful radical left became famous as an offshoot of the anti-war
movement. A split took place. Mainstream liberalism followed its
traditional path, but a radicalized left, friendly to Marxism and totalitarian
ideas, took root. The young radicals of the 1960s and 1970s went into
government and, most dangerously, into universities, where they gradually
gained influence. Violent protest groups, like the Weather Underground,
became the forerunners of Antifa. Black Panthers and other groups spawned
radical black separatism that rejected much of the Civil Rights movement.
Feminism, which began as a legitimate women's rights movement,
gradually morphed into today's highly politicized extremism.
Marxist critiques of American culture were gradually normalized. Liberal
and conservative professors and university administrators, along with their
respect for democratic institutions, fell by the wayside. Academic respect
for the Constitution, the rule of law, free speech, and other liberties
declined. Fascist practices and theories dominated many universities’
English literature, history, and even science departments. Free speech was
attacked and virtually disappeared from many campuses. Conservative
speakers and audiences were shouted down and threatened with violence.
The process was gradual but accelerated as graduating students, raised on a
diet of fascist-friendly ideas, moved into public schools, journalism, media,
and politics. The traditional liberal focus on the rule of law, democracy, and
rational, gradual reform of inequities, and society's problems slowly
perished. The long revolution drove them out of the now utterly radicalized
Democrat Party. President Biden, once a "moderate," became the
opportunistic spokesman for the fascist American left. The perpetual
revolution marches on.

6 UTOPIAN DREAMS
Hope springs eternal in the human breast. — Alexander Pope, An Essay on
Man
 Be very wary of people who declare that they're going to create heaven
on earth, they almost invariably create hell. — François Lelord (S13)
There is a tyranny in the womb of every Utopia. — Bertrand De Jouvenel
(S14)
A "Utopia" is an imaginary society where people live in "a place of
ideal perfection, especially in laws, government, and social conditions." In a
Utopia, everything is perfect. People do the right thing. Leaders are selfless
and wise. Citizens behave with justice and humility. Life is endlessly good
and happy, and evil is defeated and banished forever. The Utopian ideal
appears in religions throughout the world. Christianity has Heaven, Islam
offers Paradise, and the Old Testament recalls the joys of the Garden of
Eden. Utopias are just earthly versions of an idealized society — a "heaven
on earth."
Fascism offers an earthly Utopia for people dissatisfied with the real
world. Leaders and intellectuals honestly believe they can build a version of
heaven on earth. Their Utopia guarantees to banish the evils of class, race,
unfairness, hardship, conflict, and pain forever, but not without
"revolutionary struggle." Naturally, fascist politicians and intellectuals
appoint themselves as the leaders of the new Utopia. Sadly, the earthly
Utopias offered by Nazis, communists, progressives, and other fascists
always seem to result in violence, oppression, disruption, economic
collapse, and misery. Fascism invariably produces a hellish dystopia.
Previous failures never deter future generations from trying to get it right
next time — which is why Marxist English professors never learn anything
important from history.
The psychological appeal of Utopia is based on the very human desire
to return to our youth. Childhood is the hidden psychological prototype of
Utopia in which parents assume the burdens and troubles of daily life while
children obey and live without worry or fear. Parents protect their helpless
children from the real world. They create a safe space and defend against
pain, frustration, and anxiety. Though we grow up and leave our infantile
paradise behind, the vague memories of those happy days remain. The
memories may be half-forgotten, but the deep impressions of our infantile
Utopia influence our grown-up thoughts, relationships, expectations,
emotions, ideas, and – dangerously – our politics.
Ironically, the idyllic fantasy of a return to the bliss of early life is an
essential factor in the origin of fascism — an ideology that, in effect,
promises a return to that happy time. The Utopian urge is a repeat of our
infantile desire to return to the safety of parents and home—even a return to
the womb. This is what various forms of fascism offer us.
Karl Marx promised followers that a violent revolution and struggle
between economic groups would create an earthly paradise ruled by the
downtrodden. The evil capitalists and their supporters will be eliminated.
The government will "wither away." People will get along and do the right
thing. Everyone will be a good communist and have enough of whatever
they need. Social and economic problems, at last, will be solved. Like
children, the people will all live in harmony with a boundless future of
opportunity and happiness. A socialist Utopia forever. Well, not quite; the
Soviet Union lasted about 70 years, killed, persecuted, and terrorized
millions of its citizens, and eventually collapsed.
Progressives, Marxists, socialists, anarchists, and BLM make similar
claims. They believe we live in a time of rampant economic and racial evil.
America is supposedly in a period of class conflict and struggles against
"systemic racism." The revolutionary attitude is almost biblical in tone. The
old system will be destroyed. Justice will prevail. America will be
"transformed." The poor must be raised up, and the rich and "white
privilege" defeated. The new society will resolve all of mankind's problems.
Fascism will replace mom and dad. The people will be taken care of from
the cradle to the grave by the government. There will be an endless future
of justice and harmony. Everyone will be treated fairly and have plenty to
eat, free education, a car to drive, free money, and cheap cell phone service.
No one will have to work, and everybody will live happily ever after. So
they think.
Hitler also offered an earthly Utopia. He promised that the Nazi Party
would rise to power after a period of struggle to unite Germany. The people
(the "Volk") will be purged of Jews and other undesirables. Germany will
become rich and powerful. All social and economic problems will be
solved. The Volk will live together in harmony and peace as masters of the
universe. Every German's needs and desires will be fulfilled by a benign
and all-knowing state that would last "a thousand years." It lasted twelve
(1933 to 1945).
All fascist Utopian fantasies are fundamentally alike. Essentially, there
is a period of struggle against the forces of evil — a heroic battle against an
unjust society. The dominant enemies, capitalists in the case of communists,
Jews per the Nazis, non-revolutionary "white" Americans, and Trump
followers, will be crushed. Communists, Nazis, progressives, or socialists
will lead the people to victory. Society will be transformed by wise, benign,
and allknowing leaders, and the old ways will be cast out forever. A
superpowerful global state will create an earthly paradise run by wise,
parent-like leaders and selfless bureaucrats.
Inevitably, the psychology of Utopia is based on the infantile model of
parents taking care of children. Leaders of a fascist state assume the role of
parents. They take responsibility for caring for their children — the
ordinary people fascists call the "masses," "workers," "full-blooded"
Germans, or "people of color." In return, their childlike followers are
expected to obey their betters enthusiastically and unquestioningly.
Unfortunately, ordinary citizens in fascist states cease to be autonomous
adults. They cede their liberty and individuality to the state. They no longer
take responsibility for their own welfare. In effect, they elect to play the
role of grown-up children. Fascist leaders and their associates are the only
autonomous adults in a fully developed fascist state. In Joe Biden's
America, the adults are progressive and Democrat politicians, Big Tech
CEOs, Wall Street billionaires, media executives, and top government
bureaucrats.
Fascism offers supporters an easy way out of the dilemma of living in a
free society. Sigmund Freud, the founder of modern psychotherapy, wrote,
"most people do not really want freedom because freedom involves
responsibility, and most people are frightened of responsibility." (S15)
Freedom is challenging. Decisions have consequences. Independent
thinking is difficult. Social psychologist Erich Fromm theorized that life in
a free society — making choices and taking responsibility — generates
anxiety. He suggested that the stress of living in a free community makes
some people open to oppressive systems of government. Who could be
more anxious than a woke adult child obsessed with racism, climate change,
and the other carefully constructed woes of the internet generation?
The Utopian model explains fascist psychology, but other influences
exist. On a personal level, fascists have a hunger for power over others.
Some find pleasure in having power for its own sake and enjoy playing
parent to a hapless mob of woke progressives. Fascism offers leaders a
chance to play God. Imagine the inner world of progressive politicians like
California governor Gavin Newsom or New York governor Andrew Cuomo
barking out warnings, orders, and pronouncements during the Covid-19
crisis. Can anyone doubt the soul-satisfying, probably sadistic, pleasure of
commanding obedience from millions of fearful citizens?
Many fascists behave like, and often are, sociopaths. They are attracted
to the opportunity to act out their aggressive impulses and exhibit a lack of
real empathy for others. Fascists are notoriously careless with the lives of
their child followers. Fascism encourages supporters to adopt their leaders'
hostile and hateful attitudes as their own norms. Fascism (both left and
right) normalizes racism, tribalism, economic envy, and violence against the
"other." It dehumanizes followers by encouraging them to release their own
inner aggression and nurtures their lust for power. FNDs act out anger and
aggression encouraged and justified by their leaders and by the relentless
discourse of fascist Utopianism.
Every fascist state, its leaders, and followers imagine constructing a
Utopia where the immoral, old society and its evil ways are swept away
under their leadership. They use whatever methods seem necessary to
accomplish their goal — perversion of the rule of law, verbal and physical
intimidation, violence, propaganda, censorship, government-controlled
education, economic bullying, and so on. Perhaps most importantly, they
"transform" culture according to their Utopian ideals and fantasies – with
generally disastrous results.

7 FASCISM AND HATE

We can and must write in a language which sows among the masses
hate, revulsion, and scorn towards those who disagree with us. — V. I.
Lenin (S316)
We must destroy the Jews wherever we find them. — Hans Frank, Nazi
Governor of occupied Poland (S17)
Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away
its vital unity. Hate destroys a man's sense of values and his objectivity. It
causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to
confuse the true with the false and the false with the true. — Martin Luther
King Jr. (S18)
Fascism, in its purest form, is based on hatred of racial, economic,
religious, and political groups. Hate, directed at one or more social groups,
is always a part of fascism, although specific victim groups vary. Hitler
targeted the Jews. Lenin and Stalin persecuted the bourgeoisie (capitalists)
and the petite bourgeoisie (the comfortable middle class). Woke fascists
direct the bulk of their hate against racial and social groups, mainly the
white middle and working classes and, increasingly, Jews.
Fascist leaders are sincere haters. Their hateful rhetoric is not just
political. Hitler employed virulent antisemitism for political reasons, but he
was also a convinced Jew hater. Long before coming to power, he told Josef
Hell, "If I am ever really in power, the destruction of the Jews will be my
first and most important job." (S19). Marx, referring to the bourgeoisie,
said: "We have no compassion, and we ask no compassion from you. When
our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror." (S20) Mao was a
cold-blooded hater: "It is a very good thing, and a significant one too, to
exterminate the bourgeoisie and capitalism in China." (S21)
Hate is a cynically effective political tool. Fascist leaders use the power
of negative emotions to mobilize their followers. They encourage hatred of
racial, ethnic, political, or class enemies. The intensity of their hate
energizes supporters and motivates them to turn out for protests and
elections and commit acts of violence. On a biological level, hate activates
the "fight or flight" chemistry of the human body. It generates hormones
associated with intense physical exertion or combat. Psychologically, we
tend to have more empathy for a single person than for an anonymous
group of class or racial enemies. Therefore, hate directed against a group
makes it easier to dehumanize individuals for whom we might otherwise
feel some sympathy.
Crowds are more likely than individuals to be swept away by hate and
anger. In large, politically charged groups, ordinary people can be pushed
into committing violent acts. In the summer of 2020, more or less peaceful
BLM demonstrations by day often morphed into violence, arson, and
looting, by night. BLM activists, progressive news organizations, and
Democrat politicians did more than excuse the violence; they encouraged it.
Hitler used similar hate and mob psychology to create a national party
organization ready and willing to employ violence against political
opponents. In the years before coming to power, he organized
approximately 400,000 men as a Nazi Party militia recognizable by their
brown hats, shirts, and swastika armbands. "Brownshirts" marched through
city streets, attacked political enemies, terrorized opponents, and broke up
rival political meetings. For the most part, they were ordinary men with
jobs and families. Yet, organized as a paramilitary militia pumped up by
hateful party rhetoric, they became instrumental in Nazi electoral victories.
Fascists deliberately dehumanize opponents. Constant repetition of
derogatory slurs is a vital tactic that intimidates opponents and puts them on
the defensive. The tactical advantages and political consequences of
dehumanization explain why progressives and Democrats consistently
"homophobes," "sexists," relentless repetition of hateful insults creates a
political and social shorthand that strips subjects of their humanity.
Aggressive political hate rhetoric reduces victims to faceless members of a
"criminal" group. Psychologically, the hated enemy becomes a mere object
rather than an authentic human being. Constant repetition of hateful words
is a form of social conditioning. Words can activate hormones label
opponents as "racists,"
and "climate change deniers." The that stimulate a biological response
that helps leaders or political movements manipulate and control
supporters.
Constant repetition legitimizes code words and phrases that activate a
conditioned response. A code word that activates a strong negative emotion
is a convenient substitute for a reasoned argument based on fact. When
Hitler used the word Jew over and over in his speeches, his followers
reacted emotionally, not logically. Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and other
Democratic leaders do the same thing when they endlessly repeat the term
"white supremacy" in their press conferences and speeches. Examined
logically, hate code words are meaningless tropes stripped of authentic
content. The more often a word is invoked emotionally, the less value it has
as a part of a logical argument. In the hands of a skilled speaker or media
organization, a hate word is merely a "button" unscrupulous politicians and
activists push to generate an emotional response. For example, the term
"racist" has lost most of its explanatory power. It is now used as a general
insult by politicians and media to condemn, intimidate, and smear whole
classes of people. It has become a code word used to invoke a powerful
reaction directed against people who disagree with progressive policies and
goals. That is the likely reason television personalities like Joy Reid use
racist and other code words so freely.
Progressives employ hateful rhetoric to spur protesters into committing
acts of violence and aggression on city streets. BLM leaders, for instance,
inspire their followers by calling police "white supremacists." Insulting
language, repeated over and over by leaders, incites hate in followers.
Protesters act out the hurtful words that their leaders use to arouse
aggression and anger. Hatred against police, coupled with racist dogma,
results in aggressive verbal outbursts; for example, when a black police
officer is called a "n***er!" by hate-crazed protesters. (S22) Hateful speech
and anger often explode into actual violence. Two-thousand police officers
across the country suffered injuries at the hands of angry, hateful protesters
and rioters in BLM demonstrations and riots in 2020.
Every expression of fascist hate is directed toward political or social
groups. They are used as scapegoats for the alleged failures of society.
Hitler, for example, used antisemitism as a tactic to generate support among
millions of ordinary Germans already living on the edge of hate. He
understood that many Germans, especially veterans, were bewildered and
humiliated by their country's collapse at the end of World War One. He took
advantage of historical German antisemitism to accuse Jews of "stabbing
Germany in the back." He claimed Jews were responsible for Germany's
defeat. It was quite easy to use antisemitism to generate political support by
blaming Jews for all the woes Germans had suffered since the war ended.
Antisemitism established a crucial connection between Hitler and
Germany's numerous antisemites, disillusioned veterans, and unemployed
workers. Hate created an emotional link between the leader and his
followers. Hate engaged their active support in elections and on the streets.
Nazi racism morphed into the most extreme form of "ethnic cleansing"
known to mankind – the Holocaust.
Progressives and Democrat politicians rely on hateful rhetoric to
generate support for their programs. Hillary Clinton, running for President
in 2016, condemned Trump supporters as "deplorables," which means:
"deserving of censure or contempt." It seems clear that she was really
saying, "look at those people who disagree with us. They are not really
good human beings. They are not like you and me. Punish them by voting
for me." In 2020 Hillary supported Biden's presidential campaign by
describing Trump supporters as "cowards" and "spineless enablers." In
other words, Trump voters are nearly subhuman, useless, evil people. Let's
get them! Biden jumped on Clinton's "deplorables" bandwagon when, for
instance, just prior to the 2020 election, he angrily called Trump voters
"chumps" and "ugly folks."
 Some readers may object that politicians often use the classic "good guy
— bad guy" approach to pump up their supporters, but fascism goes far
beyond this time-honored political tactic. In the Communist Party, hate was
a defining psychological factor used to generate support for the
"revolution." Lenin and his successor, Josef Stalin, genuinely hated their
"class enemies." Both men were probably psychopaths devoid of the ability
to empathize with others genuinely, yet they certainly knew how to hate.
Stalin, for example, personally read and approved lengthy lists of political
opponents and "wreckers" destined for execution, torture, or imprisonment.
Stalin sometimes wrote notes of encouragement for secret police
interrogators next to the victim's name on the arrest list, such as, "beat, and
beat again." Lenin ruthlessly ordered opponents of the revolution arrested
and murdered by the secret police.
Speaking of murderous hate, progressives periodically "dox" — posting
the location and identity of political opponents on the internet —
Republicans, conservatives, and Trump supporters. In 2022, abortion
supporters sought to intimidate the Supreme Court by publishing online the
addresses of US Supreme Court justices. Angry crowds of Woke fascists
descended on their homes in an obvious attempt to intimidate the Court into
changing its decision on abortion. Doxing is a blatant attempt to intimidate
the opposition with an implicit promise that the doxed will be visited by
"protesters" who may physically harm them or their families if they don't
conform.
In another case, the Lincoln Project, a pro-Democrat political action
committee (PAC), published the names and phone numbers of two attorneys
hired to defend President Trump's legal rights in the post-2020 election. The
PAC posted their photos promising to "make them famous." They vowed to
begin an ad campaign to damage their businesses. Why? It was a clear
warning that translated to: "oppose the Party, and you will get hurt."
Progressive and Democrat leaders are perfectly aware of this trend. They
tacitly encourage supporters to create lists of people for their more
aggressive backers to economically, socially, and perhaps even physically
"beat, and beat again."
Woke fascist and Democrat politician Ocasio-Cortez, who grew up in a
wealthy New York suburb, was more explicit. Shortly after the 2020
election, she rhetorically asked her followers on Twitter: "Is anyone
archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny
their complicity in the future?" Deconstructing this short tweet provides a
look at how fascism works. Political opponents who oppose progressive
goals by exercising their constitutional rights are committing the crime of
opposing fascism. Convinced that Trump supporters are wicked people, she
expects them to slink away and hide the evidence of their malignantly
"complicit" criminal behavior. She obviously thinks they should be
punished in the future if they show their faces again. "Beat and beat again."
Hate empowers political leaders, excites and activates voters, and
intimidates victims. Labels, smears, and personal attacks generate and
intensify hate against political opponents. Accusations lead to blame, which
leads to anger and hatred. Classifying political enemies as criminals,
conspirators, cheats, racists, capitalists, deplorable, chumps, and a thousand
other insults makes it far easier to persuade the gullible and the politically
inclined to embrace racial, social, and economic extremism without a
second thought.
Psychologically, dehumanization makes it easier to justify repressive
measures, persecution, violence, and murder against racial and class
enemies. In October 2020, hate-motivated Biden supporters in New York
City to physically attack a caravan of "Jews for Trump" with rocks and
bottles. Hate makes it easy to reduce the status of targeted groups from
human beings to that of mere animals without rights. Hitler identified Jews,
blacks, Slavs, and other groups of "Untermenschen" (under-person or
subhuman) to be disposed of like cows or sheep. Sub-humans don't have
rights because, from the fascist perspective, they are hardly human. Woke
fascists look at Trump voters the same way.
"Woke" Democrats and progressives routinely express their hatred
openly. Verbal assaults by leaders and celebrities are intended to manipulate
public opinion and encourage a flood of imitators. Verbal attacks against
high-level Republican officeholders model behavior for followers to
emulate. Progressive "trendsetters" and "opinion-makers" set a tone that
legitimizes personal attacks on opponents. The attacks are more than name-
calling; they are a sustained effort to dehumanize the opposition.
Personal attacks by progressive leaders are snowballs rolled down a
mountain that grow into an avalanche of hate. Bernie Sanders publicly
accused Trump of being a "racist," "bigot," "homophobe," and "sexist" —
code words that he fully understands generate "me too" hate among his
followers. It's a common tactic, probably the most common, used by woke
progressives. When they compare Trump and other Republicans to Hitler,
they are not only "trolling,” they are deliberately manipulating their
supporters. The snowball of personal attacks produces an avalanche of hate.
Accusations that Trump is another "Hitler, " "fascist, " "Nazi," or
"Mussolini" produced a vast online response among progressives. A Google
search (October 2020) under "Trump as Hitler" scored 41 million hits. The
same search result for Bush produced 11 million hits. In both cases,
Google's search engine managed, mysteriously, to show first-page search
results that compared Republican presidents to Hitler. A similar search
about Bernie Sanders produced a mere 2 million hits, with the first page hits
criticizing people who compared Sanders to Hitler or Stalin. The same
search for Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell produced
29 million hits, again with all first-page hits comparing him to Hitler. There
is a tendency to excuse hateful words as mere "loudmouthing." Indeed,
many celebrities mouth off about people who disagree with them. The
cumulative effect of hate speech by wellknown politicians, actors, and
media pundits is harmful. It legitimizes and popularizes the introduction of
hateful ideas into mainstream culture. Hate speech normalizes hatred and
anger as acceptable behavior. Hate makes it easier to overcome the norms
of social discourse and replaces talk with violence. Celebrities with large
followings of impressionable fans use their popularity to lower civil
discourse to angry name-calling and personal attacks.
Progressive hate speech about Trump established new levels of vitriol in
American politics. Singer Madonna called Trump a "Nazi" and "sociopath."
She told a cheering audience that she was thinking about "blowing up the
White-house." In 2008, her concerts flashed photos of Republican Senator
John McCain on a giant screen next to pictures of Hitler and African
dictator Robert Mugabe. Kathy Griffin, a comedian, circulated a photo on
the internet of herself holding up Trump's bloody head. Ashley Judd
compared Trump to Hitler and the Devil. Actor Robert De Niro publicly
said he wanted to punch Trump. He compared Trump to "Hitler" and
"Mussolini." Not to be outdone by a mere movie actor, Joe Biden
repeatedly claimed he wanted to beat the hell out of Trump. A message of
hate that some of his followers, unable to attack Trump, turned on Trump
supporters.
Personal attacks generate copycat hate on the internet with realworld
consequences. Trump's White-house Press Secretary Sarah Sanders became
the target of relentless harassment and threats of violence against her
family. Stimulated by progressive hate, she and her family were accosted by
angry protesters in restaurants. People spat on her car and threatened to
kidnap her children. The threats of violence were so credible that she
became the first White House press secretary in history to need Secret
Service protection.
This is not an accidental side-effect of hate speech. It is the reason that
progressives promote hate and encourage violence. Congresswoman
Maxine Waters told a gathering of her supporters, shown on the evening
news across the country, "If you see anybody from that Cabinet [Trump] in
a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out, and
you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they're
not welcome anymore, anywhere." In other words, "get rid of these people."
There is a direct connection between the threats to Sarah Sanders and
Water's hateful rhetoric. Progressives' intimidation and violence on the
street is a deliberate policy that came to fruition in the BLM and Antifa
riots of 2020. "Beat and beat again."
Progressives begin with verbal attacks on leaders like Trump. Inevitably
their copycat supporters turn their hate on ordinary citizens who oppose
their agenda. In a 2008 fundraiser, Obama referred to small-town people
who vote Republican as "bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy
toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-
trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." The progressive
"mainstream" media, as we will see in a later chapter, amplifies the hateful
messages directed at the deplorables. There are countless examples.
Keith Olberman, a former ESPN host, publicly termed President Trump
a "pig" and called his supporters "maggots." (S23) It was a blatant attempt
to classify a whole section of the population, about 75 million voters and
their families, as sub-humans deserving of scorn and contempt. Why,
besides simply venting his animosity, is that important? Olberman wasn't
just venting his spleen. Intentionally or not, he continued a long progressive
tradition of dehumanizing political enemies. Fascism depends on hatred to
generate support and enthusiasm for the cause. No hate, no votes.
Group Hate
Fascism asserts the unlimited right of the state and its leadership to dictate
how people live and think at the group level. It defines our identity and
assigns us to in-groups or out-groups for political reasons. In a fascist state,
individuals have no right to mental, psychological, or legal independence.
(See Chapter 8.) There are no individuals, only groups of subjects acted
upon by the power of the state, its servants, and its supporters.
Hate as an activating political weapon is deeply associated with social,
economic, or racial groups. In-groups are favored by current dogma and fit
neatly into official doctrine. Black Americans, for example, according to
Woke fascism, are an in-group because they are allegedly subjected to
"systemic racism." White Americans are relegated to the out-group because
they are, according to woke thought, collectively responsible for "systemic
racism."
The Fascist state rewards and punishes identifiable groups according to the
doctrine underpinning the current incarnation of fascism. In-groups are
favored or rewarded with special privileges — better jobs, education,
preferential treatment, and even Covid-19 treatments. Out-groups are the
targets of official wrath. They have few rights and are singled out for unfair
or even harsh treatment. Individual qualities, like merit, or actual guilt, are
irrelevant because, from a doctrinal viewpoint, they are all guilty in the eyes
of the state.
In a fascist country, the government decides who has or does not have legal
rights. Leaders decide who gets the benefits of society and who doesn't.
Fascists classify people, according to race, ethnicity, religion, or economic
class, at the expense of the individual. In March 2021, Vermont, for
example, ordered the distribution of Covid-19 vaccines according to skin
color on thinly veiled pretexts of health, but really as an expression of
fascist racism sweeping the country. Progressives push the government to
control fundamental civil rights according to skin color or ethnic group. As
discussed elsewhere in this book, progressives overwhelmingly object to
the concept of racial equality. According to prevailing progressive fascism
— primarily based on Marxist/communist critical race theory (CRT) — the
only way to cure "racism" is to transfer rights from the sinful, guilty
majority to an infinitely worthy minority that supports fascism.
For example, the California state legislature, supported by the media and
wealthy progressives, put a proposition on the November 2020 ballot which
would have repealed equality under the law. It would have allowed state
and local officials to legally hire, promote, and fire employees based on
race and ethnicity, not merit. Racial quotas in employment or college
education would have become legal based on claims of critical race theory.
In the language of Woke fascism, the proposition would have "privileged"
racial preferences over individual rights and merit. Progressive racial
theories of group and historical guilt would have triumphed. Fortunately,
Californians decisively rejected the proposition on election day. So, for the
moment, it is still illegal in California to base hiring and education on race.
However, state officials seem to look the other way when it happens. A law
that officials refuse to enforce is meaningless.
Fascists think in terms of groups. Individuals, with their annoying rights,
have no place. Hitler described the subordinate position of the individual
relative to the "community" (in-group) in Nazi Germany:
[The] community…represents the conquest of individualism… in the sense
of setting the interest of the community above the liberty and the initiative
of the individual. The interests of the community became the regulating
and, if necessary, the commanding factor. (S24)
Fascism demands that individuals willingly subordinate themselves to
the group ethic of the party and fully accept its doctrine — just as
California legislators expected voters to surrender their constitutional rights.
Fascists believe each person in the state belongs to the community as
defined by the leadership. The fascist society demands that every citizen
fully embrace the state's political, economic, and racial policies. Individual
preferences are irrelevant. No exceptions.
The progressive assault on Associate Supreme Court nominee Brett
Kavanaugh is an interesting example of group-think hatred. In 2018,
President Trump nominated conservative constitutionalist Brett Kavanaugh
to the Supreme Court. The Senate confirmation hearing that followed
provided a sad and alarming example of how fascist-style group thinking is
imposed on and happily accepted by, rank and file FNDs.
Angry Senate Democrats tried to block Kavanaugh's nomination. They
subjected him to hours of grueling personal attacks for the unforgivable
crime of being a conservative. They supported their attack by dredging up
an unproven allegation of sexual misconduct as a teenager. Progressive
groups marshaled thousands of zealous protesters outside of the Senate
Office Building. Senate Democrats circumvented security by inviting angry
crowds into the building as official "guests." Once inside, activists gathered
protesters into small, docile groups ready for indoctrination. Leaders
coached each group, telling protesters what to say while they button-holed
and intimidated Republican senators. Protesters stood obediently and
repeated — word for word — the anti-Kavanaugh mantras they were
taught. (It's all on video.) Willing to surrender all sense of self, protesters
wandered throughout the building, repeating their wellrehearsed diatribes
against Republican senators in elevators and hallways.
In a rare display of spine, Republican senators withstood the hate-filled
attacks on Kavanaugh in the hearing room. They resisted "in your face"
intimidation by FND protesters wandering the halls of the Senate Office
Building. It is easy to believe that only a thin remnant of civility kept the
protests from morphing into violence. In the age of Woke fascism, civility
and restraints on hate have evaporated. Lenin's eager endorsement of hatred
and scorn (quoted at the start of this chapter) has triumphed, for the
moment, over Martin Luther King's diagnosis of hate as "unchecked
cancer."

8 CRUSHING THE INDIVIDUAL

You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative
and independence. — Abraham Lincoln
Marching kills thoughts. Marching makes an end of individuality. — Adolf
Hitler
Fascism reaffirms the State as the true reality of the individual. — Benito
Mussolini
Whatever crushes individuality is despotism. — John Stuart Mill
The main reason why so many people in power have always disliked
individualism is because it is individualists who are ever keenest to prevent
the abuse of authority. — Margaret Thatcher (S25)
In a true democracy, an "individual” is treated as a rational person able
to make his or her own basic life decisions within the context of a free
society. The idea of "individualism" provides every person with enough
independence to live life according to his or her own needs and desires. The
Founders believed ordinary citizens have a natural right to "life, liberty, and
the pursuit of happiness” as individuals, not as cogs in the wheel of a fascist
society. People are "free" when individuals exercise their inherent "natural"
right to make decisions with the absolute minimum of government
interference. In a society without freedom of speech, an individual cannot
make rational choices and decisions. And, without liberties like the right to
vote, self-defense, economic freedom, and natural rights, democracy is
merely a sham.
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were explicitly created to protect
natural rights and individual liberty. Without these safeguards, individuals
are vulnerable to persecution and exploitation by the government or its
agents. They become subjects of the state and lose their individual identity.
Fascists don't recognize individuals as having "natural rights." Under
fascism, individuals disappear and are merged into faceless masses. They
are lumped into groups and permitted or denied "privileges” based on
political status, race, and other characteristics.
Fascism is an extreme form of collectivism that limits personal liberty
and puts the officially approved community first in all things. Marx, a left-
wing fascist, claimed, "society does not consist of individuals" but consists
only of the relationships between people and things within the community.
There is no room for individualism in a fascist state.
Progressives object to individualism because it promotes independent
thinking and independent choices – the natural enemies of fascism.
Freethinkers come to their own conclusions and generally desire a chance to
act accordingly while also understanding that each person lives in a larger
society where others also have rights. They want as much latitude as
possible to live their own lives without external control. Adult individuals
don't want the government to act as parents and treat them like children.
Freethinking individuals want to decide for themselves whether to start a
company, get a doctorate, work as a software engineer, have children, attend
church, buy a house, enter politics, give to charity, or just comb beaches.
Freethinkers want and need a culture that empowers their decision-making
with the minimum amount of topdown usurpation of their freedom. If a
person only lives once, why not live according to one's desires rather than
be constrained excessively by arrogant politicians and bureaucrats — or
even worse, by Woke fascists?
The Founders, frequently accused by American fascists as
onedimensional racists, built a government that encourages freedom. A
culture that promotes and honors free thought is, by definition, a place
where individuals have sufficient liberty to act on their own behalf and
make their own decisions. The Founders created the Bill of Rights to
protect freedom because they had lived under a monarchy where most
major decisions were made by a king and aristocrats in faraway England.
They desired a culture that respected individual rights, not control by a
distant and authoritarian government over which they had no influence. The
Constitution and Bill of Rights assume that rational adults want sufficient
liberty from the government to live their own lives within the context of a
free society. The Founders sought freedom without anarchy, government
without top-down coercion, and the right to live as individuals, not as
subjects. The Constitution recognized that individuals also have
responsibilities to society and tried, with considerable success, to balance
rights with duties.
The Logic of Democracy
The best way to protect individual rights is to allow people to participate in
government through honest elections. Democracy gives ordinary people the
right to participate in decision-making rather than live as mere subjects of
external authority. It works best, the Founders realized, when government
power is subdivided into numerous jurisdictions that weaken and restrain
arbitrary government. This is why American democracy is subdivided into
states, counties, cities, and towns. Even the Federal Government itself is
divided into three branches – legislative, executive, and judicial. Multiple
layers of government make two things possible: it restrains the federal
government and allows decision-making at the lowest possible level where
citizens can have a say about how their community or country is run.
In fascist states, the average man and woman are mere subjects without
rights, and elites demand and expect obedience. A constitutional democracy
protects ordinary people from powerhungry fanatics who want to impose
their will on society. Democracy, without cheating or manipulation, is the
cure for Hitler, Mao, and Biden. It can go wrong at times, but only
democracy protects the common man and woman from arbitrary
government and the well-connected. It may do so imperfectly, but it is all
we have to guard our autonomy, rights, and our very lives from politicians,
Woke fascists, Big Tech, oligarchic billionaires, and other predators.
Fascism is "Top Down" and Paternalistic
In the modern world, there are two broad approaches to how governments
interact with ordinary citizens. The best method is an honest democracy that
recognizes and nurtures free-thinking individuals. The worst is a fascist
state that treats adults like children and mere subjects. Society, therefore, is
either organized top-down, where a few leaders make all significant
decisions - or bottom-up, where citizens make their own life decisions and
pursue their own dreams.
Fascism is a top-down system where commands flow from the leadership
down to the subjects. It demands conformity based on a top-down managed
culture that uses coercion, propaganda, and social pressure against
individuals who don't conform. Top-down control gives fascist leaders the
power to mold public opinion and turn individuals into compliant, even
willing subjects. Fascism stops people from thinking for themselves and
forces them to adopt stateapproved values and live as mere subjects without
autonomy.
Fascism is paternalistic (or perhaps maternalistic) in form and function.
Ordinary people are subjects, which according to MerriamWebster, means
they are "placed under authority or control" of others, not themselves.
Leaders are the adults, and ordinary citizens are infantilized subjects frozen
into a perpetual state of childlike dependence. Adults in a fascist state are
children. Grown men and women are forced to conform to the will of their
official "parents." They are subjects expected to think correctly, obey, and
passively accept punishment if they misbehave. Adults in a fascist state are
cheated of their birthright as fully developed human beings.
Paternalistic leaders steal "initiative" and "independence" from their
subjects and even deprive them of the right to raise their own children.
Parents are expected to cooperate as their children's education is taken out
of their hands by the "real" adults. Fascists follow the basic models of
government control of education established by the Soviet Union, Nazi
Germany, and Fascist Italy. All of these states used top-down political
indoctrination in their schools. Parents had no say in how or what their
children were taught. This is precisely what happens today in Communist
Cuba and Communist China. It is also exactly what is being done today in
many places in the US.
In Biden's America, local control of public schools is under attack as never
before. His administration's goal is to transfer control of education from the
states and cities to the Department of Education. Voters are being robbed of
their independence and their right as citizens to have a say in how public
schools are run. Instead, Biden and many school boards consider parents
who speak up as potential domestic terrorists and want to silence and
intimidate critics. Their goal is to ensure all schools, regardless of local
initiatives by parents or voters, churn out cooperative, obedient, politically
indoctrinated children who will blindly vote for the Woke fascist agenda.
 Collectivism Versus Individualism
Collectivism is the centralization and unification of political, economic,
educational, and social power by an all-powerful state. In other words, the
government owns, controls, or dominates every important aspect of life.
Government leaders and officials make all critical decisions with little or no
reference to the preferences or desires of individuals. Individuals are treated
as members of groups with identical characteristics. Favored groups, who
support the regime, enjoy advantages and benefits, while opponents are
penalized. All power resides in the collectivized, top-down state.
All modern forms of fascism are based on governmentsponsored
collectivism. For example, some fascist countries make it illegal to own
private property. In others, private property is tolerated but subject to ever-
increasing indirect exploitation and control. Marxists, like socialists
generally, advocate government ownership of the "means of production,"
like factories, farms, and businesses.
In the Soviet Union, for example, private ownership of businesses,
factories, farms, and the land was banned. The government essentially
owned everything. Today in Communist Cuba, only small "mom and pop"
businesses are permitted; everything else is government-owned. For
decades, private property was illegal in Communist China, whose economy
suffered many setbacks due to the collective ownership of farms and
factories. After multiple disasters, the economic solution adopted by
Chinese leaders was to allow carefully restrained private enterprise and
capitalism to save China's struggling economy — which it did
spectacularly. Currently, private ownership is permitted, often with large
chunks owned by government entities — but in return for this "liberality,"
China remains a one-party state without political freedoms like fair
elections. China's corporations are expected to cooperate with government
control just as America's Big Tech CEOs go out of their way to monitor and
control free speech on the internet for fascist politicians.
Many large American corporations are eager to ingratiate themselves with
the Biden administration. They go to great lengths to slavishly adopt
political positions, many of which are blatantly racist and fascist. During
the 2020 campaign, Senator Bernie Sanders and other self-described
"Democratic Socialists" openly promised to seize large chunks of private
companies without compensation. Sanders explained that seizing large
blocks of stock would "democratize" boards of directors and open
corporations to progressive "reforms." This action would be a step towards
the eventual complete collectivization of business at some future point.
Collectivization is not limited to the economy or public education. For
example, as we will see in a later chapter, "defunding the police" is not
about "fixing" law enforcement. It aims at "standardizing" police according
to Federal guidelines or even creating a new national police force
unresponsive to local control and run from Washington, DC. Defunding
means "collectivizing" the police according to Woke-fascist principles.
One of the first acts by communists and Nazis after seizing power was the
conversion of the army and police into enforcers of the new ruler's political
power. Biden has begun a similar process. One of his first actions as
president was to order an unprecedented "60-day stand-down" by the US
military. The purpose? To indoctrinate the rank and file in the ridiculously
inflated and illusory dangers of "white supremacists," which, according to
progressives, apparently includes 75 million Trump voters, Republicans,
and their families – nearly half the country. The goal is a cynical act of
manipulation to ensure the political "reliability" of the armed forces.
In the fascist or totalitarian sense, collectivism is more than mere
cooperation. All societies practice some degree of cooperative behavior to
accomplish important societal goals like creating armies or collecting taxes.
Fascism goes far beyond rational cooperation. It demands more or less total
commitment and obedience in virtually all aspects of economics, social
behavior, education, entertainment, and so forth.
Woke fascism and cancel culture are contemporary examples of how fascist
coercion deprives people of their humanity. Fascists encourage aggressive,
mass, collective action by followers who are unwilling to think for
themselves. Individual thoughts and opinions are suppressed; collective
thinking is the norm. Leaders and critical supporters determine society's
values and impose them on ordinary people because it gives rulers power,
which is intoxicating, personally satisfying, and financially rewarding.

9 FASCISM PERVERTS ORIGINAL SIN

We’re finally now getting to the point where we’re going to be
addressing the original sin of this country, 400 years old.… slavery and all
the vestiges of it. — Joe Biden speaking at a church in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
 One of the biggest problems in religion and philosophy is how to
account for the existence of evil. If God is good, how can evil exist? Why
isn't the world perfect, like the Garden of Eden? The ancient, Judeo-
Christian answer was the concept of original sin, which asserted that
something terrible was done in the past by our ancestors, Adam and Eve.
Consequently, everyone now alive has an inherited share of guilt or
responsibility for our ancestor's ancient "crime." Thus, Adam and Eve's fall
from grace created guilt in the form of the original sin we all share today.
Christians believe we will always carry that first sin with us in life, no
matter what. Only through faith, good works, and a trip to Heaven will our
original sin be erased.
Ironically, fascism adopts and perverts the basic idea of original sin to
justify Utopian plans for society. Fascists divide people into good and evil
according to arbitrary categories defined by ideology. Those from specific
backgrounds (Jews, whites, capitalists, etc.) are assumed to be inherently
evil, and others (workers, blacks, Hispanics, etc.) intrinsically good.
Identity based on skin color, ethnicity, or family history assigns guilt and
punishment for the supposed sins of collective past crimes. Members of
good groups are blameless and rewarded. The bad are inherently less than
human and deserve persecution.
This perverse version of original sin rationalizes the punishment of
political, class, and racial enemies. Even worse, generational guilt is never
expiated. Every new generation carries its guilt forward and must be
isolated and punished. An extreme example is that of the Communist
regime in North Korea, which uses a "three generations of punishment"
scheme to keep the population in line. If a "crime" is committed, the
criminal and his entirely innocent family may be sent to prison for life.
Future generations are born in prison.
Fascists consider themselves blameless and punish the "guilty" as they
please. Marx, for example, extolled the "working class" as overwhelmingly
good. He defined workers as the innocent victims of capitalism. The
"bourgeoisie" or the well-off were overwhelmingly bad because they were
the capitalist "exploiters" of the workers. They deserved, therefore, to be
destroyed. Progressives and BLM use the same basic logic but in racial
terms. They use CRT, a Marxist theory, to justify labeling and condemning
all "whites" as inherently racist and evil. According to them, whites and
America are loaded down with original sin and must be punished. Black
people, they believe, are free of original sin and must be rewarded. This
approach ties all whites to original sin, making it psychologically and
politically easier to penalize them based entirely on skin color. Fascist
original sin is extreme racism.
Original sin justifies cultural warfare. There are no half-measures when
it comes to culture. Fascism divides the world into "good culture" and "bad
culture." Marxists, for example, believe capitalist culture is evil.
Consequently, all of its economic and cultural paraphernalia, like work
ethic, objectivity, entrepreneurship, banks, and religion, must be eradicated.
Fascism categorizes people by class, race, sex, gender, religion, or belief
system. American fascists want to punish white people, capitalists, police
officers, and countless other original sinners. In the Soviet Union,
Communist China, or Hitler's Germany, original sinners, and their
descendants were persecuted. In the US, so far, you are merely canceled,
fired from your job, publicly humiliated, threatened by angry mobs,
castigated by Democrat politicians, deprived of your civil liberties, and
taxed into near oblivion. Indefinite detention in prison is now a real
possibility, judging by the treatment of "January 6" trespassers who
languished in jail for over a year or more without trial while BLM arsonists
go free.
Original sin also encourages the belief that everything about opponents
is illegitimate. This illegitimacy is permanent and can never be erased. The
Devil and his evil minions must be banished back to hell. It's a significant
source of intolerance of American culture. An unforgivable blood debt. It
helps justify and explain progressive racism directed against whites.
According to DiAngelo:
Nice, white people who really aren't doing anything other than being
nice people are racist. We are complicit with that system. There is no
neutral place. (S26)
This is a way of saying that whites carry with them a major load of
original sin. DiAngelo's book sold nearly 700,000 copies in a few months.
Whatever else it may be, anti-racism is certainly lucrative.
The concept of "white privilege" is based on racist assumptions built on
the fascist interpretation of original sin. Whether someone's ancestors
fought and died to abolish slavery makes no difference. White people are
forever stained like their descendants by their racial origins, no matter how
upright, decently, and honestly, they behave. Progressives believe European
Americans are tainted by their evil history. They believe only the racial
transformation of the US will end the "nightmare" of American colonialism
and oppression. Some want literally to abolish the United States. Hence, the
eagerness to abolish America's borders and flood the country with illegal
aliens.
The same thought process inspires egregious acts of racism like
Pennsylvania's proposed policy of distributing scarce, lifesaving Covid-19
drugs to non-whites first instead of as required by a medical condition. The
New York State Department of Health promoted Hitlerian genetic selection
against whites during the Covid-19 omicron outbreak in early 2022:
Non-white race or Hispanic/Latin considered a risk factor for severe
systemic health and social inequities have contributed to an increased risk
of severe illness and death from Covid. (S27) ethnicity should be
illness longstanding
In Nazi Germany, Jews were denied medical care based on their
ethnicity. How is denying life-saving medications based on skin color
instead of individual need different from slow-motion genocide or ethnic
cleansing? The racially contrived excuse is that minorities are more at risk
than whites of dying. In a later chapter, we will delve into this kind of raw,
unapologetic, and aggressive racism of the left.
Fascism and sympathetic politicians directly employ original sin as a
supposedly unanswerable attack on society. Biden, speaking on the
campaign trail in Kenosha, Wisconsin, wrecked days earlier by BLM riots,
declared, "We're finally now getting to a point [where] we're going to be
addressing the original sin of this country, 400 years old, the original sin of
this country, slavery…" His words were a clear justification of the violence.
In other words, Kenosha deserved its fate because of America's original sin.
The political intent of this statement is obvious. (S28)
The sins (real and alleged) of the past can never be forgiven and aren't –
ever. Fascists use original sin again and again because it gives them
political leverage. Woke fascism considers slavery a debt that will never be
repaid. Each new generation of white Americans is expected to pay for
slavery, a historical event that ended in 1865, often while their own
ancestors lived in foreign lands. A non-fascist might look, for instance, at
the massive bloodletting of the Civil War, fought to abolish slavery, as
"addressing" the "original sin of slavery." Until recently, historians
considered the 600,000 to 700,000 dead in that war as, at the very least, a
large down payment on correcting the wrongs of slavery. The Civil War, the
13th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution, the Civil Rights Acts of
1964 and 1965, Brown versus the Board of Education, racial preferences in
favor of minorities, and $22 trillion in financial aid, are completely
discounted by progressives as unimportant.
America's fascists zealously catalog our country's alleged "sins" on a
daily basis. Historical events are taken out of context and misrepresented.
George Washington and the Founders, who created the modern world's first
authentic democracy, are condemned for the sin of being born in the 18th
century and for not thinking like 21st-century progressives. Sincere efforts
to correct the errors and injustices of the past are ignored, forgotten, and
censored by woke journalists, academics, and museums. Fascists dismiss
the importance of the American economic success that brought one hundred
fifty million immigrants to the US, where they found a better life. Fascism
and forgiveness simply don't go together. Original sin is just too politically
useful.

10 THE WAR ON AMERICAN CULTURE

[We] won’t just rebuild this nation — we’ll transform it. — Joe Biden (S29)
Socialism will triumph by first capturing the culture via infiltration of
schools, universities, churches and the media by transforming the
consciousness of society. — Antonio Gramsci (S30)
Our present political world-view, current in Germany, is based in
general on the idea that creative, culture-creating force must indeed be
attributed to the state. — Adolf Hitler (S31)
The foundation of fascist power and control is a relentless attack on
existing culture. The Democrats use racism to rationalize the sheer scale of
their cultural vandalism. Woke-fascist vandals delegitimize, diminish, and
attack virtually all aspects of American society. They employ a mixture of
theory, propaganda, legal maneuvers, intimidation, threats, and violence to
mold society. It is a deliberate act of intellectual, sometimes physical,
aggression against an open, democratic society and its citizens. Woke
fascism is at war with America.
Revolutionary fascism demands that we revamp every American's
cultural values. No significant vestiges of our culture will be permitted to
continue without adaptation to the new society. All aspects of American
culture are under attack, from objectivity and math to literature and
language, heterosexuality, and even racial composition.
The intellectual roots of fascism's attack on culture come from Karl Marx
and his followers. Marx wrote:
Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against
the existing social and political order of things... They openly declare that
their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing
social conditions. (S32)
Antonio Gramsci (1891 1937), an Italian communist, is probably the
most influential of all modern Marxists. His theories updated and
transformed Marx's failed ideas and questionable doctrines. Gramsci
revamped Marxism from a violent revolutionary movement into something
more sinister and effective. His major contribution to communism is the
idea of attacking capitalism by undermining and taking over its culture.
Gramsci wrote:
In the new order, Socialism will triumph by first capturing the culture
via infiltration of schools, universities, churches and the media by
transforming the consciousness of society. (S33)
This bold idea became the foundation of "Cultural" or "Neo"Marxism.
And it is certainly the foundational principle of the ongoing assault on
indispensable role Nevertheless, many followers of Cultural Marxism are
"deniers" who pretend the perpetual assault doesn't exist. They cover their
tracks by accusing critics of engaging in a "conspiracy theory,"
"antisemitism," or a "post-factual dog-whistle." Anything, rather than admit
the importance of Gramsci's role in the effort to undermine US culture.
(S34)
American culture. Its in progressive-fascist influence plays an
academic circles.
Max Horkheimer, an influential Neo-Marxist widely read by American
academics, predicted:
The Revolution won't happen with guns, rather it will happen
incrementally, year by year, generation by generation. We will gradually
infiltrate their educational institutions and their political offices,
transforming them slowly into Marxist entities... (S35)
The infiltration of society's institutions has been largely achieved. The
Biden administration's Department of Justice, Homeland Security, the
Pentagon, major universities, many local school boards, congressional
Democrats, corporations, and major media outlets have adopted radical
fascist ideas through infiltration. Concepts like critical race theory and
intersectionality, have found a home in government agencies. A general
attack on the Constitution is now mainstream. Fascism is arguably the
dominant voice in American culture and politics today.
Despite their current successes, woke-fascist Utopians are impatient.
Many believe that the fastest route to revolutionary change is overt
coercion, intimidation, and propaganda. This is the reason that a large
number of progressive Democrats support and encourage BLM and Antifa
violence and disruption. They are not satisfied with infiltration. Woke
fascists want to impose their culture on Americans whether they like it or
not. The infiltration of society is an act of will, backed by coercion, not
evolution.
Fascism Attacks Cultural Symbols
Fascists aggressively attack the symbols of a non-fascist society. Symbols
like flags, historical statues, or the national anthem represent our culture.
They inspire and motivate us in peacetime and war. Symbols unite millions
of individuals with common themes that cut across race, sex, and economic
condition.
Fascism wages a relentless war against these unifying symbols, especially
those that help overcome the legacy of racism. They attack and distort key
symbols and social practices that unite and encourage all, or at least most,
Americans. Fascists distort our symbols and seek to replace them with their
own.
Culture can be considered broadly as the common practices and values of
how people in a given society live, work, interact, think, and behave. This
includes "...the beliefs that people hold about reality, the norms that guide
their behavior, the values that orient their moral commitments, or the
symbols through which these beliefs, norms, and values are
communicated." (S36) Culture is about symbols like the flag, music, art,
ethics, law, family life, our understanding of history, social values,
economics, work, politics, and many other factors. Culture defines our roles
as men or women, children or adults, fathers, mothers, employees, and so
forth. Progressives have been actively using Gramsci and Horkheimer's
ideas about the infiltration of society to undermine American culture and its
symbols under our very noses.
The national anthem and flag are two unifying American symbols under
attack. The national anthem inspires Americans and helps them feel a part
of a greater, unified society with common values. When highly paid
professional athletes "take a knee" at a sporting event, they are attacking the
celebration of the anthem that unites or should unite all those present. Their
action converts an edifying moment of shared values into a moment of
anger, doubt, and conflict — which, of course, is the point. Progressives
claim to object to the anthem because it was written by a slave owner
Francis Scott Key, but perhaps their real objection is that Key witnessed,
and was inspired by, the heroic defeat of the British attack on Baltimore
during the War of 1812. The anthem, after all, represents a victory by a
country that many FNDs despise. What is their solution to the anthem
problem? Ban it. Replace it with the song Lean on Me, Imagine, or the
Black National Anthem, as suggested by Democrat James Clyburn, "to help
heal racial wounds." (S37) One might ask how substituting a song about
only one of America's many racial and ethnic groups would "heal racial
wounds?" Even if one accepts the extreme racial claims about the anthem
(which the author does not), how does racism cure racism?
Symbol-breaking plays a significant role in fascism. It attacks existing
symbols and replaces them with new ones emblematic of the "New Order."
Out with the old, in with the new. History is rewritten and distorted to
justify the revolution. Great leaders like Washington and Jefferson are
trashed. In August 2022, the Virginia Department of Washington as
materials. They and many others are reduced from the status of national
heroes to enemies of the people. Historical individuals who are symbols of
accomplishment and virtue are condemned as symbols of racism and other
alleged crimes. Their statues are torn down, and their names are removed
from public buildings and monuments. The symbols of American
civilization must be destroyed or discredited to weaken resistance to
fascism. The complexity and triumphs of American history are reduced to a
squalid set of lies, distortions, and half-truths.
The goal of this mean-spirited retelling of American history is to destroy
the symbols and culture that unify the country. Attacking and
mischaracterizing American history is part of Woke fascism’s attempt to cut
people off from their own culture. It prepares the ground for a fascist
revision of the American story. History is revised Education the "father
proposed removing references to of the country" from educational and
analyzed from a Marxist and fascist perspective. It is used as a weapon to
trash iconic Americans for the crime of not being born in 1990 or 2000.
Washington, Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, and a host of
other famous Americans are systematically condemned for the crime of
being born in another age and behaving accordingly. Eighteenth-century
Americans are denigrated for owning slaves when slavery was legal
worldwide, including in Africa. Sadly, it was widely practiced. America
was no exception. To be born in the 18th century was to be born into a
society where slavery was tolerated to one degree or another.
Trashing the Founders and other Americans of the past is meant to taint
their memory and call into question their essential contribution to American
society. It is not a coincidence that angry, rioting mobs tore down, or
attempted to destroy, the statues of famous Americans in 2020. An attack
on Washington, Jefferson, and Jackson, is an assault on the entire American
"project," and the founding of the United States is thus repudiated. Ripping
down statues of Columbus symbolically undoes 500 hundred years of
history. (F23) Other symbolic statues torn down include Lincoln, who freed
the slaves, and General Grant, who led Union armies to victory over the
slave-holding states. Ironically, without Lincoln and Grant, slavery would
have endured for many more years.
Rioters are not the only modern-day vandals. Woke-besotted local officials
helped the vandals Theodore Roosevelt and other University tore down
Jefferson's statue — the man who wrote the Declaration of Independence.
Would it have been better for America to have remained part of the British
Empire –the source of American slavery? Across the country, many schools
named after presidents have been renamed. Public school officials in San
Francisco cleansed the names of 44 schools, including those named after
Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln. (S43) Why? Because of their alleged
"ties to racism" and "dishonorable legacies." Woke fascism misrepresents
America's symbols as "dishonorable" in order to condemn all of society
from the bottom up – that is the point.
Police, as individuals and as organizations, are under attack because they
play a symbolic role over and above their practical importance. They don't
just enforce the law; they are the public face of an orderly society. They
symbolize the rule of law, the authority of society, and the continuity of
American civilization. Police are by removing the statues of famous
Americans. Hofstra attacked as symbols because they are a roadblock to
fascist chaos and intimidation.
Fascists consider modern civilian police, who protect society from crime, as
capitalist oppressors. The famed "thin blue line" represents bourgeois
society and everything fascists wish to destroy and replace. Police stand in
the way of revolutionary violence and intimidation. Therefore, they are the
first governmental organization destroyed or replaced when fascists take
power. A symbolic attack is a preliminary step in replacing or neutralizing
them. Many BLM supporters, blue state politicians, and academics think of
police officers as symbols of an "oppressive" society. Police are smeared
with accusations of racism and incompetence. Their role as guardians of
law and order is undermined.
The "defund the police" movement is both an attack on the police as an
organization and a symbolic attack on what they represent. Do progressives
want to defund the police? "Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police,"
exclaimed the headline of a long, anti-police rant in the New York Times
Sunday Magazine. (S38)
Religion is another cultural symbol fascists abhor. Fascism views authentic
religions as competitors and, sooner or later, cracks down hard on the
competition. Fascists despise most religious organizations because they
generally support the basic structure of American culture and society,
except when infiltrated and neutralized by cultural Marxism. Christianity
and Judaism played a crucial role in the development of Western
civilization and humanism — all forms of fascism despise both. Indeed,
fascism has many characteristics of a medieval, rather than a modern,
religion — it is manipulative, disregards facts, and expects absolute
obedience. Marxism itself has many of the hallmarks of a cult.
Marx launched furious attacks on religion as a tool of capitalism. His most
famous quote, "the opium of the people," barely conceals his contempt for
the ordinary people he professed to lead. Close to a century later, Gramsci
clarified Marxism's attitude toward religion when he wrote, "Socialism is
precisely the religion that must kill Christianity." (S39) The fascist
antipathy towards religion led the Soviet Union under Stalin to suppress the
Russian Orthodox Church. Its hierarchy was dispersed or imprisoned.
Churches and other religious facilities were closed. A visit to a church
service could result in a stiff prison sentence. Shortly after the Nazis
invaded Russia (1941), the churches were temporarily reopened in a cynical
gesture to increase popular support for the war.
In the 1930s, Nazi Germany cracked down on Christianity, especially the
German Catholic Church. Many priests and nuns were sent to concentration
camps. It took considerable courage to attend a Sunday worship at a church.
Hitler recognized the potential power of organized religion by cynically
planning to create his own secular religion. The proposed "National Reich
Church of Germany" would have replaced the Cross with a swastika.
In America, progressive hostility towards religion burst into full bloom
during the Covid-19 pandemic. Woke fascism views traditional churches as
bastions of resistance to progressive social and cultural programs. Not
surprisingly, blue state officials displayed a particularly harsh attitude
towards religious worship during pandemic lockdowns. State and local
officials enforced restrictive rules, seemingly designed to pressure religious
organizations to close down, and lose revenue and adherents. Is it a
coincidence that churches were often much more tightly controlled than
many businesses? Liquor stores were allowed to remain open, while
churches were strictly locked down and closed. In extreme cases, police
were sent to prevent outdoor religious observances where attendees sat in
cars parked at least six feet apart.

11 ATTACKING THE ROOTS OF CULTURE

Revolutionary culture is a powerful revolutionary weapon… It prepares
the ground ideologically before the revolution comes… — Mao Zedong
(S317)
Cultural norms are the baseline assumptions that guide us in everyday
life. Language, family, sexual identity, literature, science, and ideals like
merit or objectivity are a few examples. Most Americans take them for
granted. Fascists don't accept these norms. Their goal is to crush them.
Another way to think about norms is to ask, what would the US be like
if they changed? What, for example, would America be like if French
replaced the English language? Or Tibetan? Or Inuit (Eskimo)? Or, for that
matter, Spanish? What would America be like if the nuclear family
disappeared? Or merit-based promotions in business, science, and
engineering ceased? If free speech was banned? Or if all private property
was abolished? Would America still be American? The answer is not at all.
 Fascists are hard at work banishing and replacing the basic norms of
society. Left to their own devices, they will transform American culture
from a highly successful and competent society into a vast, corrupt, and
incompetent state. The cultural values, norms, and practices that made
America a great country will disappear. Here are some examples:
Trashing the English Language
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a
tail a leg doesn't make it a leg. – Abraham Lincoln (S40)
Language is the most fundamental cultural norm. It provides people
with a basic vocabulary that expresses shared ideas. A flexible, content-
rich, common language facilitates understanding and cooperation between
individuals and groups. Most Americans, especially conservatives and
libertarians, take language for granted. Fascists don't. They see language as
an opportunity to change how people think.
For example, non-fascists innocently think a "dog" is a pet, a
companion without any special social meaning beyond the psychological
rewards of dog ownership. Fascists, thanks to Marxism, view the word
"dog" as having political meaning. They relate dog ownership to their ideas
of economics and class. Marxists assume dogs are owned by people in the
upper and middle classes. In reality, dogs are also commonly owned by
people with limited financial means, but facts don't matter. The Marxist
interpretation of the word dog is an animal owned by racist white people in
a capitalist society. Thus, a dog becomes a symbol of racism and
oppression, which is why they call dog ownership "white privilege." (Pet
dogs are banned in fascist North Korea.)
The usual suspects, as always, are busily at work re-defining and
twisting the meaning of English — accusing it of having a sinister, political
purpose as if it had a mind of its own. Progressives claim English has been
"weaponized and used as a tool to promote white supremacy and racism."
(41) The idea that schools should teach some common form of language,
once called "standard" English, must be abandoned. Teachers should
immediately "dismantle anti-black linguistic racism and white cultural and
linguistic hegemony in their classrooms." (S42)
In 2020, the Conference on College Composition and Communication
released a document entitled, "This Ain't [sic] Another Statement! This is a
DEMAND for Black Linguistic Justice!" It insisted, "teachers stop using
academic language and standard English as the accepted communicative
norm, which reflects White Mainstream English." Instead, "teach Black
students about anti-Black linguistic racism and white linguistic supremacy."
Students and faculty object to correcting their spelling and grammar on
college-level papers at some universities because it creates a "hostile
campus climate."
The academic appetite for cracking down on English has spread to
mainstream society. Real estate sales organizations banned terms like
"master bedroom" and "master bath." Google reportedly teaches new
employees not to use words like "unique," "leader," or "dominant." Editors
at the Los Angeles Times object to using the word "looter" because it
recently acquired a pejorative sub-text from the BLM demonstrations that
turned into riots and looting of stores. Evidently, it's crucial to change or
edit language to keep people from believing what they witnessed on
television news or in their neighborhoods. Other banned words include
"blacklist," which originated in England in 1639. Its origin had nothing to
do with race but Woke fascists assume it has racial content merely because
it contains the word "black" – a case of linguistic guilt by association. (S43)
Whiteness, white privilege, and the ironic oxymoron "positive racism, "
along with other racist terms, are discussed in Part III.
From a fascist viewpoint, these and a multitude of similarly Orwellian
and dystopian attacks on English have two major goals. First, they create
the illusion that our language is structurally racist and sexist. One way to
accomplish this change is to ignore the fact that the meaning of words often
changes with time. For instance, centuries ago, "meat" meant any solid food
for humans or even fodder for farm animals, not just beef or pork as it does
today. In old English, "girl" meant a young person of either sex. (S44)
Mining old dictionaries for violations of modern social taboos reveals little
or nothing about racism today. However, it says a lot about the misuse of
language for political purposes by FNDs who use a linguistic guilt trip to
smear society. And, having made false claims, they condemn all white
themselves, as racists or implementation of their Utopian reforms of
language and culture to fix the problem. Don't say woman; say "birthing
person;" don't say equality; say equity. Merit and objectivity are no longer
words expressing useful cultural practices; now they are "bad."
The second goal of hyperventilating progressive academics and
politicians is to generate anger and alienation from American society. Their
purpose is to "raise the consciousness" of followers, college students, and
the intellectually naive. In other words, they want to accentuate differences
between people, polarize society, and maintain the political support of
selected minority groups. Progressive professors teach students that
obsolete word meanings, grammar, spelling, and a common language, are
racist. The use of thousand-year-old pronouns that recognize the biology of
sex becomes a sinister plot by heterosexual, capitalist grammarians to
impose their homophobia on transsexuals. The point is to create hostility,
angst, and a sense of persecution as a means of inspiring people who speak
English, except
sexists. Then they demand the political support for progressive Democrats.
But why stop at creating a unique language for black students? Why not
for other minorities as well? Why not a dozen sub-dialects of English based
on race and ethnicity? Why not replace English with a multiplicity of
languages, including Spanish, French, Arabic, and others? Perhaps we
should look to Africa for a model. English is the legal language in Nigeria,
with 325 native languages and dialects. Perhaps the biblical story of the
Tower of Babel should be our model.
Attacking Merit, Objectivity, and Science
Hard work, merit, objectivity, and a desire to excel have important practical
and cultural symbolic value. From a cultural viewpoint, merit is something
we practice, but also a value or ideal which inspires useful behavior in
society. If we get to work on time and do a good job, we are rewarded with
praise, money, time off, and self-satisfaction. These are things an individual
can do to distinguish him or herself from others and reap consequent
rewards. Merit, objectivity, and science increase positive performance and
are ideals that teach us how to behave in our everyday lives.
For example, progressives attack objectivity and meritocracy because such
ideals form the inner structure of a successful capitalist society. Capitalism
thrives when individuals are allowed wide latitude for personal initiative
and performance and the subsequent rewards of success. Consequently,
Woke fascists, who base their thinking on Marxist principles, are opposed
to capitalism and condemn merit and objectivity as racist. The accusation of
racism is a tactic to justify dismantling these and other values. The fact that
society will become impoverished and dysfunctional by downgrading
fundamentally useful practices doesn't bother Woke fascists; from their
perspective, poverty and chaos are acceptable in the name of Utopia.
It is ironic that fascists claim that meritocracy, hard work, punctuality, and
other useful cultural practices are racist since merit and good work habits
are common in many countries and political systems. Meritocracy plays a
significant role in Chinese business and economic development. The
impressive growth of China's economy is a testament to that fact. Merit also
plays an essential role in European Union social democracies like Germany,
France, and Italy. Nor has merit been erased in African countries like
Nigeria. More tellingly, perhaps, most African, Asian, Mexican, and other
Hispanic immigrants from non-capitalist countries come to the US willing
and able to work hard. The truth is that merit and hard work are neither
capitalist nor racist; they just make good sense.
Objectivity is another American cultural value progressives link to
capitalism and race. Marxist-influenced scholarship in the US and Europe
denies the reality of objective truth. Academics claim everything is relative
and subjective; there is no objective truth. Marxist-influenced philosophy
and sociology claim that social and economic relations are determined by
shared assumptions between people, not by objective or individual reality.
Marx wrote: "Society does not consist of individuals, but expresses the sum
of interrelations, the relations within which these individuals stand." (S45)
The Nazis also believed that there is no truth. George Orwell, the author of
1984, noted:
Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as "the truth"
exists. There is only a "German science", a "Jewish science" etc., The
implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the
Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past.
(S46)
Woke fascism's assault on objectivity and science is racist and not
materially different from similar attacks on reason by Nazi Germany in the
1930s. Hitler ordered the creation of a "German" or "Nazi" version of
psychoanalysis in opposition to Sigmund Freud's "Jewish" psychoanalysis.
The Nazis also ordered the creation of a "German" physics to challenge the
"Jewish" physics, supposedly created by Albert Einstein and other
physicists. Scientific fact yielded to the political tastes of the regime.
Anything invented or created by Jews was racialized the same way modern
progressives condemn merit and objectivity as "white." Hitler thrust
objective facts and the laws of nature to the back of the bus behind politics
and ideology. The Nazis, like Woke fascists, were "objectivity deniers."
 In the 1930s, Stalin banned the theory of evolution, as theorized by
Charles Darwin, because it disagreed with certain political aspects of
communism. He ordered it replaced by the generally rejected theories of
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, which aligned better with the teachings of Karl
Marx. Soviet scientists, who defended scientific objectivity based on
Darwin's theory of evolution, were sent to labor camps or prisons. Fascism
puts politics first every time.
Incredibly, progressives attack objectivity and mathematics as a racist
plot and a tool of whiteness. The Gates Foundation gave one million dollars
to The Education Trust to fund a workbook, "Dismantling Racism in
Mathematics," used by school districts in Oregon, Georgia, Ohio, and
California. The text seeks to reconfigure US math education radically. Is
math objective? According to the Trust:
The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally
false, and teaching it is even much less so. Upholding the idea that there are
always right, and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity. (S47)
The textbook "advocates for a collective approach to dismantling white
supremacy." (S48). Progressives, many of whom adopt blatantly racist
attitudes and behaviors, clearly believe that black students can't handle
math, grammar, and spelling without their intervention. Objectivity and
science need to be sacrificed to Marxism's insulting views on race, society,
and black competence. One plus one equals two? No, it's a capitalist trick.
Does Bill Gates look at the stuff his foundation funds?
Woke fascism follows the lead of Karl Marx. The proper role of science
is politics and revolution, not objectivity and fact. Marx believed that, as the
"revolution" against society progressed, science would cease to be merely
about nature and facts; it would become the servant, the "mouthpiece" of
the battle to overthrow capitalism. He expressed it this way:
So long as they look for science and merely make systems, so long as
they are at the beginning of the struggle, they see in poverty nothing but
poverty, without seeing in it the revolutionary, subversive side, which will
overthrow the old society. From this moment, science, which is a product of
the historical movement, has associated itself consciously with it, has
ceased to be doctrinaire and has become revolutionary. (S49)
What does "revolutionary" science look like? The answer is climate
change. Climate change is an example of how objectivity and fact become
distorted by revolutionary politics. Global warming may indeed be
problematic, but the "science" is mixed up with politics. Otherwise, how
can we explain the many personal and institutional attacks on scientists who
disagree with or question climate change? "Climate deniers" get thrown out
of scientific organizations, have their research grants curtailed, speaking
tours canceled, and the publication of their peer-reviewed articles blocked.
Evidence that climate change is exaggerated or misunderstood is abundant,
but research dollars from government agencies and universities are withheld
from "deniers." Ironically, "science" is often used by Marxist and Woke
fascist politicians to justify draconian cultural changes to daily life. Science
in the hands of zealots becomes a tool of political and social control.
Anthropology is another science under attack. Its very existence has
been challenged for daring to engage in cross-cultural comparisons —
which are criticized as a form of racism. The assault began in the 1970s. Or
rather, the battle is long since over. Anthropology has been successfully
revolutionized. Many of the standard assumptions and terms of progressive
racism, based on Marxist ideas like critical race theory, have infiltrated
scholarship on anthropology. In anthropological literature, terms like
"whiteness" and "white supremacy" abound. The titles of just a few
scholarly articles featured in The Journal of the American Anthropological
Association (S50) over several decades give a sense of how widely, early,
and completely CRT and related "revolutionary" assumptions have
impacted anthropology as a science:
• Prejudice and Its Intellectual Effects in American
Anthropology (1973)
• Establishing the Fact of Whiteness (1997)
• Language, Race, and White Public Space (1998)
• Race and the Construction of Human Identity (2008)
• The Incredible Simplicity of Anti-Imperialism (2020)
Attacking the Family
The family is the essential social basis of American civilization. The
nuclear family, in particular, is the core of American life. It is biologically,
psychologically, and socially the human norm, the kernel of civilization.
Extended families may often live together, largely for economic reasons as
well as social, but the nuclear family is the essence of what it means to be
human. Families are almost universally found throughout history, most of
the time in most societies. In world literature and art, the family has
enduring symbolic importance that transcends mere economic and political
posturing by fascists. Where families fail, often due to ill-conceived
interventions by the government, society falters.
Woke fascism, in its purest form, abhors the nuclear family and families in
general and wants to destroy them. Its goal is to replace families with a
collective, "it takes a village," social organization that reduces parenthood
to mere biology. The eclipse of the family would reduce childhood to a
period of sustained political molding by government officials designed to
produce compliant, uncomplaining proles, ready and willing to obey.
Radicals hate the very idea of a family. Early radicals like French proto-
socialist Charles Fourier (1772 – 1837) condemned the "bourgeois" family
as oppressive. Marx agreed and attacked families as a social construct of
capitalism. He believed families in capitalism were inauthentic and that
they would disappear when private property was abolished:
The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its
complement [private property] vanishes, and both will vanish with the
vanishing of capital. (S51)
Marx wanted children to be raised and taught by society, with a minor
role for parents besides procreation. Lenin's Utopian goal, influenced by
Marx, was to free workers, especially women, from the burdens of child-
rearing at home by replacing home life with government dining rooms,
nurseries, and other facilities. All children would become virtual wards of
the state. The parental role in education and the transmission of values and
culture to children would disappear, as would the strong, loving connection
between parent and child. As Lenin said, "give me just one generation of
youth, and I'll transform the whole world." (S52) This is exactly what
Democrat politicians, teachers’ unions, and many teachers are doing to
other people's children right now.
Lenin's goal of breaking down the family and raising children
collectively plays a prominent role in BLM's Utopian plans for America,
especially for black Americans. In 2020, their website stated:
We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement
by supporting each other as extended families and 'villages' that collectively
care for one another.
For BLM's leaders, the term "Western-prescribed" is simply another
way of saying white, bourgeois family values. Nuclear families, sometimes
supplemented by extended families, are also common in countries that are
not capitalist or Western (IE, white). Are nuclear families really "Western-
prescribed"? Many societies, including ours, and even the Soviet Union,
used divorce and other laws (like taxation) to keep families together,
primarily to protect children. Those restrictive laws are largely gone. No
one has to live in a nuclear or even an extended family. Many people don't.
Today, it's a matter of choice, but it seems inevitable, given human nature,
that the desire for families and children will survive attempts to collectivize
social life.
BLM's Utopian urge to collectivize child-rearing is the result of looking
at people as interchangeable cogs in a vast social experiment
– an attitude they share with other fascists. The goal is to produce obedient
conformists who will do as their told and like it. Lenin, in the early days of
the Soviet Union, hoped to replace families with government-controlled
child-rearing – an effort that failed miserably. Twenty years later, the
government returned to supporting more traditional human family
arrangements. The new Marxist attitude towards families was summed up
by this quote from Pravda, the leading government newspaper of the Soviet
Union, "More than once the enemies of the people suggested to us the foul
and poisonous idea of liquidating the family and disrupting marriage."
(S53) They forgot Lenin.
The Communist takeover of China weakened the traditional Chinese
extended family. Mao used the "Revolution" to begin decades of social
engineering. In the 1970s, the government began the largest social
experiment in history by "encouraging" families to limit themselves to a
single child. Parents who broke the rules lost their jobs and were denied
education. Homes and private property of violators could be confiscated.
Millions of pregnant women were forcibly aborted, and millions more were
sterilized. Illegal children became non-persons denied legal status,
education, and other rights. The policy helped control population growth
but resulted in an enormous sociological disaster. Girls were aborted more
often by traditionally minded parents who wanted a boy, which resulted in a
society-wide mismatch between men and marriageable women. Millions of
families murdered their infant girls. The new threeperson families
devastated the traditional Chinese extended family most people relied upon
to take care of elderly relatives and the sick. Society as a whole suffered as
Utopian planning negatively impacted the social life of families. By 2016
the government was forced to allow two children. Today, the government
allows three-child families. So much for the idea that families are a
capitalist plot. "Trained Marxists" at BLM take note.
The real point is the desire to take children away from their parents and
hand their development over to government agencies. In the US, the effects
disastrous. Progressive educational system with catastrophic results.
Replacing families with communitarian, that is to say, communized,
versions of "it takes a village" style education weakens the link between
parent and child. The weaker the link, the easier it becomes to raise children
as fanatic little Nazis, Marxists, or Woke fascists. Replacing parents with
"communities" without a loving commitment to them as individuals is a
recipe for cultural disaster.
of collectivizing education have been fascism has spread throughout the
Art and Literature Under Assault
Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and Maoist China did everything in their
power to control and manipulate literature and the arts. Woke fascism is
similarly determined to eradicate and transform the nature of art, literature,
and music. Taste and style are not their primary concern. The goal is to ban,
censor, and discredit literature and art that represent American and Western
cultural achievements.
Fascists view art as a political weapon to control the masses. Like Hitler
and Stalin, progressives and liberals view art through the lens of politics.
Does it help or hinder politically correct policy? Does it "raise the
consciousness" of the viewer to embrace our political viewpoint? Does it
"educate" the masses? Does it help us take and remain in power?
Such questions inevitably devalue and undermine artistic endeavors.
Fascists choose politics and power over everything. In the US, progressives
lack (for the moment) sufficient police power to directly enforce their will,
so they must use indirect methods. They become detectives mining the
archives and history books for evidence of transgressions against Woke
fascist values. Writers and artists who violate their new norms are
"canceled," bullied, fired, cut off from markets for their work, and publicly
humiliated. They are silenced.
Under fascism, artistic endeavor ceases to be an act of individual creation.
It becomes collectivized by social, creative, and political mandates enforced
by government officials, fascist-friendly critics, and institutions. Museums,
publishers, college faculties, artistic associations, and others become the
willing enforcers of government and Woke fascism.
The Soviet Union is an example of a fascist state that banned politically
incorrect art. Shortly after taking power, the Soviet government established
the Proletarian Cultural and Enlightenment Organization ("Proletkult")
charged with ensuring the arts served the Revolution. For a few years,
experimental art was encouraged as a part of the new revolutionary politics.
However, officials soon objected to radical art forms like Cubism and
Impressionism, condemning them as examples of "decadent bourgeois art."
"Socialist realism" became the approved artistic style and was officially
promoted as an alternative to "capitalist" art forms. Socialist Realism that
depicted subjects in paintings as bold and heroic were simple to understand
and politically correct. Stage productions focused on the "struggle" against
class enemies.
Officials, critics, and the secret police enforced the use of approved styles.
The government created The Union of Soviet Writers to keep writers within
the officially sanctioned doctrine. Many well-known Russian authors and
composers were banned, including writer Mikhail Bulgakov and composer
Sergei Prokofiev. Foreign authors like James Joyce and George Orwell were
censored. (S54) Criticizing official Communist Party doctrine or
questioning government policy was illegal. Violators were canceled and
punished by the consequent loss of employment, housing, and other
privileges. Many were imprisoned under harsh conditions that sometimes
led to death due to exposure, malnourishment, disease, and prison violence.
Racism and the Fascist War on Culture
Hitler's attack on culture began shortly after his election in 1933 when he
appointed die-hard Nazi Joseph Goebbels as Minister for Enlightenment
and Propaganda. Goebbels organized the complete transformation of
German culture. Art, literature, and music created by "undesirable" racial
groups like Jews were banned and censored. "Pure-blooded" German artists
and writers, whose work met Nazi purity standards, were singled out for
praise and became successful even if they lacked real talent. Merit took a
back seat to political and racial considerations. Goebbels purged Jewish
professors, teachers, artists, writers, composers, and musicians throughout
Germany. (Progressives have been quietly purging universities,
government, and corporations in America for years.) The Nazi government
incorporated the arts into the government-sponsored "Reich Culture
Chamber." Only German painters, sculptors, musicians, composers, writers,
actors, directors, radio performers, and others, were allowed to join. Jews
were excluded.
The Reich Culture Chamber controlled and regulated every aspect of
cultural activity in the country. Only "full-blooded" Germans could be
members, and no artist, writer, or other creative people could legally
publish, display, or sell their work without joining. The Chamber set artistic
"standards." All paintings, sculptures, movies, music, and radio were
required to follow guidelines set by the Chamber. Officials dictated
Romantic Realism as an alternative to supposedly "degenerate" or "Jewish"
art styles like Expressionism and Surrealism. Romantic Realism encouraged
the glorification of farmers, soldiers, war, and the racist ideals of Nazi
Germany. Stylistically the products of Nazi Romantic Realism were quite
similar to Soviet Socialist Realism. (S55)
Goebbels ordered the contents of museums, libraries, and art galleries
purged. Nazis removed at least 15,500 significant works of art by van
Gogh, Picasso, Klee, Gauguin, and many others from German museums.
Their creators were canceled. Some were sent to concentration camps.
More than 5,000 works of art and many thousands of books were burned.
Artists could not display art in public without written permission –
effectively preventing "undesirable" artists from earning a living. Selected
artists, writers, and composers were banned. Many fled the country, and
German art was racialized in the service of fascism.
Notice the emphasis on race. Today's soft fascism diffuses its cultural
assault across government, media, and Big Tech rather than creating a
centralized source of censorship. Woke fascists employ tactics used by the
Nazis and communists to ban "racist" art or artists of the wrong color – in
the name of diversity. A new "color bar" for artists has been created and
directed against white Americans. White artists and writers are banned or
criticized on various pretexts because of their skin color. Museums,
galleries, and orchestras are pressured to exclude works by white or alleged
white supremacists.
The Boston Globe, Washington Post, and many media outlets attacked
museums and art institutions for lacking politically correct cultural diversity
(which may be interpreted as choosing artists according to race first, not
virtuosity). Many great writers, artists, and composers who don't measure
up to the irrational 21st-century woke ideas of behavior are condemned and,
if not banned outright, end up in storage far from the public eye. The
Goebbels-like emphasis on race and politics, in the author's opinion, may be
summed by the words of a New York Metropolitan Museum of Art Director
who told a reporter:
Art cannot solely be perceived in regard to its beauty and craftsmanship.
You also have to evaluate it in the light of its political message. (S56)
Compare this statement to the prestigious English Tate Galleries, and its
website, which define Socialist Realism as "quite simply propaganda art."
(63) Propaganda is a tool of political movements like Woke fascism, which
measures art in the light of political content. Beethoven, Shakespeare, and
Rembrandt may be technically brilliant, but their artistic genius takes a back
seat to politics – so they end up canceled. In other words, the Metropolitan
Museum of Art’s view of art appears to have much in common with
fascism... art is judged by its contribution to the revolution and its political
message.
Writers and artists who embody the exceedingly high artistic and
technical standards of Western culture don't fit the new paradigm because
they are both white and representatives of American civilization. Some are
banned outright. Others have their lives and work carefully parsed for
"error" and are publicly denounced. Painter Paul Gauguin (1848 - 1903), for
example, who was banned by the Nazis, is condemned by Woke fascism for
his personal life. Classical music is attacked as "inherently racist." (S57)
Even scientists, like Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955), an outspoken critic of
racism and prejudice, have been condemned for making allegedly "racist"
remarks about the Chinese in his private diary a century ago — as if a few
moments of human weakness cancel out a lifetime of accomplishment and
decency. Indeed, how is that worse than Woke fascism's racist treatment of
whites and Asian Americans?
Progressives play the race card against Western culture relentlessly.
William Shakespeare, the English playwright whose genius has been
recognized worldwide, is being canceled. Shakespeare, one of the first and
arguably the greatest secular writers in the English language, is under attack
by academics and teachers because he is guilty of "whiteness" and 17th-
century antisemitism. Ironically, there is no room in woke America for the
greatest English language writer and his work. Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet,
and Macbeth have to go. His race and his whiteness rule out teaching the
heritage of American civilization to American students. The idea that
Shakespeare might have "universal" value is rejected outright. Yet,
Shakespeare's works have been translated into 100 languages. Hamlet, his
most famous play, has been published and produced in at least 75 languages
since 1960. (S58) Few authors are more widely read and have had greater
influence worldwide. Of course, Shakespeare has universal merit and value;
his cancellation is an example of how progressives seek to destroy
America's cultural inheritance by smearing it with accusations of racism.
"Lord, what fools these mortals be." (S59)
Shakespeare is not the only target. Even in England, Woke fascism
demands that schools stop teaching English classics written before 1500.
(S60) A host of literary gems must be abandoned:
• Chaucer's Canterbury Tales (too white)
• Homer's Iliad (too old and too white)
• F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby (stalking and too white
• Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn (uses the "n" word and depicts slavery
• Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird (racial slurs and a "white savior" plot)
Famous composers are being mugged by Woke fascists. Beethoven's
merit as a brilliant composer is under racist attack as a symbol of white
privilege and whiteness. His brilliance and merit mean nothing. No
whiteness and other bizarre fascist categories are allowed. His work must
be canceled because admiration of his virtuosity is a supposed attack on
women, gays, and minorities. The quality of his music means nothing. In
the eyes of the politically correct, all that matters is his race and sex. One
leading left-wing musicologist ludicrously likened Beethoven's brilliant and
widely admired Ninth Symphony to "the throttling murderous rage of a
rapist incapable of attaining release." (S61) Not only must music be banned,
but some musicologists want symphonic orchestras to impose racial quotas
on the hiring of musicians. White musicians must be excluded because they
were born white, just as Jewish musicians in Nazi Germany were banned
because of their ethnicity. The Woke fascist culture war is relentless. So is
its racism.
Culture War Deniers
Defenders of Woke fascism often publish articles tut-tutting the culture war,
"No, the XYZ is not being banned." If only that were true, but it's not. The
great anti-American culture war operates on two levels. The first level is a
cloud of false reassurances and disingenuous claims intended to disarm the
opposition. Big Media spreads the comforting notion that there is "nothing
to see here, move along folks, don't believe your lying eyes" about the
disastrous results of Woke-fascist policies and ideals. "We are doing all of
this for you. Just keep quiet and cooperate while we dismantle America's
cultural inheritance and replace it with fascist/Marxist policies that have
failed disastrously, time and time again."
The second level is the relentless vandalism of FNDs in academia,
government, public education, and business, who are the loyal supporters,
theorists, and foot soldiers of the war on culture. Woke fascists are like an
army of malevolent termites chewing their way through established culture.
They seek the utter transformation of America into a Utopia based on
collectivism and government control of society. FNDs are the troops who
carry out the day-today attacks on culture.
Politics aside, how will the culture war on language and other aspects of
society affect the American economy and competitiveness with other
countries? How, for instance, will the US compete with countries like
China, India, and Japan that don't tie themselves into knots wrangling over
culture? How will we compete with countries where merit, scientific
objectivity, and showing up on time for work are encouraged, not
discouraged? Can any country flourish if its unifying culture is destroyed
and its people converted into angry, disgruntled racial, sexual, and ethnic
splinter groups turned one against the other?

12 DESTROYING THE RULE OF LAW

The revolution has no time for elections. There is no more democratic
government in Latin America than the revolutionary government. — Fidel
Castro (S62)
I will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the
Constitution of the United States. It is not the Constitution as I would like to
have it, but as it is, that is to be defended. …It must be so respected,
obeyed, enforced and defended, and let the grass grow where it may. —
Abraham Lincoln (S63)
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office
of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability,
preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. — The
Presidential Oath taken and immediately violated, by Joe Biden
The Constitution and the laws we live by are being undermined by
officials who are supposed to enforce them. The laws associated with it
mean nothing without the "rule of law" (ROL), which is essentially the idea
that the legal system is reasonable and fair and that the laws apply equally
to everyone. Under the rule of law, everybody — including presidents,
officials, politicians, the rich, police officers, FBI agents, ordinary citizens,
criminals, looters, and Big Tech CEOs — must play by the same rules. That
is the ideal written into the Constitution by the Founders. Injustices may
occur, but the principle of the rule of law is essential to a functioning
democracy. It is the crucial foundation for all genuine democratic forms of
government. In the United States, the Constitution is the foundation of the
rule of law. In fascist countries, the rule of law is dead because their
constitutions are mere words.
Fascists don't believe in the rule of law. For propaganda reasons, they
write nice-sounding constitutions that pay lip service to civil rights, but the
mere existence of a formal written constitution does not provide for the rule
of law by itself. Fascist governments, for political reasons, create the formal
appearance of rights. In practice, those rights mean nothing because
officials and courts ignore the law. The 1936 constitution of the old Soviet
Union provided a nice list of rights and liberties that, in theory, protected
ordinary citizens from arbitrary government. It included freedom of speech,
press, worship, public assembly, secret ballots, and judicial independence.
(S64) However, these rights existed only for elite members of the
Communist Party and not always for them. Government officials routinely
and arbitrarily ignored constitutional protections at will. Over a seventy-
year period, millions of people in the Soviet Union were arbitrarily arrested,
imprisoned, tortured, and murdered, regardless of their theoretical
constitutional rights. The rule of law did not exist.
The Nazi Party ignored the German constitution and its laws. Heinz
Guderian, a top Nazi general, observed, "the State does not control the
Party; the Party controls the State" – a basic fact of life when fascism is in
power. (S65) The Nazis re-wrote laws to give themselves absolute power
over the German people. Anyone could be arrested for anything. The
outcomes of legal proceedings in Nazi Germany were generally
prearranged, just as in the Soviet Union.
In Communist Cuba today, the constitution promises a variety of
personal freedoms, including freedom of speech, press, and the right to
assemble and demonstrate. Yet it also contains limits that legalize arbitrary
action by officials. For instance, freedom of speech is allegedly protected,
but in reality, the constitution says, "Freedom of speech and [of the] press is
recognized for the citizens in conformity with the objectives of the socialist
society." (S73) Who decides on the objectives? The Cuban government and
its leaders, of course. It's all entirely arbitrary – not the rule of law. Citizens
have freedom of speech until officials decide otherwise.
In July 2021, thousands of Cubans demonstrated and demanded
"freedom" and "liberty." Fascist leaders were momentarily silent, stunned
by the audacity of mere citizens attempting to exercise their constitutional
rights. The next day officials shut down the country's internet and cell
phone networks. The streets were filled with heavily armed police who
broke into homes (also theoretically protected by the constitution) and took
suspected demonstrators away in handcuffs. The pretext for the arrests was
defending "socialism," but officials did as they wished because there is no
respect for the rule of law in Cuba — at any level. It is a fascist state and,
not surprisingly, much admired by American progressives.
Just as the Cuban Communist Party imposed limits and conditions that
undermined constitutional liberties, so did the United Nations. Words like
"just" and "equity," which can mean anything depending on one's
viewpoint, were slipped into the definition of the rule of law. The emphasis
changed from equality under the law to "equality of outcomes." The rule of
law was subordinated to politics, social experimentation, and economic
fascism. Equal access and fair treatment disappeared from view. Fascism
was given a way to reduce the rule of law and enshrine leftwing social
politics. This facilitated the imposition of Utopian ideals by sacrificing the
civil rights of individuals.
America's Two-Tier Legal System
The true rule of law ensures that everyone in society has the same
theoretical and practical access to fundamental legal rights, regardless of
race, class, or political connections. Such a "one-tier" legal system offers a
genuine and honest effort to apply the law fairly to all. Unfortunately, as we
will see below, America now has a "twotier" or even a "multi-tier" legal
system, which privileges some groups in society over others. For example,
Democrat politicians openly, even brazenly, commit actual crimes without
fear of investigation or punishment. This "two-tier" system is clear and
compelling evidence that the rule of law and the Constitution have broken
down in American society.
Progressive fascism and old-time political dishonesty have succeeded in
creating a two-tier legal system based on political affiliation, skin color, and
other factors that have no place in a free country. Our legal system now
clearly affords special or privileged legal status to left-wing politicians,
public officials, progressives, and selected minorities. Even common street
criminals are now provided a significant degree of immunity to prosecution
by the de facto refusal of progressive legal authorities to investigate and
prosecute alleged crimes. Law-abiding citizens do not receive the same
consideration. The effect of creating new classes or groups with special
privileges undermines the rule of law through institutionalized favoritism,
needless social division, and outright corruption.
Biden, Trump, and the Two-Tier Legal System While in office,
President Trump, his children, associates, and his company were
extensively investigated by the FBI, IRS, and New York State authorities.
State officials were exceedingly zealous. There was little or no authentic
evidence of illegality. After an exhaustive examination of thousands of
documents, no evidence of corruption or illegality was uncovered. The only
wrongdoing officials discovered was the alleged failure of a Trump
employee, the company's CFO, to report a company car as income. The
allegedly guilty party was arrested at his home, handcuffed, and "perp-
walked" by investigators in front of dozens of reporters and cameras for a
crime that knowledgeable observers say is rarely prosecuted. His actual
crime was to be an associate of a Republican president and, therefore, a
target of progressive fascism and publicity.
Meanwhile, the extensive evidence of corruption on an astronomical scale
regarding Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden surfaced shortly before the
2020 election. Hunter left his laptop at a repair shop, which later (legally)
came into the hands of the FBI, which verified it as belonging to Biden.
New York Post reporters discovered emails on the laptop allegedly linking
President Biden as the recipient, or planned recipient, of payments rendered
to Hunter in return for "introducing" the then vice-president to foreign
businessmen. An apparent quid pro quo that appeared to many observers as
obvious bribes. It turned out that Hunter was given transportation on Air
Force Two to China for a meeting with Chinese executives eager for an
introduction. While the vice president met with Chinese officials, Hunter
met with business contacts with close ties to the Chinese Communist Party
and the Chinese People's Liberation Army. In 2017 Hunter contacted his
Chinese business associate, writing:
 My understanding is that the original agreement with the Director was
for consulting fees based on introductions alone, a rate of $10 million per
year for three years guarantee total of $30 million. (S66)
Apparently, the "introductions" were to arrange a meeting between Joe
Biden and Chinese businesspeople for unknown reasons – reasons worth
many times the lifetime earnings of the average American! But Hunter
plumped for an even bigger deal. He sought an automatic $30 million
payment even if the deal fell through.
In 2014, President Obama sent Vice President Biden as his
representative to Ukraine. Three months later (S67), Hunter became a board
member of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company alleged to be corrupt.
Hunter, who had no industry-specific experience, made millions of dollars
from this arrangement. He was also paid $3.5 million for "consulting
services" by a politically well-connected Russian woman in 2014. In
August 2017, Senate investigators concluded that Hunter's Hudson West
LLC received $5 million from his Chinese business associates, of which
$4.7 million was allegedly sent to his lawyer.
In 2020, presidential candidate Biden denied any knowledge of his son's
mysterious ability to extract millions of dollars from foreign businesses.
There was vastly more evidence of corruption or questionable dealing by
the Bidens — payments of at least $10 million by shady foreign
businesspeople — than by Trump and his family. Yet, besides a Senate
investigation obstructed at every turn by Senate Democrats, the alleged
corrupt activities by the Bidens were never seriously investigated by
Federal authorities, and then only years after the fact. Aside from the lack
of interest by Big Media and Big Tech's suppression of the facts, the
apparent double standard is a powerful confirmation of a two-tier justice
system – one for Republicans and another for Democrats. No perp-walks
for the Bidens or their friends. The progressive political class is
increasingly above the law.
The Russia Hoax: A Political Attack on the Rule of Law The Nazis
and other fascists converted national and local police forces into a political
arm of the ruling party. A similar, more subtle process has been underway
in the US for years that has significantly weakened the rule of law.
Democrats have increasingly used government agencies to undermine their
political opponents. A prime example was their war on the legally elected
President, Donald Trump. The Department of Justice and the FBI engaged
in a prolonged assault on the elected President of the United States. In 2016,
certain powerful US government officials appear to have entered into what
may have been a conspiracy to undermine and eventually overturn Trump's
election. Their actions call for an impartial investigation, something the
Biden Administration will avoid at all costs.
Former and current officials in the CIA, FBI, and Department of Justice
allegedly used their authority as intelligence and police officials to fabricate
a frame-up directed against Trump, his family, and key supporters. The
primary "evidence" was material from a fraudulent "dossier" created by a
British national paid by the Hillary Clinton campaign organization and the
Democratic National Committee. The false dossier was turned over to the
FBI, which used it to justify opening an investigation into Trump. Big
Media used its enormous power to claim the dossier was accurate even after
investigators proved it was a collection of unsubstantiated and frivolous
claims. Nevertheless, the alleged "opposition research" was passed to
politically tainted officials in the "deep state." They used it to obtain
inappropriate warrants from the secret FISA court to spy on President-Elect
Trump and others. This was the beginning of the "Russia" scandal that
falsely accused Trump of colluding with Russian officials to subvert the
2016 election — a claim later refuted by multiple investigations, most
notably by former FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
The "Russia Hoax" conspiracy is an example of how Woke fascist
Democrats and their supporters in government attack their political rivals.
They use the police power of government officials to attack and undermine
opponents. False dossiers, phony evidence, leaks of classified information,
cover-ups, and other tactics were used extensively by government officials
to attack Trump, his allies, White House officials, and his political
supporters. Hillary Clinton and the Democrats invented the news, and Big
Media — the New York Times, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and countless
other biased news outlets
– relentlessly filled the air with false, exaggerated, and lurid stories based
on lies. Sadly, as planned, many Americans and FNDs, swallowed it whole
when it came time to vote in 2020.
Biden's Assault on the Rule of Law
Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained,
for it is the only safeguard of our liberties. — Abraham Lincoln
 As seen above, Biden and his family are beneficiaries of the twotier
legal system. Biden would have almost certainly lost the 2020 election
without it. Once in office, Biden quickly showed a fundamental disdain for
the rule of law wherever it conflicted with his political priorities. On
inauguration day, January 20, 2020, Biden's acting Secretary of Homeland
security issued an operational memo to border control agencies that
effectively ended enforcement of legally enacted immigration laws. The
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border
Protection (CBP), and Citizenship and Immigration Service (CIS) were
ordered to disregard important parts of Federal law known as the
Immigration and Nationality Act. Ignoring the law allows criminals and
gang members to enter and remain in the US, even if they enter the country
illegally or return after being deported. The memo obstructed immigration
enforcement from sending home illegal aliens who arrived in the US before
November 1, 2020. It also effectively prevented the deportation of aliens
who committed serious crimes like murder and rape. (S68) Overall, the
memo trashed fully legal enforcement measures the Trump Administration
used to control illegal immigration.
Biden ignored Federal laws and regulations and created an open border
that allowed millions of illegal immigrants to enter the US with little
restraint. He even ordered border officials not to bother testing immigrants
crossing the border for Covid-19 – contributing to a rise in pandemic cases
across the Southwest. Biden's attack on the rule of law set a dangerous
precedent for the future. It encouraged a general disregard for the law by
other progressive politicians and supporters.
Second Amendment Attacked
President Biden took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Within
hours of that vow, his administration began undermining the Constitution
and individual liberties wherever convenient. For example, he promised to
ban and confiscate weapons owned by tens of millions of people who
purchased them legally under existing law:
The idea you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire
20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon, whether it's a
9mm pistol or whether it's a rifle, is ridiculous. I'm continuing to push to
eliminate the sale of those things. (S69)
First Amendment Undermined
Biden's administration has little respect for the First Amendment's
protection of free speech. In July 2021, the White House announced it was
"monitoring" private comments on Facebook and Twitter for
"misinformation" about Covid-19 and was pressuring company executives
to block those accounts. According to a White House spokesperson, Big
Tech is obligated to prevent the spread of "low quality" information and
needs to create software to "promote quality information" on its platforms.
The government looked to control free speech and evade the First
Amendment by relying on private companies to censor ideas and
information officials dislike:
We're asking them [Big Tech] to monitor misinformation more closely.
We're asking them to consistently take action against misinformation super-
spreaders on their platforms.... we're also asking news organizations to
proactively address the public's questions without inadvertently giving a
platform to health misinformation that can harm their audiences. (S70)
Monitoring and re-labeling "free speech" as "misinformation" or
"disinformation" may seem reasonable during a pandemic, but one person's
"misinformation" is another person's truth. The Biden administration's
appetite for controlling "misinformation" on the internet defies the
constitutional principle that the US government must not ban free speech
directly or indirectly by pressuring or intimidating private companies to do
it for them. Censorship by private businesses on behalf of the government
or a political party is fascist behavior and a profoundly dangerous attack on
the rule of law. In August 2022, the CDC admitted its advice regarding
Covid19 was far from perfect. It turned out that the "misinformation super-
spreaders" were often more accurate and correct than the CDC.
In April 2022, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
announced that it had created a "Disinformation Governance Board" (DGB)
headed up by a well-known opponent of free speech. The details of the
DGB remained uncertain, but it appeared to be a direct assault on the First
Amendment aimed at curtailing what officials disingenuously called
disinformation. In essence, the new organization was created by the largest
law enforcement organization in the US to monitor and discourage citizens
from publishing or expressing ideas on the internet that the increasingly
Woke fascist Biden administration finds annoying or inconvenient. All this
in apparent disregard of the President's oath to protect and defend the
Constitution, in this case, the First Amendment. (See Biden's oath of office
at the top of this chapter.)
 Spying on American Citizens
Abuse of legal authority and police power is one of the hallmarks of
fascism. It is universally true that fascism relies on a combination of force
and intimidation to achieve and remain in power. The political exploitation
of police power and related authority is used to suppress opposition and
keep ordinary citizens in line. Socialist states rely heavily on police, and, in
the final analysis, a fascist state cannot survive without men (and women)
with guns to keep the general population in line.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union and its East European satellite states,
like Communist East Germany, Poland, and Hungary, it was revealed that
these countries employed gigantic networks of secret police and informers
to keep their people under tight control. Following the fall of East Germany,
the enormous magnitude of the socialist-fascist police state was revealed. It
turned out the Stasi, or secret police, had 84,000 full-time employees and
several hundred thousand paid and voluntary informers to keep 16 million
East Germans in line — (S71) a ratio of about one Stasi employee or
informer for about every fifty people!
Cuban communism operates in a similar fashion. Secret police maintain a
vast network of informers, backed by an omnipresent uniformed and
plainclothes police presence. A presidential decree, considered the
equivalent of law, permits legal authorities to spy electronically and
eavesdrop on any Cuban citizen without a court order or warrant. Cuban
police listen in on phone calls, secretly record suspects, access computer
systems, shadow, and video record ordinary citizens — no judge or search
warrant required.
These kinds of things are not supposed to happen in America. We have a
Constitution and a Bill of Rights, both on the Federal and state levels,
intended to protect ordinary citizens from the ravages of a police state.
Americans, for the most part, have been fortunate. Despite some serious
lapses in the past, the system has generally worked, but that success is
based on the loyalty, integrity, and patriotism of public officials,
bureaucrats, and law enforcement. Officials must act in good faith, obey
their oaths of office, and resist the temptations of power. If they don't, the
massive police and intelligence bureaucracy at the Federal and state level
will turn against democracy and the rule of law. There is evidence it has
already done so. It is perhaps unsurprising that in August 2022, the
Democrats passed a law that will more than double the number of IRS
agents by adding 87,000 new hires, most of whom will be armed.
Spying by the National Security Agency (NSA)
The NSA was established in 1952 to manage and operate the US
government's electronic surveillance of agency performed some
extraordinary intelligence gathering against the Soviet Union during the
Cold War. However, after the terror attacks of 9/11, it extended its activities,
under various pretexts, against hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of
Americans. The agency appears to routinely monitor countless millions of
communications across believe the NSA and related agencies "have
infiltrated most of the communications technologies we have come to rely
on." (S72)
There is reason to think that NSA spying on US citizens is not always
conducted legally. Do they always obtain the necessary FISA or other
appropriate authorizations as required? The FISA court itself, and its
activities, are secret. If the NSA gets a warrant against a particular person, it
is also allowed to monitor communications from anyone who
communicates with the target. Thus, by an expanding web of spying, the
NSA can monitor virtually anyone that the president or some other official
chooses without additional warrants.
Even prominent people are subject to the scrutiny of the NSA. For example,
in July 2021, Fox News anchor, Tucker Carlson, discovered that his emails
were being monitored by the NSA and their contents released to selected
news organizations. Tucker complained. The NSA excused their actions by
claiming they spied on him only because he contacted another person they
were investigating. There was no explanation why his private business
information was selectively released to the public — presumably a FISA
violation. Like many other Americans, Tucker found dealing with the NSA
a frustrating experience. The agency operates in foreign countries. The and
very successful
domestic phone calls and digital the country. Knowledgeable observers
almost complete secrecy and is largely unaccountable to the public or even
to Congress. It’s possible that victims find it hard to fight back against the
extraordinary power of an agency that has a multitude of government
lawyers to defend its activities. Legal action against the government is
ruinously expensive. Lawsuits by private citizens against officials take
years and often go nowhere. If a popular national figure and a giant news
network are helpless in the face of government spying, where does that
leave ordinary citizens who lack the resources to fight back?
Domestic spying on a massive scale by a secret government agency,
largely unaccountable to the public, is a textbook definition of how officials
undermine the rule of law. Safeguards have been repeatedly circumvented.
The public has no idea who gathers information, for what purpose, how it is
used, who authorizes it, and for what political uses such information is
employed. Electronic spying by the government is so common that even the
Capitol Police have been given a military-grade surveillance system.
There is a frightening parallel between government agencies' mass
spying on US citizens and the routine, politically motivated spying by
secret police in fascist countries. The city of Baltimore is an example of
how even local governments may be spying on citizens with advanced
aerial surveillance systems. As a result of a lawsuit, a federal court found
that Baltimore's police used a surveillance system that recorded "the
movements of a city...[that] with analysis, … can reveal where individuals
come and go over an extended period." (S73) The equivalent of a
warrantless Amendment. How many more cities and states are spying on
their citizens, and for what reasons? No one knows.
court ruled the system was the
search that violated the Fourth

13 RACE AND FASCISM

Racism is the most potent weapon in the fascist arsenal. Progressives
use racism to excite and motivate their political base, intimidate opponents,
and silence critics. Racism appeals to the darker side of human psychology.
It takes advantage of the most primitive human emotions —hate, anger, fear
— to incite supporters to think irrationally and act impulsively. In the hands
of ruthless and skillful politicians, racism is a brutal weapon. Racially
charged statements, like "all white people are racists," are cruel, misleading
political attacks that reduce opponents to one-dimensional caricatures rather
than human beings.
The key to weaponizing race is to persuade voters that alleged
"systemic racism" is real and justifies war against society. Progressive goals
for the transformation of America will succeed if they can paint America as
irredeemably racist. That means taking on the false mantle of anti-racism by
attacking American culture and history. It also requires creating and
targeting one or more social groups as "bad" people responsible for
perpetuating the evils of racism. Just as Hitler condemned all Jews for
committing evil acts against Germany, progressives condemn "whiteness"
— a code word for "white Americans" — regardless of individual
responsibility for alleged racism. The use of race to advance a political
agenda is not only deeply fascist but blatantly racist.
Fascism is a form of a political cult that uses race as a weapon to
manipulate followers. Like religious cults, it creates false or misleading
narratives that distort reality. It encourages followers to "think" emotionally
rather than reasonably. Adherents unthinkingly absorb and live out the
teachings and doctrines of the cult. Alternative explanations and viewpoints
are ignored. Politicians and cult leaders use false narratives and propaganda
to influence and control followers. In Germany, Nazi supporters, for
example, were taught to ignore facts that contradicted Hitler's ludicrous
claims about Jewish "conspiracies" and secret cabals. Germans were
encouraged to think irrationally. They were taught to accept a political
doctrine based on lies, exaggerations, distortions, and misinterpretations of
fact. Progressives do the same today. Racism is their preferred weapon
against reasonable and thoughtful behavior.
Divide and Conquer: Exploiting Our Differences In a broader sense,
identity politics create differences that define Americans at an increasingly
granular level. Progressive Democrats have successfully divided Americans
into a multitude of aggrieved fractions. Democrats sweep up these cultural
and social splinters and bundle them into a super-group of voters. Seduced
by the language of grievance and offered a series of scapegoats — white
privilege, whiteness, old white men, and so forth — the super-group is
easily manipulated — which, after all, is the point.
The American people have been divided into many angry and contentious
groups who think of themselves as belonging to various "oppressed" racial,
economic, or gender-based groups. Progressives and their allies have
persuaded people to think of themselves not as Americans but as aggrieved
parties. First and foremost, ordinary Americans have been taught to
emphasize their differences from their fellow citizens. From this vantage
point, everyone is either a fellow victim or an oppressor. Individuals are
taught to identify as black, white, gay, female, or Hispanic, but not as
Americans. What counts is a person's identity as a "gay man," "heterosexual
black woman," or perhaps a "Hispanic, male-to-female, trans-gendered,
pansexual,” anything other than an "American."
Cramming people into arbitrary oppressed groups dehumanizes and isolates
the victims of fascist manipulation. Consequently, millions of people falsely
imagine themselves as downtrodden members of a victim group.
Tribalism and identity politics are based on our most primitive instinct: the
fear of strangers. Many infants and toddlers go through a limited period
when the sight of a stranger triggers anxiety and fear. The sight of a strange
face or an unusual situation can unsettle or even terrify a young child. Their
childish fears are triggered by the "survival instinct" – the fear of a
dangerous situation that may result in death or injury. Once activated, the
survival instinct prepares us to fight for our lives, hide, or run away.
Children eventually overcome their fear of strangers, but the survival
instinct remains buried within each of us, ready to be activated by
unscrupulous politicians.
Woke fascists use tribalism to take advantage of our instinctive reaction to
possible danger from outsiders, strangers, and the "other." Politicians use
the latent survival instinct to divide people into hostile social and racial
factions. Propaganda about the "genocide" of black people by "white"
society triggers the "fight or flight" reaction associated with the survival
instinct. When we start to think of other people as our enemies, we begin to
react with anger, hate, and sometimes violence to protect ourselves from a
perceived threat — real or imagined. The goal of Woke fascism is to break
Americans down into socially isolated groups suspicious of outsiders —
people who think and look differently from us. We are taught by a relentless
flood of propaganda to think of other races, genders, social groups, and
economic classes as strangers and potential enemies. And what do we do
with enemies? In wartime, we attack and destroy them; in peace, we insult,
persecute, isolate, condemn, and marginalize them. Sometimes, like Nazis
or Antifa, we may physically attack them.
Dividing society into warring fragments is an old trick at the heart of all
forms of fascism. Racism and race-baiting are weapons used by identity
politics to break American society into a patchwork of aggrieved political
constituencies. The resulting tribalism is the heart and soul of extremist
politics. Without it, there is no fascism. The Democrat Party, controlled by
progressive fascism, is utterly reliant on the appeal to tribal instincts. So is
racism.
Exaggerating Real Problems for Political Reasons Fascists
exaggerate real problems to generate political support. Facts are distorted,
invented, and taken out of context. Hysterical and lurid narratives for public
consumption energize and motivate outrage obscure inaccurate claims
abound. The original issue loses focus and is replaced by a politically
expedient set of misrepresentations or distortions.
Progressives use accusations of genocide and systemic prejudice against
white Americans as a ploy to manipulate voters. They deliberately fan the
flames of grievance to intensify a sense of persecution, anger, and
resentment among targeted social and racial groups. Black Americans are
constantly told that society uses genocide against them. Such claims
inevitably affect how a among supporters. Misinformation obvious or
essential truths. False and exaggeration comparisons and significant
proportion of blacks feel about society. Individuals who believe in genocide
claims are likely to feel isolated, fearful, and angry toward mainstream
culture. These powerful feelings help turn many black Americans into
reliable voters for Democrats – which is the point. The political effect hurts
society in three ways: black Americans feel persecuted, mainstream society
is undermined, and Woke fascists enhance their political power.
Black Lives Matter, a significant player in the progressive-woke movement,
claims American society is riddled by "systemic racism." One alleged proof
is the accusation that police are committing genocide — deliberate murder
— against unarmed black men. The genocide claim has a powerful
psychological appeal. It evokes a strong reaction from blacks and, indeed,
all Americans. Telling people that innocent young men are being
"massacred" deliberately because of their skin color is a dramatic way to
motivate protesters. It is a highly effective political and social weapon used
to justify the condemnation of American culture and society. But is it true?
George Floyd's brutal death shows how an unfortunate event can be
exploited by ruthless people. Without a doubt, his killing by a reckless, ill-
trained police officer drew attention to the need for competent supervision
of the police and possible revision of potentially dangerous procedures like
choke holds. Floyd's last moments became a symbol of a legitimate
problem, but his tragedy also provided a convenient opportunity for Woke
fascists. The mass media quickly amplified Floyd's death. The video was
replayed endlessly. The public was shocked. Black Americans, in particular,
were understandably upset.
Progressives claimed, in the absence of real evidence, that Floyd's death
condemned all policing as structurally racist and hopelessly corrupted by
white supremacy. Rational calls for reform — better training, improved
supervision, and revamped procedures — were swamped by BLM's demand
that the police should be "defunded." Policing was attacked as evidence of
the evils of whiteness.
Activists doubled down on claims of structural racism by alleging that
police frequently commit genocide against black Americans. The
accusation of whiteness generated new levels of outrage as an alleged
conspiracy to kill off black people — a claim deliberately intended to incite
racial hate and fear to mobilize woke and minority opinion. Floyd's death
was misrepresented as the result of racism bordering on a police conspiracy
to kill black men and women. This dangerous incitement of racial hatred
and division demonstrated how exaggeration drowns out more rational
voices. A relatively small number of tragic deaths was redefined as a form
of mass murder. Was this the case?
Genocide is typically defined as "the deliberate killing of a large group of
people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation." (S74)
Genocide has three essential components:
First, the murders must be intentionally aimed at eliminating undesirable
"elements" from society. In 1994, Hutu leaders in the small African country
of Rwanda planned the mass murder of their Tutsi neighbors. Hitler and the
Nazi Party organized the systematic murder of Jews by execution squads
and death camps.
Second, victims need to belong to one or more identifiable groups. Hitler
and his supporters targeted Jews and Slavic peoples for destruction. In
1915, the Turkish government organized the mass killing and deportation of
about one million Armenians through the use of starvation and violence.
Third, large numbers of people are persecuted and murdered. The Nazis
murdered two out of every three of Europe's 9.5 million Jews. The Hutus
slaughtered between 500,000 and 800,000 Tutsis in a few weeks. The
Turkish government brutally exterminated about one million of Turkey's
two million Armenians.
Let's compare these historical massacres to progressive claims about police
genocide in the US. In a typical year, police interact with between fifty and
sixty million people of all races. These interactions result in the death of
about a dozen unarmed black men annually. In 2019, about 1,000 mostly
armed people (usually males) of various races died in confrontations with
police. Of these, 259 were black, 400 were white, and 182 were Hispanic.
Progressives point out that black men are more likely to be killed per capita
by police but gloss over FBI statistics that show young black males are also
statistically much more likely to commit a crime.
Black men are also far more likely to be murdered, primarily by other black
men, than killed by police. Of the approximately 6,500 black men murdered
in 2019, about 89% were killed by other black people. It turns out that the
alleged "genocide" of black men by police doesn't exist. Police killings of
black men are rare when compared to other causes of death. The odds are
that:
• an unarmed black male will be killed by police are about 1,615,000 to
one (S75)
• an armed black male will be killed by police are 81,000 to one
• a black male will be murdered by another black male are 3,200 to one
• a black male or female will die in a car accident are 5,600 to one (S76)
These facts clearly demonstrate that blacks are not victims of systematic
genocide — if they were, the death toll would be far, far higher, numbering
at least in the hundreds or thousands. The numbers show that black
Americans are not intentionally targeted for murder by police departments
because of their skin color. It can be argued plausibly that sometimes a
police shooting by an errant cop is racially motivated. The numbers,
however, don't support the claim of genocide. Although every individual
death is a tragic event, black Americans are much more likely to die of drug
overdoses, car accidents, and murder by other blacks than by police action
— the same applies to white, Hispanic, and Asian Americans. The evidence
that black Americans are singled out for genocide is not only unconvincing;
it is virtually non-existent. Yet, BLM and progressives continue to use
genocide and related arguments because exaggerated and blatantly false
claims work. In other words, they use wildly exaggerated claims of racial
prejudice as a political weapon.
14 RACISM AGAINST SOCIETY
Racism, along with class hatred, is one of the two primary weapons
used by fascists to attack the structure of society. Progressives use race
relentlessly to attack virtually all aspects of culture, including education,
history, democracy, language, and the economy. The constant drumbeat of
"racism" diverts attention from all other issues and forces people to think
only about race, as fascists define it, before they think of anything else.
Fascists train followers to view America through the filter of racial hate and
bigotry. Everything their supporters see or feel is viewed through the lens of
racial thinking. Race is a general justification for endless social and cultural
attacks. Allegations of racism act as a universal solvent designed to weaken
resistance to fascist political and Utopian ambitions.
Redefining Racism
An essential first step in weaponizing race is to redefine it. Changing the
definition of words and concepts can radicalize basic ideas about society.
Fascists use language to undermine and replace existing social and cultural
ideals. "Political correctness" purges the English language of ideas and
concepts that are the foundation of society. Repeat a new word meaning or
concept often enough, and behavior, laws, voting patterns, and society will
gradually morph into new and disturbing forms. Fascists have long
understood the seminal importance of this principle; many conservatives
and libertarians have not. Republican officeholders seem oblivious to this
fundamental political and cultural weapon.
Traditionally, racism was broadly defined as an attitude, behavior, or pattern
of thought by individuals who believed "that race accounts for differences
in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others"
and acts accordingly. (S77) Individuals of any race are personally
responsible for their own racist behavior or thoughts, not that of others.
This well-established definition of racism concerns individual acts based on
what we do, not on the skin color, race, or country of origin of the accused
racist.
For instance, a white man who joins the Ku Klux Klan, and a black man
who joins the Black Panthers, are probably both racists by virtue of their
actions, not their skin color. Both men are almost certainly racists because
they chose to participate in the behavior and rhetoric of organizations that
promote racial hatred. Racism is a choice that leads to particular behaviors
and thoughts by actual people. It is not a predestined stain on the soul of
250 million Americans of European descent. No one is a racist simply
because they were born white, Asian, or black. Fascists, who treat people as
groups, not individuals, work hard to misrepresent that simple fact.
Fascists are trying to change the definition of racism from actions by
individuals to actual or imagined actions by whole social groups or races.
Their goal is to make every member of a group responsible for historical
wrongs regardless of individual behavior and personal responsibility.
Modern progressives, whose ideology is deeply tainted by fascist thinking,
do not recognize the legitimacy of individual aspirations or rights. Fascists
categorize people as racial, economic, and other groups who can be
collectively praised as "good" or condemned as "bad." For example,
according to the Nazis, all Jews are bad. According to progressives, all
whites are "sinful by nature." Or, for example, Asian Americans work "too
hard, " and so forth. Fascists define racism as a permanent stain that cannot
be cured by ordinary decent behavior and a clear conscience. Everyone in a
selected group is automatically guilty of racism regardless of personal
conduct.
That's how Hitler treated the Jews. According to the Nazis, the poorest Jew
on the remotest farm in rural Poland was as guilty of conspiring against the
German Volk as a Jewish professor in Vienna. All Jews were considered
guilty of "crimes" against Germany because they were ethnic Jews. Nothing
mattered except their racial characteristics. Likewise, progressives claim all
white Americans are guilty of racist crimes — directly or indirectly —
against blacks. Racism allows no exceptions. However, a special exemption
can be earned by joining the progressive-woke movement, accepting the
pre-ordained stain of birth, and persecuting others. The Nazis did not give
Jews a similar opportunity.
Many social "scientists, " drawing heavily from Marxist theory, redefined
racism as a system or a pattern of "power relations" designed to keep
minorities "down." They claim white racism is systematic, intentional, and
sinister. Society is permanently saturated with racist "intentions." The deck
is allegedly stacked against blacks in everything from housing to jobs
through systematically racist laws and practices. Racism, the argument
goes, is structurally hierarchical, with whites on top and blacks on the
bottom. According to this argument, "whiteness" benefits all whites even if
they are never overtly or intentionally racist.
Leading American sociologists with impeccable credentials rationalize and
champion the new definition of racism. They provide the questionable
theoretical framework that underpins the claim that racism is all about
"power relations" and racial groups. For example, a Professor of Sociology
at the University of California (UC), Santa Barbara, one of this country's
most respected sociologists, wrote that society "creates or reproduces
structures of domination based on essentialist categories of race." (S78) His
work is very influential. He was affiliated with the Black Studies and
Chicana/o Studies departments at the University of California (UC) and co-
founded the Center for New Racial Studies across ten UC campuses.
Whatever his political viewpoint, his work appears to draw heavily on the
ideas of Antonio Gramsci, one of the founders of the Italian Communist
Party. Gramsci's theory of cultural hegemony claimed that capitalism, the
state, and the bourgeoisie, create cultural institutions that keep them in
control of society.
A fundamental belief of Woke fascists is that racism is at least as bad today
in society as in the past. Marxist-influenced progressives believe "power
relations" are so ingrained that America must be totally restructured.
American culture, law, history, and white Americans are tainted. America's
racist sins are still with us — unforgivable and forever unforgiven, no
matter what steps our capitalist society has taken in the past — the Civil
War, abolition of slavery, or the Civil Rights movement.
The redefinition of racism by Woke fascism treats vast groups of Americans
as scapegoats. It justifies attacks on the Constitution and basic civil liberties
like free speech. It demands new programs to "correct" America's sins.
Most importantly, it justifies imposing a de facto, one-party monopoly on
the American people. This, above all other considerations, defines the
progressive-woke movement as irredeemably fascist.
Racist Code Words
Woke racist theory uses specific code words and euphemisms to promote
the idea that America is "systemically racist." They claim these terms are
based on Marxist "science, " but in reality, they are politically charged
words that activate emotional responses in passionate followers. For
example, the term white supremacy is fraught with an immense load of
predefined meanings and political consequences. The mere mention of the
term by activists, writers, or politicians generates an outpouring of
emotional assumptions from supporters that propels them to the voting
booth, protest meetings, or riots. There is no need for rigorous proof.
Mouthing a code word is sufficient justification in itself. In the hands of
fascists, words are weapons.
In the dystopian novel 1984, George Orwell called the strategy used by
fascists, socialists, and communists to reconstruct and control language
"newspeak." His disturbing novel demonstrated how totalitarians warp and
twist words into new politicized shapes. Old meanings are stripped away
and replaced. For example, in 1984, the ministry charged with waging war
against other states was called the "Ministry of Peace." The state pretends
the army is a force for peace, not war. Authentic meaning is removed, and
only the emotional content remains. The words themselves become
meaningless or simply false.
Hitler often twisted the meaning of language. In 1939, Germany launched a
surprise attack on Poland after falsely claiming the Polish government was
the "aggressor” and Germany the victim when the opposite was true. Later,
the Nazis used the term "final solution" as a euphemism for the mass
murder of Europe's Jews. Under Stalin, ordinary Soviet citizens who
supported the wrong policy, had the wrong parents, or just got in the way —
were termed "wreckers." A simple accusation of "wrecking" got countless
people arrested and sent to prison camps — or worse.
Code words provide "revolutionary" language used to attack society. The
assault on capitalist culture redefines the meaning of words used in
everyday life. The social practices that make America successful are
undermined relentlessly. Words and concepts like objectivity and
individuality are criticized as racist and homophobic. Woke fascism attacks
the foundations of American social and economic success by using
language to label its many accomplishments as a conspiracy to oppress
ordinary people. Rational social concepts are relabeled as racist to weaken
the basic fabric of culture. The normal and authentic are repackaged as
abnormal and false. Objectivity, the basis of scientific research, is reduced
to a sinister racist plot by white people.
Carefully contrived words build a framework of self-justifying assumptions
that claim all social problems have a dominant racist component. Proof,
evidence, and intent become unnecessary when code words contain
powerful emotional valences. To trigger an emotional reaction, one merely
has to repeat a racially charged code word in a speech or an article.
Emotionally and ideologically loaded language dodges the need for proof or
logic. It covers up and excuses outrageous personal and social attacks on
millions of people simply because of their skin color happens to be white. It
confuses victims and paralyzes resistance. Here are a few examples of
common Woke fascist code words: (See Appendix A for more examples.)
White Supremacy — The idea that all white people have deeply ingrained
racial bias and believe they belong to a superior culture. Progressives
believe white supremacy is a conscious and unconscious set of ingrained
assumptions independent of actual deliberate behavior. Ordinary concepts
like a good work ethic or merit promotion are considered evidence of
unconscious bias. An executive who attended race training for New York
City school employees was taught that "White supremacy is characterized
by perfectionism, a belief in meritocracy, and the Protestant work ethic," the
exec said, adding that whites who object when accused of deep-rooted bias
are called "fragile" and "defensive." (S79)
White Privilege — A derogatory term that describes economic, social, and
other advantages resulting from supposed systemic racism allegedly
enjoyed by all white people. A racially charged Marxist euphemism for the
bourgeoisie (wealthy capitalists) and the petite bourgeoisie (middle-class
workers) who make American culture successful. Woke fascists insist that
ordinary activities like dialing 911, owning a dog, having a decent job,
going to college, and raising a family are examples of white privilege.
White Resistance — Any white person who refuses to accept personal guilt
for the wrongs of America's past 400 years is guilty of white resistance.
Denial or "protests of innocence" are considered signs of underlying guilt.
It's a blatantly racist concept based on skin color that completely discounts
rational, factual analysis of American history and society.
White Normative Behavior — Acceptance by a white person of learned
white supremacist biases and social behaviors like having a job, raising a
family, being patriotic, or obeying the law.
White Fragility — The idea that whites display discomfort and defensive
behaviors when confronted with evidence of their racism. It is considered
an unconscious "admission" of guilt. Denial "proves" the accused are guilty
as charged. Thus, Woke fascism automatically assumes people are "guilty"
based on racial identity. In other words, a white American is always guilty
of racism.
These and many other words and expressions are more than just crudely
camouflaged racial slurs. They are more complex and sophisticated than
old-fashioned name-calling. Every term is linked to a rich, though
repulsive, set of biased assumptions and a poisonous ideology of racist
contempt and hate. Most involve implicit claims and are designed to isolate,
belittle, and paralyze the victims of Woke fascist hostility. Many are based
on CRT. Marxist analysis and ideology rationalize and justify the use of
racially charged "newspeak."
None of these code words are fair or accurate. Each term or word typically
has four underlying features:
1. It is fascist in origin (mostly Marxist).
2. People are treated as groups, not as individuals.
3. Code words often create a "double-bind." Any answer is wrong. Denial
of racism, for example, is taken as proof of guilt. Confession is also proof
of guilt. Either way, you lose.
4. The code word dehumanizes its targets and strips them of their humanity
and sense of self.
Racist Interpretation of American Culture and History The
redefinition of racism by scholars, media, and politicians delegitimizes
American history. The progressive sociological description of America as
irretrievably racist recasts American history as a racist enterprise. In that
view, America, as a land of opportunity for 150 million immigrants (legal
and illegal) over four centuries, is a fraud. The enormous sacrifices of blood
and money used to abolish slavery and the long, difficult struggle for equal
rights are dismissed as trivial or misguided. In other words, American
history is a racist cover-up.
Until recently, the history of American race relations contained two inter-
woven stories. The first story told of how America, with great difficulty and
persistence, made huge efforts to correct the wrongs of the past. It's a story
of vast sacrifices designed to give minorities, especially black Americans,
equal rights to opportunity, jobs, education, and housing while providing a
good life for hundreds of millions of people. The second story concerns the
slow progress associated with overcoming the effects of racism and the
evils of the past. It emphasizes gradual, sometimes imperfectly realized,
change for the better.
Woke fascists devalue and undermine the profound struggle to right the
wrongs of the past. They emphasize the second story of resistance to change
as if it were all that matters. The left in American universities and grade
schools ignore racial progress and focus on past wrongs rather than on
sincere efforts to solve the problems of the past. Progressive news outlets,
Big Tech, Hollywood, and book publishers endlessly repeat the Woke
fascist narrative. In their hands, America's history is a one-dimensional tale
that only tells part of the story. The long, complicated, but heroic battle to
correct the injustices of the past increasingly goes largely untold and, if
recounted, is dismissed as meaningless or hypocritical.
This misrepresentation of US history is designed to bury American society
beneath ceaseless accusations of systemic racism. The goal is to depict the
US as utterly racist and beyond redemption. All previous historical efforts at
reform are presumptively assumed to be inadequate — so much so that
even mentioning them is often considered racist. Marxist critical race theory
claims the Civil Rights movement itself is tainted since capitalism's
political leaders allegedly use it to conceal and perpetuate racism in new
forms. By implication, Martin Luther King Jr., one of the most outstanding
Americans, is nothing more than a dupe.
Progressives attacked America's 240-year struggle to deal with the impact
of slavery inherited from its colonial past. They refuse to acknowledge the
historical fact that the battle to abolish slavery began before the US won its
independence. Vermont, for instance, abolished slavery in 1777.
Pennsylvania began abolishing slavery in 1780. New Hampshire and
Massachusetts did the same by the last year of the Revolutionary War in
1783. By 1804 every northern state had banned or was in the process of
banning slavery. Meanwhile, in 1787, slavery was blocked from spreading
north of the Ohio River, laying the groundwork for five new "free states" to
join the Union — Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio. The US
government criminalized the international slave trade in 1806. (See
Appendix B for a detailed timeline of the extensive and complex US battle
against slavery and racism.)
The long, courageous struggle against slavery is ignored. It has to be, or the
use of racism and racial division wouldn't get the traction it needs to crush
American culture. Millions of Millennials and Generation X Americans buy
into Woke fascism because they have rarely been told the real story of how
this country defeated slavery and racism. They have been deceived and
misinformed by an educational system increasingly controlled by FNDs.
The argument that America did little to "repent" for slavery is simply wrong
and doesn't survive even the slightest honest scrutiny. The average young
American is told little or nothing about the battle against slavery waged and
won by millions of ordinary US citizens. Little attention is paid to the
bloody fighting to make Kansas a free state (1855-1861). The role of the
Republican Party as the leading force in abolishing slavery is rarely if ever,
taught. President Lincoln's heroic leadership in the Civil War is dismissed.
His assassination and the death of 600,000 to 700,000 Americans during the
conflict – more than twice as many US deaths as in World War Two – are
ignored. Woke fascism ignores that the accumulated wealth of the slave
states was destroyed as slave plantations, cities, and towns were burned
down or looted by Union troops. The abolition of slavery by Union armies
is treated as a minor event. Progressives are trying to erase the painful but
heroic American struggle to abolish slavery because it doesn't fit their
narrative.
Over a period of 60 years, from the 1890s to the 1950s, millions of black
Americans migrated from the rural South to the industrial cities and towns
of the North and West, where discrimination was less onerous. A black
middle class gradually developed — smaller than the existing white middle
class but vibrant and growing. By the end of the Second World War (1941 -
1945), the US was on the cusp of real change. The military desegregated. In
1954, the Supreme Court case of Brown versus the Board of Education
began school desegregation —opposed mainly by Democrats.
The Civil Rights movement and mass protests of the 1960s led to the
enactment of the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965 and numerous follow-
on laws and regulations. Federal, state, and local governments enacted a
vast array of programs to help black Americans. Thousands of programs,
large and small, improved education, stimulated job creation, offered
financial assistance, and made discrimination illegal. Workplace
discrimination was banned. Colleges and universities encouraged young
black people to get higher education. Universities and public schools hired
black and minority teachers, lecturers, and professors in unprecedented
numbers. Government agencies integrated. Yet, progressives attack and
minimize this long, expensive, difficult battle against slavery and racism
because the historical facts strongly contradict their racist accusations about
American history.
The US has worked harder and longer than any other country to deal with
the aftermath of slavery and racism. No country has spent more blood and
money to accomplish that goal. The results have been real but mixed. The
old barriers to black employment in corporations, schools, and government
have been largely, but not entirely, overcome. Numerous cities have black
mayors, councilmen (and women), police chiefs, and other officials.
Barrack Obama served two terms as America's first black president. We
have a woman of color as vice president. Black voters often play a decisive
role in presidential elections. Many senior managers at US companies are
black. Black men are now 20 percent more likely to reach the middle class
or better than in 1960. The number living in poverty has dropped from 41 to
18 percent. (S80) In 1960, only about 20 percent of blacks graduated from
high school. Today, about 92 percent are high school graduates. In 1960,
black men and women made up 3.5 percent of college enrollment
nationwide. Today about 14 percent of college students are black —
roughly equal to their share of the US population. (S81) Black and minority
progress over the past 50 years has been immense but uneven. More needs
to be done, but the eagerness to comprehensively reconstruct American
culture and society from the ground up is not about race; it is about power.
Blame America First
Sweeping generalizations are a baseline characteristic of fascist thinking.
There was no such thing as a "good" Jew for Hitler. For Marx or Mao, the
idea of a "decent capitalist” was a pure oxymoron. Fascists don't "do"
subtle. In their minds, there is very little middle ground for "maybe"
thinking. They operate on the assumption that if some white Americans are
or were racist, then all are racist. By a similar exclusivist thought process, if
any part of America was ever tainted by racism, then ALL of its institutions
are, by definition, racist, no exceptions. This is typical fascist all-or-nothing
thinking.
We can see this mode of absolute thinking at work among raceobsessed
progressives. Robin DiAngelo, the current reigning doyen of American
anti-racism, appears to indict all American institutions and "white" people:
White people raised in Western society are conditioned into a white
supremacist worldview because it is the bedrock of our society and its
institutions.
DiAngelo also said, "Racism is the norm rather than an aberration." (S82)
Every aspect of American life is microscopically examined for the
faintest possible traces of systemic racism. The word "systemic," in the
context of American race relations, means deliberate, pervasive, and
inescapable. Progressives think it's everywhere. DiAngelo claims race is the
"bedrock" of society — as if all of the myriad activities of 350 million
people are nothing more than an engine of racism. In this view, the fact that
the Union Army freed the slaves, that numerous civil rights acts became
law, and that voters elected Barrack Obama meant nothing. America is still
guilty. Under the skin, in our very marrow, America is racist —or so we are
constantly told. Fascists think of racism as an expression of skin color.
There is nothing America can do to satisfy them. Progressives will never
forgive America or stop trying to control Americans.
Marxism supplies the theoretical foundation, the rhetorical glue, for all-
or-nothing thinking on race. Present-day Marxism/communism claims to be
"scientific" and "objective." It takes a "structuralist" approach that assumes
irrefutable "privileged" rules govern society. Critical race
progress as surface. Marxist professors believe that beneath innocent
exteriors and clear consciences, capitalist racism lurks in the structures of
society and in our secret thoughts. CRT claims to be objective and
scientific, but it primarily consists of accusations based on Marxist dogma
and emotional commitment to a cause.
On a larger scale, Woke fascists claim that even ordinary life experiences
are irrefutable evidence of racism. The underlying identifiable and theory,
today's
Marxist theory about race relations, dismisses all assumption is that the
structure of society is stacked against black aspirations in favor of
maintaining white privilege. The most basic activities, like going to work,
getting an education, or buying a house, are considered signs of systemic
racism. BLM takes the position that even the nuclear family — whose roots
extend into the unfathomed depths of human prehistory and biology — fits
into the racist schema of oppression and should be eliminated. During the
BLM demonstrations and riots in the summer of 2020, Americans were told
that the very concept of calling the police and expecting help was a sign of
white privilege. A Minneapolis city councilwoman told CNN that calling
911 and expecting help was something that "comes from a place of
privilege." (S83) Even the most mundane activities like working hard at
your job or owning a pet have been attacked as racist or signs of white
privilege.
On a more granular level, there is something strangely Freudian about
the search for hidden racism. Sigmund Freud (1856 - 1939), the founder of
modern psychotherapy, believed that deep in our inner brain, the
unconscious is forever busy thinking and reacting to daily life. This inner
world of experience and values helps shape our personalities. It's a realm of
deep fantasies, dreams, wishes, and ideas beyond our conscious control.
Freud theorized about the unconscious and believed inner thoughts are
often nothing more than an internal working out of ideas, desires, and
conflicts.
In recent years, ideologically minded professors, consultants, writers,
and politicians have begun searching even the deepest thoughts for
evidence of racism. Progressives steeped in CRT doctrine examine the
tiniest details for evidence of white racism. White workers in government
agencies and corporations are subjected to "training" sessions that
microscopically examine everyday activities for signs of racial crimes. The
smallest words or facial expressions become "proof" of hidden thoughts
about white supremacy. The most innocent behavior, speech, and daily
activity of millions of ordinary citizens, apparently conceal the effects of
white racism. White workers are taught to beware of committing
unconscious racially motivated "micro-aggressions" against minority
employees, which dictionary.com defines as:
A subtle but offensive comment or action directed at a member of a
marginalized group, especially a racial minority, that is often
unintentionally offensive or unconsciously reinforces a stereotype.
Woke fascism claims that a micro-aggression can be as simple as a
white worker asking a black co-worker for the loan of a pencil. CRT
interprets this innocent request as a racist act because the white requester
might be unconsciously lording it over the black person. The micro-
aggression concept is a powerful tactic because there is no need to discover
actual proof of racism. Every white American is presumed guilty of
assumptions learned conscience means nothing. A lifetime of good
behavior is no excuse. If you are white, your deepest unconscious mind is
contaminated by racism. Even unconscious fantasy life, understood by
Freud as nonvolitional and devoid of moral content, is subject to
crossexamination. "Unintentional" or "unconscious" thoughts or feelings
secretly morph into signs of white privilege and racism.
Not satisfied with the concept of micro-aggression, progressive
psychologists have added:
harboring a host of unconscious racist in a systemically racist society. A
clear
• "Microassaults … when a person intentionally behaves in a
discriminatory way while not intending to be offensive"
• "Microinsults… a comment or action that is unintentionally
discriminatory"
• "Microinvalidation … a white person telling a black person that "racism
does not exist in today's society." (S84)
Corporate thought police scrutinize employees for evidence of "subtle"
unconscious transgressions against others. They excavate the deepest inner
workings of the human mind for signs of moral impropriety and failure to
adhere to the latest woke rules of behavior. Even a saint cannot escape
having every word and deed parsed for signs of error. The question, "Hey,
do you have a pencil?" is put on trial IF the offender is white. Daring to
question the validity of the countless, sweeping claims of white privilege
and racism is itself a "micro invalidation" - a sign of a guilty unconscious.
The deepest, most innocent thoughts are subject to cross-examination and
persecution. Our unconscious minds have become witnesses for the fascist
prosecution.
All of this was anticipated by author George Orwell's 1984, which
described life in an imaginary socialist dictatorship. In his novel, the
"Thought Police" use psychology, close monitoring of subtle behavior, and
facial expressions to discover and punish deviant thoughts. Characters
attempt to hide their criminal inner thoughts using "crimestop," a form of
self-monitoring to conceal even the slightest external sign of socially
unacceptable thinking. According to Orwell:
Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at
the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not
grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of
misunderstanding the simplest arguments…and of being bored or repelled
by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction.
Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity. (S85)
Micro-aggressions, micro-assaults, micro-insults, and the whole
panoply of progressive thought control on race are real-life parallels to
1984. Millions of Americans in schools and the workplace are subjected to
racial monitoring, self-interrogation, and thought control, similar to those
practiced by fascist regimes and examined by Orwell. Progressive doctrine
is a real-world version of "protective stupidity" that controls and
manipulates millions of its adherents. In Biden's America, "race
consultants," cancel culture, Big Tech, and government officials have
assumed the role of Orwell's Thought Police.
Scapegoats — White Middle Class and Working Americans Fascist
racism uses the primitive idea of a "scapegoat" to blame others for the
alleged wrongs of society and life in general. Its leaders and intellectuals
invariably target some readily identifiable social, ethnic, and economic
groups, like Jews or the non-vaxed, as the cause of society's problems and
difficulties. Scapegoating provides leaders with a recognizable symbolic
enemy whose alleged crimes motivate and energize their followers. White
Americans, especially working middle-class people, are today's scapegoats
of choice.
Like earlier fascists in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union,
progressives used the scapegoat strategy as a political weapon. Whites are
treated as scapegoats collectively and individually held responsible for the
real and imagined ills of racism as determined by their skin color, not their
actual behavior. Scapegoating is powerful. The guilt of actual racists, past
or present, is falsely extended to all group members — alive or dead, even
centuries after the fact. Modern scapegoating uses "guilt by association"
based on generic factors like skin color or nationality — not individual
behavior.
Scapegoating derives its psychological power by transferring
responsibility for life's problems to someone else. A scapegoat is generally
defined as "a person who is blamed for the wrongdoings, mistakes, or faults
of others, especially for reasons of expediency." (S86) Scapegoating allows
the causes of poverty, defeat in war, racism, unemployment, crime, and
other social ills — which are often very complex — to be ignored and
blamed on others. Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany's defeat in World
War One. Marx attacked entire economic classes — the bourgeoisie and the
petite bourgeoisie — as oppressors of the "people." Mao did the same with
"landlords." Progressives blame all white people collectively for slavery
and racism. Whites in Biden's America have to "prove a negative" — "I am
not a racist" — in the face of systematic smears by politicians, intellectuals,
and media. The concept of "innocent until proven guilty" is dead.
Shame and Guilt
Progressives use guilt and shame to manipulate the emotional state of their
followers and browbeat opponents into silence. The focus is on "white
guilt" — the sense of collective responsibility for historical or social acts of
racism committed, or allegedly committed, by other people, not oneself.
Progressives obediently accept blame for what others did centuries ago, and
then they insist everyone else does the same. Their insistence is little more
than an attempt to deflect their sense of shame and guilt onto innocent
bystanders.
Self-imposed guilt is both satisfying and distressing. Millions of FNDs
thrive on self-righteous indignation fed by vicarious pain and anger about
the crimes — real, imagined, or exaggerated — of the past. Criticizing and
condemning the evils of history creates a comfortable and pleasant sense of
moral superiority over others that feeds and nurtures the ego. However, the
psychological "feeling" of guilt can also be unpleasant. Co-existing feelings
of pleasure and pain inspire millions of "left-wing" Americans to support
grotesquely overwrought progressive critiques. Their leaders exploit these
feelings to promote white guilt for political reasons. White Americans are
blamed for actions they didn't personally commit and racist thoughts they
probably never experienced because it advances the socialist, one-party
agenda of the Democrats.
Shame, the painful feeling associated with a sense of personal guilt, takes
the game to even higher levels of manipulation. It makes a person feel
disgraced by his or her behavior, thoughts, or a sense of profound personal
inadequacy. It is an assault on the self and often leads to avoiding others,
acting defensively, or feeling anger. Shame causes low self-esteem, anxiety,
and depression. This pathology leads psychotherapists to consider shame an
unhealthy condition often requiring treatment. According to the American
Psychological Society (S87) shame is:
A highly unpleasant SELF-CONSCIOUS EMOTION arising from the
sense of there being something dishonorable, ridiculous, immodest, or
indecorous in one's conduct or circumstances…
Progressive leaders and intellectuals dismiss guilt as a cop-out. They
complain it is easy for white followers to feel "good" without
acknowledging personal responsibility for racism. This is where shame
comes into play. Shame is promoted as a virtuous replacement for mere
guilt. Woke fascists order Americans to search their white, racist souls for
wicked thoughts, micro-aggressions, and other hateful crimes. The appeal
to inner shame is blatant. Shame is now a positive social good.
 Popular publications like Psychology Today market shame to induce
white Americans to atone for their presumed individual racism. Instead of
being a treatable psychological condition, shame has become a path to right
thinking about race. It's like an adult speaking to a naughty child, "you
should be ashamed of yourself." According to an article appearing in
Psychology Today:
Shame is a necessary requirement for true anti-racism development.
While guilt can lead you to take corrective actions, it doesn't lead you to
examine what it was about you — your beliefs, values, biases, assumptions
— that led you to engage in racist actions in the first place. It also doesn't
lead you to challenge the group and systemic forces that perpetuate racism.
(S88)
Fascist leaders have long applauded, even demanded, selfcondemnation,
acceptance of shame, and social guilt. Show trials, demonstrations of
shame, and required self-criticism intruded into daily life in the Soviet
Union under Lenin and Stalin. Mao's Cultural Revolution featured countless
show trials and "struggle sessions." Ordinary Chinese teachers, government
employees, factory workers, and managers were often forced to confess
crimes against the "People" publicly and criticize their own inner thoughts
and feelings. They were often beaten and sometimes killed during or after
their confessions.
There is a frightening similarity between public shaming during the
Cultural Revolution and BLM demonstrations in 2020. White woke
demonstrators often bowed their heads, "took a knee," and humbled
themselves in a bizarre imitation of Chinese Communist struggle sessions
where deviation from the official doctrine on economic, political, or social
issues was an actual crime. Following the communist conquest of South
Vietnam in 1975, a million former soldiers, government workers, teachers,
and other "shameless" miscreants were sent to "re-education" camps for
months or years. Inmates were systematically intimidated, shamed, and
forced to reject their previous ideals and beliefs as social and political
errors. Public self-criticism and shaming were a large part of the
reeducation program. Now, it has come to America. (The internet is filled
with FNDs who call for coerced re-education and punishment of the 74
million people who voted for Trump.)
Strong emotions are the bread and butter of fascism. Reason, facts, and
logic are its enemies because they nurture independent thinking. Individual
thought is a threat to the entire fascist project. Consequently, Woke fascism
systematically uses guilt and shame to manipulate followers into thinking
only permitted thoughts. These feelings break down the resistance of
ordinary Americans in a relentless assault by the media, universities, and
public schools. Guilt, shame, scapegoating, blame, redefinition of basic
concepts like race, and re-writing of history, are standard tactics used to
intimidate and neuter opponents. Woke fascism is built upon a foundation
of shame and finger-pointing deeply familiar in fascist regimes, and their
victims, throughout history.

15 RACISM, REVENGE, AND RETRIBUTION

I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character. — Martin Luther King, Jr.
Racism comes out of our pores as white people. It's the way that we are.—
Robin DiAngelo (S89)
Fascists want retribution – revenge – against America and its people for
alleged mass racism and other crimes. The goal of the civil rights
movement of the 1960s was to end racial discrimination and create genuine
equality between the races. Martin Luther King and civil rights leaders
fought to heal America and create an era of goodwill in which a person's
race and color no longer mattered. Half a century later, progressives
jettisoned conciliation and focused on punishment, humiliation, and racial
revenge against anyone with the wrong skin color. They adopted racism in
its purest form – judging people by their skin pigment. Martin Luther
King's dream that "people will not be judged by the color of their skin" has
been turned on its ear – people will be judged by the color of their skin!
Today’s Woke fascists are as "color-conscious" as the most arrogant
19thcentury plantation owner or meanest member of the old Klan.
FNDs have eliminated racial equality and created new racially favored
groups. It's a lamentable throwback to early and mid-20th- century fascism,
where race was a basic foundation of political power. Nazi Germany used
racial policies to punish Jews, Slavs, and other "inferior" races. Jews were
not only reviled as enemies, but their personal property, homes, businesses,
and places of worship were seized and distributed among Nazi officials and
supporters. Nazi death camps were more than murder factories; they were
torture chambers. Jews were starved, beaten, and executed. Nazis wanted
retribution and divided the world into good and evil. Jews were cast in the
role of evil doers deserving punishment. Germans, on the other hand, were
the good people wronged by history, righteously crushing their enemies.
Today, that old formula has been revived. The average white American is
stigmatized as a natural-born racist responsible for the actual and alleged
sins of people who lived and died centuries ago. They must be punished,
humiliated, and humbled.
Woke fascist Democrats have adopted many of the tactics and ideas of
the Nazis. They fancy themselves as the sword of vengeance, fighting on
behalf of the oppressed. In reality, they are merely swapping one set of
victims for another. Fascists do not want justice; they want revenge against
their enemies and control over their followers. As one progressive professor
at Drexel University tweeted, "All I Want for Christmas is White
Genocide." (He was eventually forced to resign. His dream was a bit too
blatant for even the university's administration.) (S90)
The old socialist Soviet Union, fascist to the core, was in many ways
one of the most utterly and unapologetically racist regimes in modern
history. Soviet-style politics, collective guilt, and revenge led to the
deportation of minority groups from their homelands to barren,
undeveloped areas. Over 20 million innocent Soviet citizens were forced to
move because they belonged to undesirable ethnic minorities and "counter-
revolutionary" groups like the Volga Germans, Poles or Taters. The cruel
deportations of minorities in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s are now
widely considered crimes against humanity. Deportations of various
minorities killed up to 2 million people due to violence, disease, starvation,
and imprisonment. Mortality rates soared as high as 24 percent among some
minorities. (S91) Deportations were particularly hard on the descendants of
the historical enemies of Russia: Crimean Taters, Chechens, Poles, and
others, whose ancestors fought against Russians in the past. These groups
were persecuted for the original sin of resistance to the old Russian Empire
and the Soviet Union. Survivors were treated as second-class citizens and
denied opportunities for advancement, education, or employment.
Chinese Communists are currently persecuting Tibetans and Uighurs
whose remote ancestors engaged in intermittent warfare with Imperial
China in previous centuries. In 1950, Chinese Communists conquered Tibet
and began a brutal, racially motivated persecution of Tibetans by the Red
Army and secret police. Over one million people have died so far. Since the
conquest, China has resettled several million ethnic Chinese in Tibet. The
newcomers permanently disrupted Tibetan culture and changed the ethnic
composition of the country. Tibetans are now a minority in their own land.
Compare China's deliberate intention of changing the population balance of
Tibet to the Biden administration's open borders and population
replacement scheme.
China also systematically persecutes its ancient racial and religious
enemies, the Moslem Uighurs. About ten percent out of a total population
of 11 million have been imprisoned, tortured, and sterilized. The remainder
lives under a harsh police state regime and lacks fundamental human rights.
In 2020, a secretly recorded video showed hundreds of Uighurs bound hand
and foot, surrounded by heavily armed police waiting for transportation to
some distant prison or slave labor camp. Fascism in all of its forms –
Chinese, Russian, German, or American – is deeply racist.
Original Sin
As discussed in Chapter 9, progressives use "white privilege" and
"whiteness" to justify condemning a whole race as collectively guilty of
racism. It makes no difference whether an individual is rich or poor, works
hard, or is lazy; everyone in the hated group is marked for punishment.
Since blacks were excluded from Harvard in the past, it is now necessary to
exclude whites by lowering standards or setting up quotas for admission. It
doesn't matter whether an individual student is, or has ever been, racist. It
doesn't matter whether an individual is or is not a better student. What
matters is the compensatory ideal, the deeply satisfying sense of righteous
pleasure liberal deans, activists, and the rank and file derive from turning
the tables on the bad guys. The Germans, not surprisingly, have a word for
it: schadenfreude — schaden, which means "harm," plus freude, meaning
"joy." Schadenfreude, then, means taking pleasure in another person's
misfortune.
Original sin, of course, is an idea stolen from Christianity. From the fascist
perspective, it simply means that all white Americans and society are
indelibly tainted by the ancient crime of slavery regardless of personal guilt.
White Americans must expiate that collective guilt through whatever
economic, social, and cultural upheavals fascists wish to inflict. Original sin
is a never-ending justification for condemning America and white
Americans. Progressives will never be satisfied. If you are white, you have
to carry that ancient sin in your very essence to the end of time. Despite
protestations to the contrary, original sin is an endless rationalization for
social and governmental extremes. Just as it was in Nazi Germany, but not
as extreme.
"Positive" Racism
The ideas of retribution and original sin are re-segregating America.
Woke fascists believe desegregation perpetuates white supremacy.
Consequently, they feel entirely justified in building a society based on
race. In their view, principles like merit, hard work, experience, and talent
must give way to race-based quotas, special privileges, hiring by skin color,
and adherence to politically correct thought.
Positive discrimination is "...the act of favoring someone based on a
"protected characteristic."(S92) A protected characteristic can be anything
progressive politicians, officials, university presidents, and CEOs wish —
race, skin color, language, sex, gender, or political party. They justify their
action by finding a convenient rationalization to exclude people of one
characteristic in favor of another.
Today positive discrimination, or racism, is known as equity. It is
blatant compensatory racism meant to benefit one group at the expense of
another. Its proponents claim that using race (sex, gender, etc.) to "correct
historical injustice" is morally justified by collective guilt and original sin.
In reality, it is simply old-fashioned racism. Like most fascist ideas, it
enshrines the treatment of people as faceless masses, disregards individual
rights, empowers politicians, and punishes opponents.
How does positive racism work? Recently, NBC Universal announced
that half of all employees must be women and half of minorities in the
future. (S93) White males will be excluded based on racial and sexual
characteristics. White males, whose only crime was being born of the
wrong race and the wrong sex, will be penalized. NBC's progressive math
simply reverses alleged bias based on racial and sexual characteristics to
favor new groups. In the author's opinion, NBC's management is not
correcting the fundamental wrong of racism. They are enshrining it. Two
wrongs somehow make a right. The ethical and moral legitimacy of
punishing individuals innocent of any wrongdoing is deeply flawed —
especially those based on genetic characteristics like skin color, penis, or
vagina.
 Positive racism in education enforces artificial advantages and
disadvantages based on race to benefit preferred groups. For example,
officials at the Oak Park and River Forest High School (OPRF) in Oak
Park, Illinois, ordered teachers to give preferential grading to members of
minority groups. How? According to published reports by:
Equalizing "test scores among racial groups, OPRF will order its
teachers to exclude from their grading assessments variables it says
disproportionally hurt the grades of black students. They can no longer be
docked for missing class, misbehaving in school, or failing to turn in their
assignments, according to the plan." (S94)
White and Asian students who work hard, show up for class, and do
their homework will be penalized with artificially lowered grades in favor
of selected racial groups based on skin color. Why? Simply because
progressive educators believe that "traditional grading practices perpetuate
inequities and intensify the opportunity gap." In other words, "opportunity"
is not based on individual effort but on skin color based on group rights.
Equity is an expression of Woke fascism that penalizes hard work and
rewards poor behavior. It is pure racism.
Once the principle of protected characteristics is accepted and used, as it
is today, it establishes a precedent. If a white male can be penalized for his
race, why not penalize Americans of Chinese or Indian extraction? And in
fact, that is what is happening. Many universities are actively limiting the
number of Asian students they will accept. Corporations rule out qualified
whites because of their skin color. Men are excluded because of their sex.
Thus, whites, men, heterosexual women, Chinese Americans, and Indian
Americans are penalized by protected characteristics like race and sex.
With less obvious fanfare, universities and public school districts
quietly exclude political groups, like Trump voters, conservatives, or
Republicans, from employment. Corporate CEOs, who exclude white men
based on race, will probably also hire only progressives or Democrats —
clearly, this is already happening. It smacks of a passion for retribution and
appeals to progressive schadenfreude. However, having established the
principle of exclusion, any group may become vulnerable to the injustices
of protected racism. If racism is wrong, then it must be wrong all of the
time for everybody. Surely there are other ways to cure residual racism
besides using racism to combat racism?
 Outlawing Positive Discrimination - California Prop. 209 One of the
ways to overcome racist thinking is to prevent progressives in government
from institutionalizing positive racism. This, of course, is easier said than
done. During the 1990s, positive racism (also known as affirmative action)
was promoted by state and federal agencies, despite its unpopularity with
many voters due to its ethical and practical flaws. In California, a public
debate raged over whether the state university system and other state
government entities should use racial characteristics when hiring and or
promoting employees. These institutions seemed determined to implement
affirmative action regardless of widespread opposition.
In California, however, voters decide on changes to the state constitution,
thus bypassing the state legislature and out-of-control government agencies.
In 1996, Proposition 209 was placed on the ballot. It stated:
The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment
to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or
national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or
public contracting.
In other words, Proposition 209 was designed to make racism and
sexism unconstitutional. Voters passed it with a majority of 55 percent, and
from that moment on, official discrimination became illegal in California.
Progressives and liberals were outraged. The new law established the
principle that racial discrimination was illegal no matter who benefited. The
government must be "color-blind" in hiring, contracting, and other
operations. The civil rights of ordinary citizens cannot be ignored at will.
California bureaucrats and university administrators could no longer use
racism for or against any individual or group. Special interest groups
protested and sued in Federal court. The case reached the US Supreme
Court, which declared Proposition 209 constitutional. The Court confirmed
that all citizens have fundamental equality before the law, a principle
fervently sought by Martin Luther King and millions of civil rights
demonstrators but angrily opposed by Woke fascists who promote equity.
The Empire Tries to Strike Back - California Prop. 16 In 2020
progressives, emboldened by BLM riots and demonstrations, attempted to
repeal Proposition 209. Their goal was to give state agencies and their
university system the authority to use racial characteristics to provide equity
for minorities, women, and other groups. Alleged "disparities" in hiring
would be "corrected" at the expense of innocent individuals. The bill,
known as "Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 5" (AC5), contained a
laundry list of alleged damage to minorities, including employment
disparities, wealth creation, decreased chances of graduating from college,
and numerous other problems allegedly caused by Proposition 209. AC5
essentially called for the repeal of equality before the law for all citizens. It
would have allowed public agencies and officials the right to use positive
racism to favor selected groups based on protected characteristics, like skin
color or sex, as defined by progressives.
AC5 was placed on the November 3, 2020, ballot as Proposition 16, and
something unexpected happened — it lost. In the year of the Covid-19
pandemic and BLM riots, voters rejected the attempt to repeal equal rights
for all Californians regardless of race, gender, sex, and other factors.
Despite the increase in California's minority population since Proposition
209 in 1996, Proposition 16 was defeated by 57 to 43 percent—higher than
the 55 to 45 percent victory of Proposition 209. As California state senator
Ling Ling Chang who had argued against AC5, said, "I have experienced
racial discrimination, so I know what that's like. But the answer to racial
discrimination is not more discrimination… ACA5 legalizes racial
discrimination and that's wrong." (S95)
Hitler's Nuremberg Laws
Unfortunately, the use of race as a political tool is not always defeated. In
1935, the Nazi Party and Reichstag (Germany's "Congress") enacted racial
laws aimed at German Jews. The Nuremberg law eliminated the legal
principle that all German citizens were, at least theoretically, equal before
the law. The third paragraph clearly stated, "The Reich citizen ["Aryan"
German] is the sole bearer of full political rights in accordance with the
law."
Jews lost their civil rights and, " [F]or the first time in history, Jews faced
persecution not for what they believed, but for who they — or their parents
— were by birth." (S96) They could no longer appeal to the courts for
protection from Nazi racism and persecution. The Nuremberg laws gave
government officials – Nazis
– the legal right to discriminate against Jews based on race and ethnicity.
The German government could, and did, exclude them from government
employment, access to the courts and universities, and the right to own
homes and operate businesses.
All of which was a prelude to the more vicious and brutal persecutions
inflicted upon them a few years later. Jews were denied their legal rights at
the whim of government bureaucrats, judges, and officials. Their jobs could
be, and were, given to non-Jewish Germans. Jewish teachers, professors,
lawyers, truck drivers, shopkeepers, and others were fired and replaced with
a Nazi version of equity.
The Nuremberg Law was the Nazi equivalent of California Proposition 16.
Hitler used it to correct what he claimed were injustices and crimes by Jews
against the German people. As abhorrent as it may seem, the Nuremberg
Law is an example of "positive racism." In principle, it is very similar to
Proposition 16. Both recognize or allow the use of racial characteristics to
reward and punish people innocent of any personal fault or responsibility
for the alleged racial "disparities" of society.
Proponents of Proposition 16 and similar proposals, amendments, laws, and
regulations would object to comparing their legal tampering to the
Nuremberg Law. They invariably assert their good intentions – ironically,
so did Hitler. (Just read some of his speeches.) Racists often justify racism
with claims of "doing the right thing." Southern slave owners in the 19th
century absurdly claimed that African slaves were happy and could not
function in society on their own. Russian Communists insisted society
needed protection against non-Slavs like the Crimean Taters and Volga
Germans living in the Soviet Union. Chinese Communist officials currently
justify their racial and religious persecution of the Uighurs by the threat of
Islam. Hitler insisted that the German people needed protection from
"degenerate" Jews and their "conspiracies." Today, progressives defend
equity as the only "fair" way to help and protect minorities. Racists always
rationalize and justify their behavior.
Everyday Racism
I look forward confidently to the day when all who work for a living will be
one with no thought to their separateness as Negroes, Jews, Italians, or any
other distinctions. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Our company has announced representation goals that reflect the
diversity of all people of color in the United States. By 2030, our employee
population across all job levels will align with US census data by
race/ethnicity. – Announcement by Coca-Cola (S97)
Fascism almost always reverts to the use of race. Positive racism in the
guise of equity, diversity, protected characteristics, and affirmative action
are the go-to strategies of progressives. Only specific legal and
constitutional prohibitions like California Proposition 209 can protect
fundamental civil rights and equality before the law from constant attacks
based on race. And then, only if officials and judges do their jobs.
Unfortunately, as the examples below demonstrate, the government,
corporations, and universities are hard at work promoting racism in our
most important institutions.
Everyday Racism in Government
In 2020, a "whistleblower" employed at the Sandia National Laboratories –
America's nuclear weapons research facility – came forward to expose the
use of CRT at the lab. Trainers were teaching white employees about the
alleged evils of white privilege and systemic racism. (S98) Attendees were
required to repeat white privilege statements and write letters of apology to
people they may have harmed with their wicked white ways. According to a
published report, "trainers claim[ed] that "white male culture" leads to
"lower quality of life at work and home, reduced life expectancy,
unproductive relationships, and high stress." (S99) A shocked President
Trump ordered a ban on similar training in other agencies and government
contractors. But, within days of his inauguration, Biden ordered the
restoration of diversity training in Federal agencies suspended by Trump.
Ironically, only weeks before, researchers found that "diversity training is
typically ineffective." It doesn't increase cooperation, does not stop
discrimination, or increase productivity. (S100)
In Washington State, the City of Seattle Office of Civil Rights "invited"
white city employees to attend training on "Interrupting Internalized Racial
Superiority and Whiteness." The seminar was supposed to help white
employees understand their "complicity in the system of white supremacy"
and "interrupt racism in ways that are accountable" to minorities. (S101)
In King County, Washington, the Library System brought in a consulting
firm that held racially segregated "listening sessions" to address
"institutional privileges and systematic inequities." White employees who
objected were described as suffering from "internalized racism." (S102)
In 2020, the King County Prosecutor, Democrat Dan Satterberg, required
employees to sign an "equity and social justice" pledge. White employees,
specifically, were ordered to attend "training for white employees" to "learn
the true history of racism in our country." They were also brow-beaten into
joining racially segregated "antiracist action groups." White employees
were coerced or pressured into adopting "non-oppressive and non-
exploitative attitude[s]." (S103)
After taking office, Biden ordered the US military to "stand down" for 60
days to root out racism and white supremacy. During a stand down, regular
training and business, like defending the country, is put on hold until special
training "fixes" the problem. Biden's stand-down was the longest in US
military history.
Everyday Racism: Higher Education
In 2020, the United States Department of Justice completed a two-year
investigation of Yale admissions policies and found that the Ivy League
school discriminated against white and Asian students. Applicants with the
wrong skin color were "one-tenth to onefourth" as likely to be admitted as
black students with similar qualifications. According to the lawyers at the
Department of Justice, Yale was violating the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Yale
didn't seem to care. Its spokesman declared that the university
"categorically denies this allegation." A similar case against Harvard
University is still in the courts. (S104)
At Smith College, a prestigious private women's college in Massachusetts,
the administration created "affinity" housing for students based on racial
characteristics. In theory, white students could live in designated housing,
but this, of course, is subject to social pressures by woke students. (S105) In
2020, at least 70 universities and colleges, including Columbia University,
offered separate graduation ceremonies based on race, ethnicity, and sexual
orientation. (S106) United we stand, divided we fall.
Everyday Racism: Corporations
In 2020, whistle-blowers at Coca-Cola revealed the company was allegedly
promoting "reverse racism" by using "anti-white" rhetoric in diversity
training for employees. White employees were told to "try to be less white."
Slides from a diversity seminar urged white employees to "be less
oppressive," "less defensive" and "less ignorant." One slide allegedly
contained the following quotes urging white employees to be "less white:
To be less white is to: be less oppressive Americans be less arrogant be
less certain be less defensive be less ignorant listen believe break with
apathy break with white solidarity. (S107)
In 2020, NBC Universal announced a dramatic decision to cut white
employment from its current 74 percent to 50 percent — considerably less
than the current overall white population of the US. Yet it seems that of 27
top corporate "leaders" listed at the time on NBCuniversal.com, twenty
were apparently of European descent. The eight top managers also appeared
to be of European descent. Only two of these were women. These facts
suggest that top white managers who created the policy will not lose their
own jobs anytime soon. (S108)
On October 9, 2020, travel company Yelp declared, "we're announcing a
new consumer alert to stand against racism… we've seen that there is a
clear need to warn consumers about businesses associated with egregious,
racially-charged action to help people make more informed spending
decisions." Yelp's definition of racist behavior appeared undefined. Its
policy seemed designed to impose racial standards of behavior on
restaurants, hotels, and other businesses reviewed by the Yelp platform. It
appears to have ignored the possibility that fake, exaggerated, or inaccurate
reports could be used to punish or harm otherwise innocent companies.
Yelp may have ignored the possibility that the policy might create an
oppressive atmosphere biased against white-owned businesses — mirroring
early and mid-20th-century biases against black-owned businesses before
the 1960s civil rights movement. (S109)

16 BIG TECH CENSORSHIP BY PROXY

I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be
depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them
the real facts. —Abraham Lincoln (S110)
We’ve increased disinformation research… it’s important to take faster
action against harmful posts … and Facebook needs to move more quickly
to remove harmful violative posts. — White House spokeswoman (S111)
Why should freedom of speech and freedom of press be allowed? Why
should a government which is doing what it believes to be right allow itself
to be criticized? It would not allow opposition by lethal weapons. Ideas are
much more fatal things than guns. Why should any man be allowed to buy a
printing press and disseminate pernicious opinions calculated to embarrass
the government? — V. I. Lenin (S112)
Censorship by Proxy: The Bill of Rights in Danger For over two
centuries, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights stood as protection against
government attempts to censor or suppress freedom of speech and the press.
The Founders believed a functioning democracy is impossible without
freedom of expression. James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights,
thought democracy would fail without free speech protections against
government power:
Our First Amendment freedoms give us the right to think what we like
and say what we please. And if we the people are to govern ourselves, we
must have these rights even if they are misused by a minority. (S113)
Despite Madison's wise admonition, free speech is under direct attack as
never before. The Bill of Rights is in danger for several reasons.
First because, as Mussolini said a century ago, "The truth is that men
are tired of liberty." Hard to believe, but many Americans no longer value
our fundamental freedoms. Apparently, getting their way is more attractive
than respecting other people's liberty. Progressives expect to keep their right
to speak while silencing others. What better explanation can there be for
cancel culture?
Second , the Founders feared the rise of ruthless, power-hungry
politicians like those who now dominate the Democrat Party. These ruthless
individuals are more than willing to adopt the tactics and goals of fascism in
their lust for power. Today's Democrats view free speech as an obstacle to
be crushed, just as the Founders anticipated.
Third , the internet and modern communications have given fascist
politicians a convenient way around constitutional restraints on censorship.
The Bill of Rights and state constitutions were written to limit government
power. The First Amendment says, "Congress shall make no
law...prohibiting the free exercise" of free speech, which leaves the field
open to private enterprise – a potentially disastrous loophole. The
Constitution doesn't prevent private companies from censoring their
customer's speech.
The Founders lived in an age where a large newspaper had a circulation
of a few thousand copies. They couldn't imagine that someday a handful of
large companies would control communications between billions of people.
Nor did they foresee that in 21st-century America, Big Tech would use
technology to censor freedom of speech and the press by proxy on behalf of
a fascist-friendly political party.
Congress has the authority to protect free speech from private
companies, universities, and other organizations but won't act. Power-
hungry Democrats in control of Congress and the Biden White House
encourage the assault on free speech because it helps them politically. They
rely on private corporations to take full advantage of the loophole in the
First Amendment. Censorship by proxy is one of their primary methods of
seizing power and neutering democracy to ensure permanent control of the
US government and society. Big Tech and Big Media use their power on
behalf of Woke fascist officials to control free speech and circumvent the
Bill of Rights. Big Tech can openly censor public discourse to help fascist
politicians evade the Constitution.
Censorship by proxy gives fascism a constitutionally immune means of
suppressing free speech. Long-established legal precedent allows private
companies the right to control what they are allowed to say in their business
activities. For example, a newspaper has the right to report whatever stories
it wishes. It may include or omit information, facts, and ideas at will.
However, wronged individuals can sue a newspaper if it knowingly or
recklessly publishes false or defamatory information. Big Tech internet
companies have the same right to censor content, and thanks to the Net
Neutrality Act passed by Congress, they are protected from lawsuits that
might keep them honest.
Currently, Big Tech has nearly absolute control over what it allows or
prevents its customers from saying or publishing on its platforms. Facebook
and Twitter can legally block or censor "free" speech at will for any reason
at all. Given their immense access to vast numbers of people, they can
control, manipulate, or censor the presentation of facts and ideas to the
American people. They can and do allow virtually unfettered access, for
example, to Democrat candidates like Joe Biden while preventing
opponents like Donald Trump from communicating with his supporters.
Even worse, Big Tech can and does cut off discussion or dissemination of
ideas and facts to the American public arbitrarily. Their control of the news
seen by millions of independents prevented voters from learning facts that
might have influenced their votes in 2020.
Big Tech - Bullied by Democrats
The effort to use Big Tech as a proxy for government political censorship
dates to at least 2016, when candidate Trump effectively used online
websites and services to reach out to prospective voters. His opponent,
Hillary Clinton, was infuriated by Trump's success. She was dismayed by
the apparent willingness of Big Tech to allow Republican access to social
media. She expected all forms of media to be overwhelmingly friendly and
cooperative. So, she struck back, accusing Big Tech of "anti-competitive
practices" designed to "undermine" elections. Senator Kamala Harris and
other Democrats asked Twitter to suspend Trump's accounts for alleged
violations of its policies against harassment and hateful conduct. It didn't.
Big Tech held its ground (briefly). After Hillary lost in 2016, leading
Democrats initiated an aggressive anti-tech campaign in Congress directed
against Facebook and Twitter. They accused both companies of
"anticompetitive practices” and launched a prolonged attack on social
media.
Highly publicized hearings were held in the House and Senate.
Executives were browbeaten and threatened with harsh regulations unless
they complied with Democrat demands to censor speech. But what they
really wanted was Big Tech's help in the 2020 election cycle. Some
Republicans (RINOs) foolishly joined the chorus, not understanding that
they were merely helping Democrats recruit Big Tech against them. In
2019, Democrats pilloried Big Tech and demanded tough regulations. CEOs
of the biggest, most influential social media giants got the message. In
2020, they intervened on various pretexts to censor critics of Biden. Big
Tech executives unleashed their natural progressive tendencies and went all
out for Democrats. They turned the full force of their wrath on Trump,
Republicans, and their supporters. Pleased with their success, many
Democrats quietly dropped calls for strict regulation. Big Tech's bias and
censorship won the election for Biden.
The left-wing political inclinations of Big Tech executives, spurred on
by their fear of government intervention, made them willing to partner
openly with a political party to suppress free speech. They deny their bias,
but their hefty campaign contributions to progressive causes say otherwise.
Big Tech firms gave far more money to Hillary than Trump - $62 million to
$7 million — almost nine to one. (S114) From 2019 to 2020, leading
companies and their employees gave vastly more to Biden and Democrats.
Alphabet, Google's parent company, donated $21 million, of which only 7
percent went to Republicans. Microsoft gave $17 million, of which 14
percent went to Republicans. Facebook contributed $6 million, with 10
percent going to Republicans. (S115) By October 15, 2020 —less than three
weeks before election day — 99% of campaign contributions by Twitter
employees and PACs went to Democrats. Facebook employees and PACs
gave 91.7% to Democrats. Biden was the largest single recipient of
donations by both companies. (S116)
 Politicians who successfully manipulate the flow of information on the
internet and in the news media are not necessarily fascists. However,
fascism appears when government agencies use their official power to
control free speech and freedom of thought for political purposes. The full
extent of the pressure brought to bear on Big Tech by Democrat officials at
various levels of government is unknown. However, in May 2021, Judicial
Watch released documents showing that officials in the California Secretary
of State's office allegedly pressured YouTube to take down posts on
election-related content they didn't want the public to see. (S117) YouTube
appears to have complied.
In an earlier case, Judicial Watch successfully sued the Iowa Secretary
of State, forcing him to release documents and emails between the
Communications Director of the Iowa Secretary of State and a Facebook
official, allegedly asking for help to block a "false" story. Facebook
apparently was happy to oblige. The post was labeled as "false. " Facebook
responded to the Director:
Our third-party fact-checkers have rated this content false, and we have
applied a filter over the content warning users before they click it that the
content has been rated false by independent fact-checkers. (S118)
Who were the so-called "independent fact-checkers?" What were their
qualifications? Were they biased? Were they competent? Who verified their
judgments? What made their opinion more valid than the person or
organization that put up the post? What happens to free speech if
government officials and Big Tech block facts and opinions they dislike?
Why do we even need progressive "fact checks" initiated on behalf of a
political party in a free country?
It took lawsuits to reveal these two incidents. However, there are
numerous other examples of what appears to be blatant political bias. A
recent study found 646 alleged instances where Twitter and Facebook
clamped down on conservative critics of Biden and Democrats. Many
individuals who criticized Biden were banned, their comments deleted, or
their speech restricted. (S119) This may be the tip of the iceberg. It seems
probable Big Tech has quietly or secretly blocked freedom of expression by
thousands, perhaps millions of Americans since 2016.
Censoring "Misleading" Speech
In politics and civil discourse, "misleading" is often, if not generally, a
matter of perspective. For example, for four years, Democrats proclaimed
Trump an agent of President Vladimir Putin. They repeated this lie on news
programs and the internet many thousands of times. Democrat politicians
and their supporters posted thousands, perhaps millions of misleading or
false posts on Facebook and other social media outlets. A weak-kneed
Republican Attorney General bowed to the pressure and assigned a special
prosecutor, Robert Mueller, to examine the allegations. For two years,
investigators conducted hundreds of interviews and reviewed thousands of
documents but found NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE to back up Democrat
claims. Yet, even after Mueller's conclusions, Facebook allowed Trump
critics to post misinformation about the affair with little or no restriction. If
misinformation was so significant to Facebook and other media companies,
why didn't they do more to block misleading posts about Trump from
appearing on their platforms?
It seems likely that wealthy executives haven't bothered to read Madison
(quoted earlier) or the words of any other Founder. The argument that
misleading information has to be blocked ignores Madison's warning that
"we must have these rights even if they are misused." Perhaps their attitude
is based on the arrogant assumption that people are too dumb to separate
truth from lies. Perhaps it's raw, naked partisanship. Despite occasional
half-hearted endorsements, Big Tech CEOs don't seem to believe in the
fundamentals of democracy. The evidence suggests that they believe foolish
voters need to be led by the nose to the ballot box and made to vote the
right way. Inconvenient opinions, ideas, and facts are too dangerous for
public consumption. The people might not vote for the fascist candidate.
In almost every case of political censorship, Big Tech allegedly erred on the
side of caution. They quickly blocked Trump, conservative, and Republican
Tweets, Facebook posts, and other communications. Disputed Tweets and
posts by Biden were rarely blocked, even though many of his campaign's
statements were at least as questionable as those of Trump. Big Media
spared Biden intense scrutiny and routinely focused their energies on
Republicans and conservatives. The evidence again strongly suggests that
open political expression, as opposed to Woke fascism, is suppressed,
restricted, or censored.
After the 2020 election, Facebook issued a 22-page report bragging about
its censorship activities during the campaign. The company admitted – or
boasted – it had blocked or removed 265,000 posts for allegedly violating
its policies against voter interference. It rejected 3.3 million ads, it claimed,
to protect against misinformation and foreign influence. The report asked
for more regulations on elections. The Biden administration's recent attempt
to create a Disinformation Governance Board may have been inspired by
the apparent zealousness of Facebook and Big Tech to censor the political
views of at least half of the American people.
Let's take a moment and look at what Twitter blocked in its allegedly
public-spirited censorship program during the 2020 campaign and on
election day. Twitter censored many Trump tweets during the 2020
elections, including one sent election night stating: "We are up big, but they
are trying to steal the election. We will never let them do it. Votes cannot be
cast after the Polls are closed!" (In fact, many states allowed voting long
after the poll's official closing
– in some cases illegally.)
Twitter quickly censored and blocked retweets of Trump's claim, tagging it
as "misleading":
Some or all of the content shared in this Tweet is and might be misleading
about an election or other civil process.
Twitter blocked Trump's account without any apparent legitimate
evidence to substantiate their action. The company and its managers
blocked Trump's claim that election results were manipulated. At the time,
no one, including Twitter management, could possibly know whether
tampering had occurred. Indeed, there was much evidence that tampering
did occur. The fact that Trump failed to get the courts to intervene in
alleged election frauds committed by Democrats came later. And the failure
of the courts to intervene, often for technical or process reasons, seems, in
retrospect, questionable. For example, the US Supreme Court refused to
hear a lawsuit by several states because they lacked "standing."
As an allegedly neutral referee, Twitter effectively disenfranchised its
customer's right to consider and discuss Trump's assertion. It should have
been up to the voters to discuss and accept or dismiss Trump's claim. As
Madison said, "Our First Amendment freedoms give us the right to think
what we like and say what we please." Apparently not.
Late in the campaign (October 2020), the New York Post published a
headline story featuring alleged incriminating evidence of Biden family
corruption. The blockbuster story had the potential to be a game-changer —
if the public had access to it. The Post published emails and photos found
on Hunter Biden's laptop left for months at a computer repair shop.
According to reporters, the emails suggested Hunter "took cash for access
to his father, Joe Biden." Biden denied he was paid for access. Hunter's
actions and emails told a different story.
Alarmed campaign officials canceled Biden's schedule and hid him
from the public. No questions are allowed. Facebook and Twitter quickly
censored posts on the Biden scandal. Twitter "locked" the Post's account.
(S120) The company claimed, erroneously, that the article used "hacked
material." In fact, the Post reporter used information legally obtained from
a laptop Hunter abandoned at a repair shop. Twitter announced, "We are
taking action to block any links to or images of the material in question."
Users who clicked on the article link got an alert stating, "Twitter or our
partners have identified this link as being potentially harmful." A later
warning called the story link "potentially spammy or unsafe." Unsafe? A
more honest statement might have said that this link is potentially harmful
to the Biden campaign. Facebook announced it would limit access to the
story by "reducing its distribution on our platform."
Big Tech used its vast power to prevent millions of voters from hearing
about or discussing an important issue. Americans were not allowed to
make up their own minds. And that is exactly what the agents of censorship
sought to accomplish. Shortly after the election, a poll found that 36 percent
of Biden voters were unaware of his connection to the Chinese Communist
Party through his son's business dealings. Fully 13 percent of those voters
told pollsters they would NOT have voted for Biden had they heard about
the scandal. That translates to 4.6 percent of all Biden voters, or about four
million votes, more than enough to have tipped the election in battleground
states like Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Michigan to Trump. The president of
the polling company summed it up, "It is an indisputable fact that the media
[Big Tech and Big Media] stole the election. The American electorate was
intentionally kept in the dark... the media and the big tech companies did
everything in their power to cover it up." (S121)
Facebook and Big Tech were not alone in their efforts to keep the public
uninformed about crucial information. It is interesting that Big Tech and the
Nazis used the word "misleading" to justify censorship. In 1933, Hitler
enacted a law intended to regulate the operation of the press and news
organizations. Section 14 of that law ordered editors, under penalty of law,
to "keep out of the newspapers anything which in any manner is misleading
[author's italics] to the public, [or] mixes selfish aims with community
aims." (S122) The words and justifications of Section 14 are amazingly
similar to the many rationalizations used by social media companies to
justify censorship. Criticism or unauthorized discussions about Hitler, the
Party, other leaders, and government policies were strictly banned. Editors
in Nazi Germany censored critical and embarrassing information to protect
the regime.
Not to be outdone in zeal for protecting the ignorant public from
misleading information, in 2020, Mailchimp, an email delivery and
marketing firm, banned "misleading" content in the emails they deliver.
According to the company:
Mailchimp does not allow distribution of Content that is, in our sole
discretion, materially false, inaccurate, or misleading in a way that could
deceive or confuse others about important events, topics, or circumstances.
(S123)
Misleading, false, or inaccurate by what standard? By whatever
arbitrary criteria executives wish, for whatever purpose they deem
appropriate. It appears that their policy blocked or interfered with
communications between their customers and other individuals. This seems
roughly equivalent to the US Postal Service reading and censoring mail
before delivering it. In the author's opinion, Mailchimp's decision
represented a dramatic escalation in censorship by proxy. In the author's
opinion, censoring "content" in customer communications is an activity
strikingly similar to censorship commonly found in many fascist countries.
Now apparently, in the US, also. If Mailchimp censors client emails and
communications, why couldn't Google or Yahoo? Why couldn't Apple
monitor and edit text messages sent over a cell phone? What is to stop
Verizon and other giant telecommunications companies that provide the
"backbone" for the internet from censoring political speech on behalf of the
Biden administration? It turns out there isn't any reason "why not."
The disturbing trend of corporations taking unilateral action against
freedom of speech includes "de-platforming" websites, which is equivalent
to a cable company banning Netflix. In some cases, de-platforming occurs
without specific examples of "violations." In a recent case the
conservativetreehouse.com (CTH), a website with 200,000 subscribers, was
de-platformed by WordPress, a large web-hosting platform. (S124) A week
after the November 2020 elections, WordPress notified CTH that "given the
incompatibility between your site's content and our terms, you need to find
a new hosting provider and must migrate the site by December 2."
Allegedly, WordPress did not provide any examples at the time of claimed
violations to justify their action. CTH, a conservative news site, contained
no hate or abusive speech or depictions of violence. CTH was a WordPress
customer for ten years, yet they were given about two weeks to "migrate" or
move the site, a complex, disruptive, and expensive process. Some
observers believe the short notice was intended to be punitive or even
vindictive.
The lesson is that even technical service providers like Mailchimp and
WordPress are willing and able to clamp down on free speech anytime, for
any reason. To no one's surprise, the victims of these actions are
overwhelmingly conservative and Republican.
As we have seen, large private corporations often use their power to
limit free speech. Firms like Facebook and Twitter claim their rules are
intended to preserve civility, eliminate misleading information, and clamp
down on "hate speech." They appear to have several other motives: First,
their senior management tends to be very liberal or progressive. Second,
they want to avoid controversy, which they feel harms their platforms.
Third, they are subject to a wide range of intimidation from progressive
organizations and media outlets. Fourth, their managers have no stomach
for being grilled and threatened by Democrats in congressional committees.
Fifth, they expect the Democrats to reward them with businessfriendly
legislation.
Censorship by proxy is a practical, real-world way to censor free speech
quietly. The government keeps its hands clean, Democrats get deniability,
and progressives use fascist tactics to impose their social and economic
ideas on America. What do the American people get? They get censored.
Censorship by Search Engine
The internet is a gigantic mass of information on millions of subjects. It
contains billions of web pages, articles, book excerpts, videos, and images
representing an almost unimaginable array of political ideas and opinions.
In theory, it is the largest repository of free speech ever created. People who
like or hate Trump, Biden, Republicans, Democrats, progressives, Marxism,
democracy, or any other political person or concept can find material of
interest on the internet. But can they actually locate the information they
want to see?
What good is this vast mass of information if the government or its allies
tamper with or block access to political information and opinions officials
and politicians don't like? Direct government censorship of the internet may
be unconstitutional, but what would happen to democracy if a third-party
controlled access to opinions and information? Many experts and
knowledgeable observers believe Big Tech has been using search engine
technology to control, or at least influence, access to the internet for some
time.
Big Tech controls all major search engines and associated technology. It
appears they have been using that capability to bias the results of web
searches to favor political allies or progressive ideas. The alleged
interference almost certainly prevents the spread of dissenting opinions.
Corporate bias has a "chilling effect" on free speech by preventing access to
information.
Manipulation of search engine technology makes it theoretically possible to
reduce the number of "hits" that result for particular types of websites.
Reducing hits damages the economic viability of targeted websites. Fewer
hits mean fewer or no advertising dollars, limiting profitability or even
forcing a site to close down. Experts call this process "demonetization." Big
Tech appears to have actively blocked or discouraged companies from
placing paid ads on web pages to punish websites and control content. An
example might be the financial impact on affected websites that lost
advertising when Facebook rejected 3.3 million ads in 2020. One suspects
that few advertisements of progressive causes were banned.
Google, by far the largest and most powerful search engine, uses "Search
Quality Ratings" to grade searches and websites to ensure they meet "user"
needs. At first glance, it may seem like a good idea to tamper with allegedly
harmful content to "protect" the public, but is that really the case? Google's
publication states:
Search results should help people. Search results should provide
authoritative and trustworthy information, not lead people astray with
misleading content. Search results should allow people to find what they're
looking for, not surprise people with unpleasant, upsetting, offensive, or
disturbing content. (S125)
What happens if controversial subjects like politics, civil discourse,
discussions of global warming, or various Covid-19 pandemic disputes
occur? Google's guidance states:
 Websites or pages without some sort of beneficial purpose, including
pages that are created with no attempt to help users, or pages that
potentially spread hate, cause harm, or misinform or deceive users, should
receive the Lowest rating.
Sounds benign and reasonable when applied to pornography or sites that
"cause harm," but how about other cases? What is to stop Google raters
from using these rules to down-rate websites they dislike for political
reasons? When it comes to politics, what defines "harm"? What does
"beneficial" mean? Electing Joe Biden? Promoting the war in Ukraine?
Limiting free speech?
Down-rating is effectively a form of censorship because it makes it
difficult, perhaps impossible, to use Google, the world's premiere search
website, to find "harmful" political web content. Websites ranked "lowest
rating" become more or less invisible. A website may exist but ends up as
one of thousands or millions of search results so far down the search page
results list, that it almost certainly will never be seen.
Who decides? This is the crux of how Big Tech uses groupthink to
censor the great unwashed masses of Trump supporters and any individual
or group they don't like. Google says,
[For] pages that have a beneficial purpose, the amount of expertise,
authoritativeness, and trustworthiness (E-A-T) is very important.
In other words, web pages should be based on E-A-T to ensure the
content is reliable and authoritative, and trustworthy. How is this done?
Simple. Raters find "expert" or similar opinions to judge whether the
content is beneficial and not misleading. Google provides this example:
Medical advice should be written or produced by people or
organizations with appropriate medical expertise or accreditation.
Sounds logical, but who decides which experts are "authoritative"?
Decision-makers are company employees or raters selected or approved by
Big Tech. And, based on the evidence of who gets banned, it seems
probable that the vast majority of raters and decision-makers, and their
corporate masters, are progressives and Democrats. So ideologically, left-
wing raters are likely to choose "authorities" they feel are experts. (S126)
This is exactly what happened when companies like YouTube, owned by
Google, blocked videos of medical doctors who disagreed with official
pronouncements about Covid-19 – opinions, by the way, that often proved
to be more accurate than information from the CDC.
 Raters appear strongly biased regarding politics, culture, and even
science. In the reasonable to accreditation." Yet during the Covid-19
pandemic, Big Tech repeatedly censored, banned, and blocked many fully
accredited medical doctors, scientists, and researchers who questioned the
value of full lockdowns, closed schools, or supported the use of new
therapies. In October 2020, YouTube reported it had censored 200,000
videos about Covid-19, including those of Trump's medical advisor, Doctor
Scott Atlas (S127), and hundreds if not thousands of other medical
professionals. In December 2021, it took down the video of Joe Rogan's
interview with Doctor Robert Malone, one of the inventors of the vaccine
technology used to make the Covid-19 vaccines, allegedly for being anti-
vax!
Months later, many opinions that were protected and nurtured by Big
Tech based on mainstream groupthink turned out to be misleading.
Researchers, for example, found that lockdowns, the gold standard of
pandemic prevention, were of questionable value and even harmful. The
World Health Organization (WHO), once the champion of lockdowns,
declared in October 2020, "We really do appeal to all world leaders: stop
using lockdowns as your primary medical example used by Google, it
sounds choose people with "medical expertise or control method." (S128)
In the early days of the pandemic, Doctor Fauci, head virologist of the
CDC, told the public that masks were not necessary. Yet several months
later, he called masks essential. Fauci later admitted he gave false
information to the public to ensure doctors and nurses would have enough
masks. In other words, he lied.
Big Tech and Big Media repeated his later insistence on the value of
masks over and over. Their fact-checkers made it official "science." A year
later, Fauci demanded that all Americans use masks despite vaccinations.
Fact-checkers again cited him as an authority. Yet research by reputable
scientists suggested masks and vaccines were not nearly as effective as
believed. The "science" kept changing. Experts, especially in science, are
often proven wrong or change their minds as new evidence appears. Big
Tech's censors get it wrong in two ways: they tend to choose "experts" who
agree with their viewpoint and then censor others who disagree. Worst of
all, accidentally or deliberately, they often censor political speech on behalf
of Woke fascism.
 Lincoln, quoted at the top of the chapter, got it right when he said, "I am
a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon
to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts."
Big Tech is not wise or honest enough to presume to censor free speech.
Fascist-friendly corporations lack the wisdom, integrity, and selflessness to
substitute their narrow-minded thoughts for those of 350 million
Americans. Censorship weakens democracy and encourages Woke fascism.

17 BIG MEDIA CENSORS AMERICA

He who now talks about the ‘freedom of the press’ faces backward, and
halts our headlong course towards Socialism. — V. I. Lenin (S129)
There is no doubt that a free press is the first enemy of dictatorship.—
Fidel Castro, the first Communist dictator of Cuba (S130)
Two things form the bedrock of any open society: freedom of
expression and the rule of law. If you don't have these things, you don't
have a free country. — Salmon Rushdie quoted by Senator Mitch
McConnell on the floor of the Senate.
Censorship by proxy in America results from a combination of powerful
Big Tech and Big Media companies manipulating and controlling the flow
of information on behalf of Woke fascism. For our purposes, "Big Media" is
defined as large television networks, major news organizations, leading big-
city newspapers, publishers, entertainment companies, and major websites.
Woke fascist ideas about race, politics, free speech, culture, and history
increasingly dominate these powerful organizations.
Top executives often adopt the extremist positions of progressives if it
helps their companies and their careers. They are fearful of angering the
progressives and follow the path of least resistance. Many Big Media
executives are globalists in outlook and appear to care little or nothing
about the US, its people, its Constitution, culture, or history. Most CEOs
view themselves as a class of elite global managers with few loyalties to the
USA. Globalists look at the American working and middle classes with
disdain as mere consumers without rights. Inferiors. Subordinates.
Uniformity and Self-Censoring
Censorship in fascist countries is mainly centralized. Tone and content are
controlled by the center of power. In Nazi Germany, censorship and
propaganda were carefully stage-managed by Joseph Goebbels, the minister
of information. He met daily with his editorial staff and decided what
newspapers and radio stations would report. The Soviet Union worked
about the same way. Government officials at the highest levels determined
basic news content. The word was passed to leading news organizations like
Pravda (ironically meaning "truth"), and across the Soviet Union, news
organizations fell into line. Or else.
In 2022, censorship is decentralized but more and more coordinated as it
tightens its grip on free speech and democracy. Companies like NBC, CBS,
or the New York Times generally ban or refuse to air similar stories.
Information that doesn't support progressive narratives is edited out of
existence. Facts about Joe Biden and his son's possible corruption are
discouraged. Covid-19 vaccine safety issues and concerns are erased.
Big Media emphasizes group thinking and a broad willingness to defer to
Woke fascist viewpoints. Newsrooms are packed with FND journalists and
editors who fervently follow the lead of progressives to promote fascist
views on free speech, race, democracy, and culture. For decades progressive
editors and journalists have promoted newsroom uniformity by refusing to
hire Republican or conservative journalists and writers. Gradually, as older,
traditionminded journalists retired, newsrooms became overwhelmingly
liberal. This is the process of gradual revolution anticipated by Gramsci.
The same process took place in higher education. Left-wing professors and
department heads gradually hired fascist-friendly academics like
themselves. All others were filtered out. Thus, newsrooms and universities
constantly move leftward towards censorship and fascist ideology. In many
news organizations, the result is fascist control or domination of news
reporting and programming. Dissent in those organizations is suppressed
through social pressure and the threat of job loss.
The growing political unanimity of newsroom personnel is analogous to
how Nazi news organizations purged anti-Nazis, Jews, and people who
disagreed with Nazi values from gainful employment as journalists and
reporters. News editors and reporters had to be "pure" Germans and good
Nazis, not Jews or fans of democracy. They couldn't be of Slavic ancestry,
homosexuals, or Nazi rivals like socialists or communists. In the Soviet
Union, Pravda and other news organizations required journalists to be
Communist Party members. The same is true today in Communist Cuba.
As reporting and analysis in Big Media gradually moved to the left,
journalistic "standards" also moved to the left. Values changed. The concept
of news reporting as a fair presentation of facts and information gave way
to politicized stories. Fascist concepts like "words are violence" took hold.
Ironically, fewer and fewer journalists believed in free speech or balance in
the selection of news. Journalism became politically correct, and other
viewpoints were systematically excluded.
Political bias in the media, formerly limited to opinion-editorial pages,
spread throughout the publication. Soon all sections of a newspaper,
magazine, or website, from news to sports, reflected Woke fascist values.
The ideal of objectivity gave way to subjectivity — allowing personal
preferences to contaminate content selection. Reporters morphed into
advocates who viewed their role as gatekeepers manipulating the news for
political and social purposes. Readers were no longer given all of the news
about a subject. Inconvenient facts and ideas tended to be edited out in
favor of advancing left-wing agendas.
For example, during the run-up to the 2020 election, Big Media ran
thousands of stories on the alleged corruption of Trump and his family. By
contrast, the story of Biden and his family's possible corruption was
"buried." Many news organizations simply didn't cover it. Those that did
dismiss evidence of corruption as "fake." As discussed elsewhere in this
book, polling shows that media bias on this and other subjects changed the
2020 election outcome.
Although newsroom bias is clearly evident, many "critics" and
"researchers" go to great pains to deny the obvious. Research and polls
confirm that the composition of news organizations consists largely of
Democrats and "moderates." Media apologists insist that journalists'
political views and inclinations don't bias their reporting. A study published
in the Conversation found journalists overwhelmingly liberal but went to
great pains to dismiss the importance of this finding. The study claimed,
"simply being liberal does not make journalists biased... Claims of
ideological bias among the media may be overblown." (S131)
A rash of articles appearing on Big Media websites, newspapers, and
magazines deny or minimize political bias in the media. Clear examples of
bias and censorship are dismissed as lies, bad faith, and rants by deranged
Trump supporters. But the overwhelming political bias of Big Media is
irrefutable. Big media coverage of Trump was wildly out of balance. In
2017 a Harvard University study found that 93 percent of CNN coverage of
the Trump administration was negative. (S132) Another study found the
negative media coverage of Trump at 90 percent. (S133) In the Spring of
2020, the Media Research Center found that coverage of Trump by ABC,
NBC, and CBS was an astonishing 99.5 percent negative, nearly 40 percent
worse than reports on then-presidential candidate Biden. (S134) During the
2020 campaign, 70 newspapers openly agreed to coordinate their negative
coverage of Trump and excused their decision as made necessary by the
evils of Trump himself. (S135)
Virtually every major study and poll has found that Democrats and left-
wing journalists heavily outnumber Republicans and conservatives in the
newsroom. A research project found that the number of Republican
journalists fell from 26 percent in 1971 to 7 percent in 2013. Democrats fell
from 35 percent to 28 percent during the same period but still heavily
outnumbered Republicans four to one. The study also found that
"independent" journalists rose from 32 to 50 percent. Yet, the increase in
biased reporting continued to climb, calling into question the "moderate"
status of journalists identifying themselves as "independents." Media bias
has a long history. A 1992 study by the non-partisan Freedom Forum found
that 44 percent of 1,400 journalists surveyed were Democrats. A more
recent study conducted on supposedly tough, pro-business financial
journalists, usually expected to be Republicans or conservatives, found that
only 4.4 percent self-identified as politically right of center. In the same
poll, 58 percent self-identified as left of center – a ratio of roughly twelve to
one in favor of the left. (S136)
The NewYork Times: From Liberalism to Cancel Culture The Times
is the most influential news organization in the US. Newsroom editors and
journalists across the country take their cue from the Times. NBC, ABC,
CBS, CNN, and hundreds of newspapers and magazines slavishly play
follow the leader with the Times. It's been that way since FDR and the New
Deal or longer. For decades, its editorial viewpoint was mainstream liberal,
socially and culturally moderately left. It almost always endorsed
Democrats and expressed contempt for Republicans, but "liberal," in those
days at least, included lingering respect for democracy, free speech, and
civil rights. The paper opposed censorship and even covered news its
editors might not like because that is what good news organizations do. Its
publishers hired executive editors who understood the need to be
reasonably fair and keep the news free of gratuitous political content. In
other words, the Times formerly had some integrity and was not prone to
fascist behavior.
Over the past two decades, the Times gradually abandoned its liberal
values — although they would claim otherwise. A new generation of
publishers assumed control. The older generation of senior editors and
managers retired and were replaced by leadership willing and even anxious
to allow politics to intrude openly into the news process itself. A new
generation of journalists with little respect for American culture,
institutions, and above all, the Bill of Rights took over. The staff was
gradually radicalized in much the same way that American universities
slowly evolved from liberal and conservative organizations into Neo-
Marxist ones. Slowly, and perhaps inevitably, given the complacent attitude
of conservatives and Republicans, Marxist and racist principles came to
dominate the paper and many other news organizations across the country.
The Revolting Staff
The radicalized staff of the Times emerged as the controlling factor in how
the paper manages its "news" and editorial process. In the summer of 2019,
after a series of mass shootings, the Times published an article headlined:
"Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism." The headline was based on public
remarks by President Trump blaming "the glorification of violence" as an
important causative factor in mass shootings. The left was infuriated. They
denounced Trump for not blaming guns for the violence. A flood of angry
tweets criticized the Times. The headline was quickly changed in the next
edition to read, "Assailing Hate, But Not Guns," which editorialized the
article. Several days later, Executive Editor Dean Baquet faced an angry
staff meeting and obsequiously apologized. Reporters and editors at the
meeting demanded harsher, more critical coverage of Trump and insisted on
more stories about systemic racism. (S137) Management got the message.
A year or so later, while violent riots devastated many American cities, the
Times published an op-ed piece by Republican Senator Tom Cotton, calling
on Trump to "send in the troops" to reestablish law and order in several riot-
devastated cities. The Woke fascist staff exploded in anger. The Editorial
Page Editor, James Bennett, reportedly groveled to his staff and apologized
for publishing the piece. Intense pressure from the staff bullied management
into complete capitulation. Over 800 staff members signed a letter
protesting the publication of the opinion piece. Bennett resigned, and his
assistant Jim Dao, the Op-Ed Page editor, was demoted. (S138) In effect,
the Times agreed to allow staff radicals to run the paper. Senior
management rationalized Bennett's firing. According to publisher A. G.
Sulzberger, "Last week we saw a significant breakdown in our editing
processes, not the first we've experienced in recent years," and threw
Bennett and Dao under the woke bus. Radicals on the staff were now in
virtual charge of the paper's editorial policy and news coverage. An internal
source reportedly claimed senior management was "terrified of the young
Wokes." (S139) A few weeks later, the hostile and radicalized staff bullied
and harassed Bari Weiss, a senior member of the staff who championed
diversity of opinion, into resigning.
The Times, already in the grip of extreme woke bias, morphed into a news
organization ready and willing to practice selective censorship. In short
order, a "red flag" system was put into place, giving relatively junior staff
the ability to "stop or delay the publication of an article containing a
controversial view or position." Bennett and Dao's fate spoke volumes
about the power of the news staff to banish opinions different from their
own. Radicals apparently gained the right to censor editorials at will. And
the evidence strongly suggests that they also are free to inject their partisan
viewpoints into news articles. For example, the Times published a "news"
article in January 2021 with the headline, "A Late Burst of Climate Denial
Extends the Era of Trump Disinformation." The headline conflated "news"
and "editorial" content and used emotionally charged terms like "climate
denial, "Trump," and "disinformation" to promote a specific political
viewpoint. (S140)
In the 1940s, novelist Ayn Rand, famous for her defense of individualism
and civil liberties, predicted fascist takeovers of newsrooms. In her famous
novel, The Fountainhead, the publisher of a major newspaper chain ignored
the signs of a gradual undermining of his authority. Woke fascism, 1940s
style, quietly reduced the fictional publisher to a mere figurehead. The real-
life publisher of the Times, A. G. Sulzberger, appears to have witlessly
stumbled into the same irrelevance. Rand described the takeover this way:
[The publisher] had known for several years the trend which his paper
had embraced gradually, imperceptibly, without any directive from him. He
had noticed the cautious 'slanting' of news stories, the half-hints, the vague
allusions, the peculiar adjectives peculiarly placed [political correctness],
the stressing of certain themes [systemic racism], the insertion of political
conclusions where none was needed. If a story concerned a dispute between
employer and employee, the employer was made to appear guilty, simply
through the wording, no matter what the facts presented. If a sentence
referred to the past, it was always 'our dark [racist] past' or 'our dead [white
supremacist] past.' If a statement involved someone's personal motive, it
was always 'goaded by selfishness' or 'egged on by greed.” [whiteness]
(S141) (Contemporary words and terms in brackets added for comparison
with Rand's text.)
Book Burning
The Nazis raised book burning and censorship to an art form. Newsreels
from the 1930s recorded long columns of marching university students
throwing thousands of banned books onto huge pyres. Students at the
University of Berlin burned 20,000 books, including Freud, Gide, Einstein,
Zola, Brecht, Proust, Jack London, and many other famous authors. (S142)
The Nazis "blacklisted" numerous writers. Books were banned because the
authors were Jews, opponents of the Nazi Party, or non-Germans. The
books were "degenerate," "decadent," offensive, false, and corrupting and
did not fit into the Nazi view of society. Across Germany, librarians
removed countless books from shelves in public, university, and school
libraries for the crime of being written by the wrong people and containing
the wrong ideas. Communist countries like the Soviet Union, China, Cuba,
Vietnam, East Germany, and many others engaged in a similar process, but
without the staged book-burnings. Fascists don't like ideas they can't
control.
There are always people, left or right, who want to ban books because of
their prudery or opinions. Various school districts or library systems in the
past banned books. Some were controversial. Others were prohibited due to
profanity, sexually explicit content, depiction of drug use, and issues like
youth suicide. Fascist-style censorship is more systematic, critical, and
aggressive. It is explicitly directed at the political, cultural, and social
opinions of conservatives, Republicans, and some libertarians. In addition,
it has an ugly racist component directed against people of European
ancestry. The focus is on banishing politically incorrect opinions that differ
from progressive ideology and beliefs. Contemporary book "burning" is
about purging society of values, ideas, and history with which the left
disagrees. It affects books that offer alternative, nonfascist, opinions on
subjects from trans-sexuality and race to the content of children's books.
For example, Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn has been banned from many
public and school libraries, including those in Pennsylvania, Virginia,
Minnesota, and Mississippi. Progressives object to its alleged racial content,
including the "n-word" and the inclusion of a significant character who is a
slave. Twain's book was published in 1884 and was set in the pre-Civil War
period. It reflected the values of late 19th-century society and somewhat
realistically depicted how people lived several decades earlier. A book
written 140 years ago will not be politically correct. It's a literary classic
and provides a look at life as it was, not as woke critics wish to manipulate
reality for political reasons.
Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck, is another literary classic banned in
some places because of alleged "racial slurs and racist stereotypes, and their
negative effect on students." Ironically, when first published in 1937,
liberals applauded Steinbeck's work as powerful social criticism about the
plight of poor migrants and other agricultural workers. No longer. Like
Twain, he wrote realistically, something progressives today find
objectionable. (S143)
Pre-emptive Censorship
The US Supreme Court has ruled that government agencies cannot use
"prior restraint" to censor free speech or freedom of the press before it
occurs. Government officials cannot pre-emptively block the publication of
a book or an article merely because officials don't like or agree with it.
Unfortunately, as mentioned in the previous chapter, privately-owned
companies, like Facebook, can legally censor books and free speech in the
course of their everyday business. Progressives encourage private
censorship to suppress free speech and ideas they dislike.
Woke fascism targets "politically incorrect" books. After only two
complaints, retailing giant, Target pulled Irreversible Damage: The
Transgender Craze That's Seducing our Daughters from its stores
nationwide. (S144) Target censored a politically incorrect book that defied
the current progressive promotion of trans-sexuality as the new sexual and
social ideal. The idea that trans-sexuality might be harmful or problematic
for some individuals is forbidden. In this case, poor publicity apparently
forced Target to reverse its ban. The company's quick surrender to criticism
by a few FNDs is likely to deter the publication of similar books in the
future — which is precisely what progressives want.
Target's assault on book sales is an example of how Woke fascism
discourages the publication of similar books. Publishers won't invest in a
new book if they believe it is unmarketable. The power of a giant retailer
acting as a censor on behalf of extremists may be sufficient to eliminate the
publication of similar books in the future. Publishers may be intimidated
when large retailers ban books. This amounts to the textbook definition of
preemptive censorship and suppression of the principle of free speech.
There is no need for the Bidens of this world to ban books when
corporations can be brow-beaten into slavishly censoring political ideas and
opponents the left dislikes.
Some publishers appear to feel the heat of Woke fascism more than others.
Simon and Schuster (S&S), one of America's premier publishers, may be
one of them. In January 2021, S&S canceled its contract with Republican
Senator Josh Hawley for his planned book, entitled, The Tyranny of Big
Tech. Why did they cancel? According to the publisher, "After witnessing
the disturbing, deadly insurrection that took place on Wednesday in
Washington, DC, Simon & Schuster has decided to cancel the publication
of Sen. Josh Hawley's forthcoming book." They went on to state, "it will
always be our mission to amplify a variety of voices and viewpoints," while
hypocritically denouncing Hawley's viewpoint regarding the electoral
results of the presidential election. Hawley called their action "a direct
assault on the First Amendment. Only approved speech can now be
published," he said. "This is the left looking to cancel everyone they don't
approve of." (S145)
The S&S decision certainly looks like a surrender to progressive fascism,
but we can't be sure since we are not privy to the publisher's internal
decision-making process. But, at best, their reasoning appears to be biased
and flawed. The publisher seems to think that Hawley's dissatisfaction with
the election outcome is morally wrong. Do they believe, for example, after
the many reported irregularities of the election, that voters who are
suspicious of the results are morally repugnant white supremacists? If so,
how do they explain a poll taken before the election (September 21, 2020)
which found that thirty-six percent of Democrat voters and forty percent of
independents expected a rigged election? (S146)
If Trump had won in 2020, would S&S have condemned Democrats and
independents who questioned the election as immoral? Probably not.
Why was the management of S&S surprised or disturbed that Hawley
thought the same way as about 60 million Democrats, independents, and
Republican voters before the election? After the election, a Reuters poll
showed that 52 percent of Republican voters believed that Trump would
have won had the election not been rigged. (S147) Does S&S believe 40
million Republican voters are deemed immoral because they suspect
cheating in one of the most unusual, contested, and partisan elections in US
history? Are they all evil insurrectionists, or are they simply people who
dare to disagree with Democrat and Woke fascist narratives? Is rescinding a
contract and censoring an author for expressing an opinion held by millions
of Americans of both parties the right thing to do in a democracy? When is
censorship, for political reasons, by a major publisher morally acceptable in
a free country?
However, even the most innocent and beloved books may face the wrath of
Woke fascism. Six books written by the famed "Dr. Seuss," author of sixty
children's books that have sold over 600 million copies, have been
withdrawn from publication. Public and school libraries across the country
are removing the six "offensive" books from their shelves. According to the
Loudoun County, Virginia school district located just outside Washington
DC, "Research in recent years has revealed strong racial undertones in
many books written/illustrated by Dr. Seuss," the school district said in a
statement. What research? Was the study unbiased or simply a rehash of
Woke fascist ideology? Under growing pressure, the publisher, Dr. Seuss
Enterprises, announced it was ceasing publication of the offending books,
saying, "These books portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong."
(S148) Is that what company officials believe, or are they merely afraid to
cross progressives? If they think the books are "hurtful and wrong," why
did they wait decades to withdraw them from publication?
Inspired by the publisher's apparent capitulation to Woke fascism, the
Philadelphia Inquirer published an editorial (S149) claiming Dr. Seuss
wasn't "canceled." According to the editorial, the publisher withdrew the
books voluntarily. They explained, "the decision was made by the company
that owns and controls the books, not by the government, or by a "mob" that
pressured it."
In a case of "see no evil, hear no evil," the Inquirer's editorial staff
demonstrated that it is part of the problem. The editorial claimed that the
publisher acted voluntarily, which appears ludicrous in the face of the
available evidence. Such a claim seems intended to create a sense of
"plausible deniability," insulating progressives from facing responsibility
for censoring Dr. Seuss's iconic books. The Inquirer's rationalization
facilitated the growing push by Woke fascism to censor books and ideas in
print and online. Perhaps that was the point.
As in the case of the New York Times, the pressure to censor books
sometimes comes internally from a publisher's staff. The editorial staff of
Penguin Random House pressured the company to block the publication of
a controversial new book by author Jordan Peterson. His previous book, 12
Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos, was a bestseller. However, the staff
objected to the sequel, "Beyond Order." They claimed the book promoted
"white supremacy," "hate speech," and "transphobia" – the usual "crimes"
of whiteness used to intimidate and silence people whose ideas they dislike.
Happily, in this case, the publisher, unlike the Times, successfully resisted
the censorious demands of its woke staff, at least at the time of this writing.

18 PROPAGANDA: SELLING FASCISM

Be completely honest, do not lie, be truthful, be fair to your political
opponent. — Ernest Benda, president of the West German constitutional
court (S150)
The essence of propaganda consists in winning people over to an idea
so sincerely, so vitally, that in the end they succumb to it utterly and can
never escape from it. — Joseph Goebbels (S151)
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. — The Wizard of Oz
Politicians and their supporters use propaganda because they cannot win
arguments without it. Fascism, more than any other political movement,
cannot stand the light of fact-based truth. Its dangerous, bizarre, Utopian
ideals and aggressive behavior simply collapse under scrutiny based on
normal human motivations, feelings, and ideas. Therefore, propaganda is
indispensable to the pursuit of power. Fascist leaders and key supporters
understand that they can never attain or keep political power without the aid
of an active, relentless program designed to cover up its innumerable
failings and crimes. Fascists use propaganda because their policies,
promises, and plans don't work as advertised. Why else would they go to
such great lengths to deceive their countrymen and women?
Propaganda regulates the flow of information to ordinary citizens. The
goal is simple: fascism cannot attain or hold power in the long run, where
the truth about its disastrous policies is plainly visible. Without propaganda,
only a relatively small fraction of the public – the naive, the bloody-
minded, and perverse – would support fascism. How could it be otherwise?
Fascism is a political movement based on race, class hatred, unlimited
police authority, violence, and impractical Utopian delusions. Given a
chance, it crushes basic human rights like free speech and the rule of law. It
reduces ordinary people to helpless subjects of an all-powerful state. With a
record and a program like that, fascists must deceive, manipulate, and
conceal their true intentions. Otherwise, their aggression against existing
society and culture will inevitably fail.
Propaganda is "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature,
used to promote a political cause or point of view." (S152) Its goal is to
manipulate public opinion and gain widespread political support for the
"cause." The truth is, at best irrelevant – at worst, something to be
suppressed. Propaganda is a synthesis of fact, fiction, and distortion
intended to promote a political goal. It can be quick, simple, and bold – like
Biden's blatantly false claim that the retreat from Afghanistan was an
"extraordinary success." Or propaganda can be a relentless and complex,
interconnected program of shameless lies, distortions, and invented facts
like the 2016 Clinton campaign's Russia Hoax. For example, Nazi
propaganda falsely accused Jews of disloyalty, sexual offenses, dishonesty,
greed, corruption, and other crimes. These and other lies appeared in
political speeches, news articles, movies, radio shows, posters in public
places, books, art, schools, and public meetings daily for years.
Woke fascism constantly strives to control the media "narrative.”
Progressive propaganda appears nearly everywhere. It's unavoidable. A
multiplicity of false or distorted narratives are pounded into the eyes and
ears of Americans many times a day on television, network news, websites,
movies, social media, books, plays, and lyrics. Thousands of schools,
universities, government agencies, and even the military, constantly
promote progressive fascism and propaganda.
Censorship and propaganda are two sides of the same coin. Public
access to accurate information allows people to think for themselves and
make their own decisions – the fundamental basis of democracy. Therefore,
the success of propaganda depends on how completely legitimate ideas and
facts are hidden from the public. Censorship kills the "weeds" of competing
ideas and facts so that propaganda can replace truth with whatever fiction or
manipulated information will advance the cause. Propaganda fills the
information vacuum created by censorship. Reality is replaced by a
manufactured image that prevents the public from resisting fascism.
Fascists present their propaganda in the guise of absolute, indisputable
fact. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature in
1970, wrote that the left always insists 95 percent of their claims are non-
negotiable but is willing to discuss the remaining five percent. (Warning to
the West. Page 142) Nothing has changed.
Woke fascism insists on complete acceptance of its propaganda narrative.
Some of the most important of these include:
• America is systemically racist.
• Gender fluidity is normal.
• January 6 was an insurrection.
• Police must be defunded.
• BLM is always right.
• Open borders are good for America.
• Freedom of speech and the press is harmful to democracy.
• People who disagree with progressives are racists and white supremacists.
• Government officials should completely control education.
Lies, Damn Lies, and Propaganda
If you tell a lie, tell a big one. — Joseph Goebbels (S153)
Fascists lie to gain or to hold on to power. Their lies take many forms
but generally focus on covering up their real intentions or concealing their
failures. Their lies are political in nature and have a specific purpose. There
is always a reason for their dishonesty.
In the years before World War Two, Hitler repeatedly lied about his
aggressive intentions to expand Germany by occupying neighboring
countries. In the summer of 1938, he bullied France and England into
forcing Czechoslovakia into surrendering a large part of its territory. He
promised it would be "my last territorial demand in Europe." (S154) Six
months later, the German army occupied the rest of the country. Five
months after that, Nazi Germany attacked Poland and started World War
Two. Hitler lied because admitting his long-range plans would have
increased popular resistance and might have pushed Britain and France to
stand up to his aggression sooner than they did. German propaganda
covered his tracks.
Communist dictator Joseph Stalin pulled a similar stunt a few years
later. After Germany's defeat in 1945, he planned to impose communism on
the eastern European countries conquered by the Red Army. However, he
couldn't admit this publicly without risking interference prevaricated.
interference in Poland and other countries. He broke his promise and
imposed Communist Party dictatorships in East Germany, Poland, Hungary,
Romania, Bulgaria, and Czechoslovakia. Stalin lied to reduce the chance
that the US and Britain would use their economic resources to resist the
power grab. These countries remained communist until the collapse of the
Soviet Union in 1990.
The Biden administration also uses unscrupulous lies to further its
political ambitions. Biden supports the globalist push to abolish America's
borders. He and his top officials lie, rather blatantly, to cover up their
unseemly eagerness to replace or at least disempower native-born voters –
of all races – and replace them with compliant illegal immigrants. His
surrogate, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, lies
shamelessly on the administration's behalf. As illegal immigrant interactions
with the Border Patrol rose from 78,000 in January 2021 to nearly 215,000
by September, the Secretary announced that the border with Mexico was
"closed." He lied. The formal closing of the border was pure fiction and
propaganda because many border crossings were neglected and unguarded.
The flow of illegal aliens was actually increasing across the supposedly
closed border! When he testified before the Senate about the border crisis,
Mayorkas insisted he had no idea how many people were coming across the
border or were turned away. He insolently claimed he was too busy to
worry about it – "I work 18 hours a day."
The next day White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters she
couldn't provide numbers either. (S155) More prodding eventually led the
administration to admit they had allowed at least 12,000 out of a group of
15,000 to 20,000 Haitian illegal aliens across the border. Biden encouraged
illegal immigration while trying to hide the truth from the American people
in a blatant example of propaganda aimed at facilitating the imposition of a
de facto oneparty state.
The crisis caused by the arrival of 20,000 Haitians triggered censorship
by the Biden administration to hide the facts. For months reporters were
kept out of dangerously crowded holding facilities near the border. Video
and photos of crowded conditions were banned. The administration
concealed the magnitude of the border chaos. Fox news used drones to
show the massing of 15,000 to by Russia's American and British allies. So
he
Stalin promised to allow free elections without 20,000 Haitian
immigrants on the border and the almost complete failure of border officials
to stem the flow of illegal border crossings. Upset by the damning images,
the Biden administration ordered the Federal Aviation Agency to ground all
news drones and airplane flights for "security" reasons. The obvious goal
was to stop the flow of embarrassing and revealing images of the actual
border situation. Undaunted, a Fox news reporter flew over the forbidden
area in a Texas state police helicopter and recorded the scene for television
news. Frustrated by their inability to stop the flow of revealing images and
under intense criticism, the administration lifted the drone ban, and their
propaganda effort fell apart.
Exaggeration
Exaggeration is a standard propaganda tactic used to advance Woke
fascism's political and social agenda. Elsewhere in this book, we saw how
progressives and BLM routinely use the statistically low number of
unarmed black men killed by police to justify inciting anger and outrage
among African Americans. The purpose is to craft a narrative that "proves"
black people in the US are under systematic attack by society and that their
deaths are deliberate genocide. The goal is to manipulate black voters so
they will vote for Democrats.
Other recent exaggerations include wildly distorted claims by government
officials and the media that "January 6" was a sinister "insurrection" against
the US government, not a riot with some criminal trespassing. One tactic
used in the insurrection myth involved using the word "deadly" to describe
events that day. Propagandists claimed five people died due to the riot. In
fact, only one person died – Air Force veteran Ashli Babbit was allegedly
murdered by a Capitol Police officer who remains unindicted. Babbit was
shot to death inside the Capitol building for no apparent reason. Officials
also claimed that police officer Brian Sicknick died the day after the riot
due to injuries sustained at the hands of "insurrectionists. " In fact, the
Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in Washington DC ruled that he
actually died of a stroke, not any harm associated with the riot. (S156)
Nearly two years later, this lie is still being repeated by Woke fascist news
organizations and Democrat party operatives.
Another example of exaggeration involves the badly bungled evacuation of
Americans and Afghans from Kabul in August 2021. The evacuation cost
the lives of thirteen US service people and up to 200 Afghan civilians. Polls
showed Americans overwhelmingly considered the evacuation a mess, but
Biden publicly claimed his disastrous Afghanistan policy was an
"extraordinary success." He claimed US forces completed a "historic"
accomplishment by withdrawing 120,000 people from Kabul. However, he
omitted some damning facts:
First , only a small fraction of the 120,000 Afghans evacuated from
Kabul ever actually worked for the US mission in Afghanistan.
Second, by his own admission, Biden abandoned at least 100 to 200
American citizens and many thousands of former US employees and
helpers.
Third, according to the Washington Post, "without including coalition
evacuations, the number of US military evacuations drops to somewhere
from 66,000 to 75,000 evacuations." (S157) In other words, Biden took
credit for evacuating about 40,000 to 50,000 Afghans who were actually
transported by our coalition allies!
Afghans who were actually transported by our coalition allies!
month-long US-British Berlin Airlift in 1948 was far more extensive. The
US and its allies supplied Berlin, a city of about two million people, with
2.3 million tons of food, fuel, and supplies during the Soviet blockade at the
start of the Cold War. The airlift involved 277,000 flights supported by
32,900 military personnel and 23,000 civilians. (S158) That averages out to
about six hundred flights per day for over a year. By contrast, the Kabul
evacuation made several hundred round trips in total over two weeks to
transport evacuees and US troops.
The Afghanistan disaster negatively impacted Biden's popularity. Polls
showed a dramatic decrease in his approval ratings and a consequent
increase in negative perceptions about his job performance. Biden's
credibility as a good manager – a propaganda fantasy created entirely by the
news media and Biden operatives collapsed. Quite aside from the usual
political pressure to cover up his falling numbers, Biden's entire agenda was
imperiled. This led to the concealment of the actual number and identity of
evacuees, the refusal to answer reporters’ questions, and the creation of a
narrative falsely claiming the evacuation was a brilliant success. Big Media
quickly endorsed Biden's stonewalling and determination to "move on." In
the aftermath of the debacle, the plight of an unknown number of stranded
US citizens and many thousands of Afghan allies was studiously ignored by
the administration and the national news organizations
Concealment and Coverups
Concealment is a powerful propaganda technique. When lies and
exaggeration aren't sufficient: bury the story, cover it up, and hide the truth.
Their philosophy is, "what people don't know can't hurt us." Often extreme
or even bizarre policies might arouse fierce resistance... if the public had
access to the truth.
Hitler, for example, was determined to exterminate all European Jews, but
ever sensitive to political considerations, he was wary of upsetting ordinary
Germans. The Nazis concealed their intentions because they worried the
German people and even many Party officials might be shocked by the
liquidation of millions of people. So, they concealed their plans. The
concentration camps and mass murders were kept out of sight as much as
possible. Among themselves, high Nazi officials employed euphemisms
when planning the implementation of Hitler's orders. They referred to the
mass murder of Jews as the "Final Solution." Planners used the word
"resettlement" as a euphemism for the forced transportation of Jews to
death and slave labor camps. "Natural reduction" was the term for Jews
who died of overwork, starvation, disease, and maltreatment as slave
laborers in factories and mines. (S159) Despite attempts at concealment,
millions of Germans participated in the Holocaust or heard rumors about it.
Yet secrecy kept the Final Solution from becoming a public relations
problem for the regime.
The truth must be hidden. Progressives used BLM and the
demonstrations/riots it inspired after the unfortunate death of George Floyd
as a vindication of their racial claims. They considered anything that
weakened or undercut BLM's moral authority (as progressives view it) was
a danger to the general attack on the legitimacy of American society.
Narratives that associated the BLM riots with negative consequences for
Americans – especially black Americans – had to be hidden or undermined.
The recent unprecedented two-year rise in murders, and its connection to
the BLM "uprising" and Woke fascist empty-the-jails campaign, is
concealed and covered up. Big Media pays little attention to the dramatic
increases in the murder rate because it gives the lie to their claim that
systemic racism is to blame for crime in American cities.
The statistics are startling. Approximately 16,425 people were murdered in
2019 and 21,570 in 2020. That means 5,145 more Americans were
murdered in 2020 than in 2019. Perhaps 80 to 90 percent of these additional
victims were black or minority, which means 4,000 to 4,500 more needless
deaths of the very people BLM and Woke fascists claim to protect. The
evidence suggests that this mass slaughter is primarily the effect of Woke
fascist attacks on policing and the lack of prosecution of criminals in blue
cities. But those horrific numbers are quietly concealed. They conflict with
the Utopian claims by Woke fascists that they are making America fairer
and that the solution to crime is less policing and the end of jail for
criminals.
For decades, US murder rates fell dramatically from an astronomical 9.71
deaths per 100,000 (1991) to less than half that in 2014. They briefly rose
again from 2014 to 2016 and resumed their decline from 2016 to 2019.
Everyone hoped death rates would continue to fall, but they didn't. Murder
rates rose moderately in early 2020 and then spiked dramatically during and
immediately after riots sparked by Floyd's death. In Chicago, for example,
murder rates spiked, dropped briefly, and then rose markedly again during
the summer of riots. Then, as BLM demonstrations and riots slowly
decreased, murder rates fell but remained well-above pre-riot levels and
then soared again. Chicago, for example, saw a 50 percent increase in
homicides in 2020. New York City suffered a 40 percent increase. Murder
in Los Angeles rose 30 percent. This pattern was repeated in many US
cities. (S160)
Why? The demonstrations and riots had a massive impact on policing and
public attitudes to being policed. Demands for defunding the police, the
serial release of criminals by progressive prosecutors, and a general sense
that police can be defied, had a significant impact on law enforcement. In
many cities, the number of police fell as officers quit or city officials
reduced police budgets. For example, in New York City, officials eliminated
or cut back police programs aimed at violent gangs and career criminals.
Murders and shootings on crowded streets in broad daylight became
commonplace.
The stunning rise in murder rates was a big problem from a propaganda
viewpoint. It was necessary to deny the impact of BLM on policing and
crime. The left evolved an alternative narrative to explain it all away. The
usual suspects were trotted out to conceal the facts.
Here is a typical representative propaganda headline from CBS News:
"Murder rate climbed 29% in 2020 amid gun stockpiling and pandemic
pressures" (S161) Notice the complete absence of any mention of BLM
riots, police defunding, or progressive DAs emptying the jails.
The mention of increased gun ownership by law-abiding citizens was the
first part of the cover-up. The article claimed that "stockpiling" guns was
responsible for more murders. Yet there was no logical explanation why the
increase in legal gun purchases by law-abiding citizens, fearful of the
collapse of law and order, increased murder rates in poor black and
Hispanic neighborhoods. Gangs and criminals, after all, already had access
to a wide range of illegal guns. The article's headline ignored the dangerous
drop in community policing by overstretched and demoralized police
departments. The BLM riots, followed by cuts in police budgets,
manpower, and morale, made the streets safer for criminals. It became
ridiculously easy to gun people down in broad daylight without fear of
police intervention. It remains so today in blue states.
Then there was the pandemic deception. The underlying premise of the
article was that the pandemic increased violent crime because people were
locked down and stressed. Schools were shut. Millions were trapped at
home with nothing to do. So, implicit in this narrative, people suddenly
took their newly purchased guns, evaded the lockdown, and started
randomly murdering each other. Shooting up the local neighborhood
supposedly became a psychological release for Americans reacting to the
pandemic.
The pandemic narrative is weak. In most countries, crime dropped
significantly due to lockdowns, except in the US. A study that preceded the
BLM riots found significant decreases in crime worldwide due to pandemic
lockdowns. Researchers found that crime during lockdowns fell in 27 cities,
including Chicago, London, Barcelona, Brisbane, and Sao Paulo. Daily
assaults dropped by an average of 35 percent, robberies by 46 percent,
vehicle thefts by 39 percent, and homicides by 14 percent. (S162) Another
study conducted in Mexico found that crime rates dropped dramatically
during lockdowns due to decreases in economic and social activities,
reduction in mobility, fewer opportunities for criminal activities, and fear of
infection. (S163) Covid-19 shut down bars, clubs, street parties, and other
social venues where violence and crime commonly occur. Yet Big Media
propaganda promoted the idea that the pandemic increased crime in
America – when it fell in most other countries.
The progressive media narrative was a concerted effort to conceal the real
causes of crime by blaming guns and Covid-19. Leftwing propaganda was
designed to protect the supposed ethical innocence of BLM in the near
collapse of civil society in major US cities.
Big Media promoted the Woke fascist agenda while minimizing BLM's role
in the burning and looting of American cities. The responsibility of BLM
and the complicity of blue state Democratic officials for creating the
conditions that led to riots was covered-up. News organizations hid the
causal link between BLM and the 600 demonstrations that morphed into
violent riots. BLM apologists used two basic propaganda strategies: deny
the real impact of the riots and assert that looting and arson were justified
by historic and systemic racism.
Even the mainstream media was unable to ignore the riots completely. But
damning videos of violence could be, and were, edited or not aired.
Dismissive narratives by reporters on the scene, accompanied by carefully
edited videos of riots, attempted to conceal the truth. News anchors and
pundits minimized and concealed images of riots, looting, and arson from
the public. The real truth about the riots was hidden behind multiple layers
of Woke fascist producers, reporters, news writers, and film editors.
Networks sheltered audiences from the full implications of the violent
disaster taking place before their eyes. In a well-known example of bald-
faced media propaganda, a CNN reporter stood in front of a raging fire in
Kenosha, Wisconsin, during an active riot and declared the "protests" were
"mostly peaceful." In fact, rioters destroyed 35 local businesses and looted
or damaged 80 others. (S164) Mostly peaceful?
Nationally, during the brief period between May 25 and July 31, 2020, there
were 8,700 BLM demonstrations. Of these, according to police officials,
574 were officially declared riots. There were 624 cases of arson plus 97
police vehicles burned, and 2,385 incidents of looting. Two thousand police
officers were injured. Approximately 16,000 people were arrested for
protest-related crimes, but progressive district attorneys only prosecuted
about half. (S165) Relatively few were ever punished.
Woke propagandists manipulated public opinion by blocking access to
accurate information and controlling the narrative. Most news
organizations, progressives, and Democrat politicians minimized this
outpouring of lawlessness by reassuring the public that: "the overwhelming
majority of the more than 9,000 BLM demonstrations that took place across
the US after the killing of George Floyd have been peaceful." (S166) The
statement that only about seven percent of protests turned into violent riots
is a way of statistically concealing the most extensive rioting in US history.
Another method used to cover up the painful reality of the riots was to
justify violence as acceptable behavior. Progressives at the New York Times
normalized the idea of looting. According to a Times article entitled: "What
Kind of Society Values Property Over Black Lives?" looting is an American
norm. (S167) The author claimed, "Our country was built on looting."
The Times article prioritized its propaganda message over the reality of 450
New York businesses looted or damaged in the BLM riots. (S168) It created
the illusion of a causal connection between property values and black lives
– as if selling toothpaste or shoes is a racist act that justifies wrecking
another person's livelihood. Looting is not legitimate; it is an act of violence
against innocent bystanders, shop owners, and store employees. Many of
the looted stores were underinsured. A great many were black and
minorityowned.
Looting is violence. Looters smashed windows, broke down doors, attacked
store employees, stole private property, robbed cash registers, and set fires.
Looting and riots destroyed neighborhoods and made life generally
miserable. Yet woke progressives were indifferent to the suffering caused
by the riots they encouraged. Others were thrilled. After the riots ended and
the smoke cleared, local inhabitants remained behind to wonder where they
could buy food and medicine. After neighborhoods were wrecked and the
police defunded, left-wing journalists went home to their safe
neighborhoods to editorialize on the evils of American society.
False Equivalences
False equivalence is a form of "guilt by association." Propagandists
deliberately associate a well-established norm with something ordinary
people find unpleasant or awful. They create a false or wildly exaggerated
comparison that links the good or normal with the bad and the abnormal.
They confuse an issue, idea, or practice by creating a link, however tenuous
and questionable, between what we believe is good or true with something
we dislike.
The Times article was one of many that created a false link between private
property and black lives. Its author implied that white Americans care more
about material things than the safety of black Americans. In other words,
they are selfish and consumed by feelings of white supremacy. The author
appealed to the reader's emotions – guilt, sadness, and sympathy. He asked
readers to accept an unproven allegation on faith: that the social norms of
private property, law, and order are associated with the evils of whiteness.
The claim was intended to shock, humiliate, and motivate gullible liberal
readers into accepting the idea that America's alleged systemic racism
justifies almost any degree of violence and theft. Looting is good because
white people put material objects above black "lives." The argument
dismissed the downside of looting – violence, theft, arson, destruction of
neighborhoods, the ruin of stores owned by innocent shopkeepers, and
encouragement of general lawlessness that leads to violence and death.
False equivalences about Israel and Jews are among the most common
examples of progressive propaganda. Woke fascists claim that Jews, Israel,
and the United States are morally equivalent to Hitler, Nazism, and
terrorism. Woke anti-Semites (there are many) often accuse Jews of
behaving like Nazis in their dealings with Palestinian Arabs. Fascists (and
racists) like Democrat US Representative Ilhan Omar use false equivalences
to condemn America. According to Omar, the US and Israel are guilty of
war crimes and are terrorist states:
We must have the same level of accountability and justice for all victims
of crimes against humanity. We have seen unthinkable atrocities committed
by the US, Hamas, Israel, Afghanistan, and the Taliban. (S169)
Senior Democrat officials often encourage false equivalences not only
by what they say but by what they don't say. In September 2021, Vice
President Harris, on a college visit, refused to correct or challenge a college
student who accused Israel of "ethnic cleansing"
– a blatant lie. Harris, who claims to be pro-Israel, nodded her head, praised
the student for speaking out, and then said, "Your truth should not be
suppressed." (S170) The clear implication is that Harris believes Israel
engages in ethnic cleansing. Compare this indirect antisemitism to her claim
during the 2020 election that she supported Israel. Her bland refusal to call
out the student's false equivalence legitimized a lie. A lie unchallenged by a
high official is a form of propaganda.
The comparison of the Jewish state and the US to terrorist organizations
is propaganda designed to weaken support for Israel by linking alleged
Jewish hypocrisy with Nazi-like behavior. It takes a complex moral issue
and imposes an unsupported emotional assumption as a substitute for facts.
The long, complex history of Arab-Israeli relations is summed up
emotionally by implying that "Jews" are the problem, not the racists who
try to kill them. This activates a set of antisemitic beliefs about American
Jews that implicitly criticizes US support for Israel. On the one hand, it
exaggerates the alleged moral flaws of the US and Israel and minimizes the
deliberate moral outrages of Nazi Germany or Hamas. This is the reason
Omar and other anti-Semites lump the US, Hamas, Israel, Afghanistan, and
the Taliban” together in the same sentence. It is guilt by association
intended to create moral confusion.
False equivalences are pervasive. A few years ago, a European Red
Cross worker visiting the US prison for terrorists in Guantanamo, Cuba,
accused US troops of acting like Nazi death camp guards. The accusation
became propaganda when it was repeated by news organizations in the US
and the European Union. The false equivalency equated tightly disciplined
US guards to Nazi SS killers who systematically murdered, starved, and
tortured millions of people. US guards at Guantanamo murdered no one but
were falsely associated with history's most notorious mass murderers. The
accusation, taken at face value, either minimized the crimes of the Nazis or
falsely claimed the US operates a murderous concentration camp. The
comparison undermines America's moral and ethical legitimacy and its right
to self-defense against brutal Islamic terrorism.
False Narratives
A false narrative is a storyline deliberately intended to deceive the public
and intended to advance a political cause. It uses false or distorted
information to confuse people or stimulate an emotional response that
undermines their ability to think clearly about a subject. Hitler used the
false narrative that Germany lost World War One because the disloyal Jews
"stabbed Germany in the back." The Soviet Union and the left spread the
"nuclear winter" hoax as a ploy to halt the US deployment of nuclear
missiles to Europe. Hillary Clinton's infamous 2016 "Russia Hoax" was a
massive anti-Trump disinformation ploy financed by her presidential
campaign and the Democrat Party.
The emotional appeal of false equivalence is insidious. The false narrative
is a powerful, often complex story based on a misleading set of interlocking
lies, misrepresented facts, distortions, and exaggerations. It creates a
seemingly plausible narrative designed to advance a political agenda.
Progressive fascism and Democrat politicians are masters at the art of the
false narrative. It's a timetested formula and an indispensable tool in the
fascist toolkit. False narratives like the "Russia Hoax," systemic racism,
police genocide against black men, and the bizarre claim that biological
men without a uterus can get pregnant are essential to the success of Woke
fascism.
Almost a century ago, Hitler propelled the Nazis into power using a false
narrative based on an actual event. On February 27, 1933, a raging fire
destroyed the Reichstag building (equivalent to the US Capitol
building/complex) only days before a scheduled national election. Police
suspected arson and quickly rounded up a member of the Communist Party
who Nazis claimed set the fire. Responsibility was never clear, and some
historians blame the entire incident on the Nazis. The Communist Party was
the chief political rival of the Nazis in the upcoming election, and the arrest
of a communist pointed the finger of suspicion at them. Goebbels, the Nazi
propaganda boss, quickly invented an unproven narrative claiming that the
communists burned down the Reichstag as the prelude to a planned coup
against Germany's legal government. Ordinary Germans were shocked.
Hitler's popularity soared as his supporters successfully exploited
widespread anger and fear of a communist coup. He won enough votes in
the March 5th election to take control of the Reichstag. Within days the
Nazis enacted the infamous "Reichstag-fire decree" that banned the
Communist Party and became the legal basis for complete Nazi control of
Germany. The Nazis purged the police, then used them to persecute political
rivals. Opponents were arrested and imprisoned. Germany's constitution
was scrapped, and the country became a one-party fascist state. (S171)
It is interesting to compare the Reichstag fire to the "January 6" riot at the
Capitol. Both incidents inspired false narratives surprisingly similar in
structure and purpose:
1) Months before the 2020 Presidential election, Democrats and Big
Media began to claim President Trump would stage a coup if he lost re-
election. Almost exactly the way Nazis claimed the Communists planned a
coup if they lost in 1933.
2) The incident at the Capitol occurred shortly after an election. The
German Reichstag occurred just before an election. Both events drew
national condemnation and attention. Both were used politically against
their respective rivals.
3) Using doubtful evidence, the Nazis blamed their competitors for
plotting to overthrow the government. Without credible evidence,
Democrats accused Trump and key supporters of arranging or ordering a
coup in the form of an "insurrection" against the US government.
4) German police quickly arrested a perpetrator belonging to a rival
political party. Political opponents were arrested and imprisoned without
any legal rights. The FBI conducted raids and arrested Trump supporters for
allegedly being present at the riot. Many were held in solitary confinement
for over a year despite being charged with minor crimes like criminal
trespassing.
5) The Nazis used the fire to justify the persecution of their rivals and a
state of emergency requiring a special decree. The Democrats flooded
Washington DC with 25,000 heavily armed troops for months and began
political purges of the Armed Forces.
6) The Nazis and their media outlets used the fire as an excuse to
persecute other political parties and call communists terrorists and national
enemies. Democrats launched a highly biased investigation, called
Republicans enemies of the people, and declared "white supremacy" and
"domestic terrorism" the biggest threats to America. In his infamous Soul of
American speech, Biden declared: "Donald Trump and the MAGA
Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of
our republic. "
7) Some historians and writers believe that the Nazis arranged the fire
or conspired with police to choose a politically valuable perpetrator. There
is considerable evidence that the FBI was forewarned about the riot and did
nothing to stop it. The FBI allegedly had infiltrators at the riot who may
have actively participated and even encouraged illegal behavior. (The FBI
denies it encouraged, participated in, or helped plan January 6.)
The January 6 false narrative is based on an actual event. There is no
doubt a riot occurred, but the key unsupported claim is that Trump planned
to overthrow the US government. In evaluating the validity of the narrative,
one might ask, what kind of coup or insurrection is carried out by a random
crowd of unarmed people against a government with literally millions of
armed troops and police at its beck and call?
The accusation against Trump is a classic example of a false narrative.
It is a strategy designed to attack and weaken political rivals relentlessly.
Like the Nazis in 1933, Democrats hoped the theory would resonate with
average voters and weaken the opposition. And, like the Nazis, Democrats
played fast and loose with the rights of the accused. The relentless attack on
Trump supporters, the invocation of "domestic terrorism," and the
association of January 6 with race (white supremacy) are the real point.
Propaganda misinforms, conceals, and keeps political rivals on the
defensive and off-balance.
Repetition
Virtually all types of propaganda are repeated endlessly. Propaganda is like
the old sales truism, which advises sales trainees to ask a prospective
customer for the order at least three times. The goal is to break down a
buyer's resistance by repeating the sales pitch at every opportunity. Big
media and advertising agencies rely on this simple rule. The endless
repetition of commercials and advertisements breaks down resistance by
taking advantage of basic human psychology. Repetition normalizes an
observed behavior or message and undermines resistance to an idea or
concept. For example, Democrats and Big Media repeated their false
narrative about Trump until millions of voters accepted it as fact.
It's not a coincidence that so many famous fascist leaders viewed repetition
as essential for selling their totalitarian ideas to the "masses." Fidel Castro
said, "repetition is a revolutionary virtue." (S172) Lenin, creator of the
Soviet Union, told his followers, "A lie told often enough becomes the
truth." (S173) Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's brilliant but evil propaganda
minister declared, "a lie told once remains a lie, but a lie told a thousand
times becomes the truth." (S174) Thus, it was with the Russia Hoax.
Propaganda uses the same basic sales principle as big corporations —
repeat key messages until belief becomes second nature. Goebbels directed
a nationwide campaign in newspapers, radio, theater, magazines, books,
movies, rallies, marches, and workplace posters that relentlessly repeated
Nazi dogma. It was literally impossible to avoid Nazi messaging. It was
everywhere. Similar techniques were employed in the former Soviet Union
and are routinely used in Communist China and Cuba today. Here in the
US, fascist propaganda is impossible to avoid. Politically correct messaging
about systemic racism, white privilege, and white guilt (and other false
narratives) dominates the internet, network news, television, textbooks,
schools, and the workplace. Progressives are the dominant force in the
media, business, and education. They fervently repeat their core beliefs on
media platforms to persuade the American people to accept the imposition
of progressive Utopian values.
 Disinformation
Disinformation is another propaganda technique used to shape narratives,
confuse opponents, and persuade the public to follow or accept the fascist
program. It uses invented or distorted information on a national scale to
replace or undermine facts and ideas that contradict fascist claims. The
Russia Hoax originated with a madeup "dossier" filled with lies, distortions,
and half-truths about Trump. The claim that police practice genocide
against black men (discussed elsewhere in this book) is based on a series of
distorted and exaggerated facts presented out of context.
Disinformation can also be used on a smaller scale as a part of a more
extensive campaign. For instance, Rolling Stone magazine added its voice
to the Big Media effort to persuade Americans that Covid19 treatments
used successfully in Europe and Asia are actually dangerous or useless.
Rolling Stone, apparently eager to discredit therapies the CDC didn't
approve, failed to verify the story's accuracy. They published an article
claiming that Oklahoma hospitals were overwhelmed by people overdosing
on the drug Ivermectin – a treatment widely used by India to fight Covid-
19. The story "went viral" until the hospitals categorically denied the report.
(S175) But the public was left with the impression that alternative Covid-19
treatments were dangerous. Mission accomplished.
Politicians and governments often employ disinformation to divert attention
from failed policies. As discussed earlier, the Biden administration's
disastrous, anti-American border policies flooded the US with illegal aliens.
Videos of thousands of illegals walking largely unchallenged across the
border helped push Biden's poll numbers way down. Desperate to change
the narrative – from truth to untruth – Biden and his officials focused their
attention on a video they claimed showed mounted Border Patrol agents
"whipping" illegal aliens. Biden publicly condemned the alleged whipping
and promised to punish the perpetrators and banned horses from the border
– without waiting for the official investigation results. Big media repeated
his claims for days to divert viewers from the apparent collapse of law and
order at the border. Observers on the scene, including the photographer who
took the photo, denied a whipping occurred. Months later, investigators
concluded that the alleged whipping did not occur. Biden refused to
apologize.
The whipping claim was an opportunistic attempt to divert attention from a
dysfunctional Woke fascist policy – in this case, a virtually open border.
The alleged incident was a contrived issue designed to create an emotional
reaction among ordinary Americans. It was presented as an alternative
narrative to obscure the reality of the disastrous situation at the border. The
real issue was momentarily concealed behind a fog of disinformation about
the supposed cruelty of the Border Patrol.
19 THE ATTACK ON CIVIL LIBERTIES
The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the
Constitution. — Thomas Jefferson (S176)
It is true that liberty is precious, so precious that it must be carefully
rationed. — V. I. Lenin (S177)
The revolution will not uphold the Constitution. – Chant by FND
students as they shut down a local pro-free speech event on campus (S178)
It is in the nature of a totalitarian regime that it believes no human
activity can exist independently of itself, with its own set of values, but
must rather be judged merely as an aspect of the ruling political system. —
Jean-Francois Revel (S179)
The masses themselves naturally believe that under the term 'freedom'
they possess the right to a quite peculiar freedom of motion – freedom to
move the tongue and to say what they choose, freedom to move about the
streets, etc. A bitter deception! — Adolf Hitler (S180)
There always are excuses to justify taking away liberty from the people.
Once gone, it takes decades to undo the suppression of civil liberties. In the
meantime, life without liberty poisons the lives of vast populations. After
the Communists took over the Russian Empire in 1917, a moderately
authoritarian country became an aggressive police state without liberty or
freedom. Seventy-four years passed before the Soviet Union collapsed and
gave fundamental human rights like freedom of speech a chance. Even now,
over 30 years later, only parts of the former Soviet Empire enjoy real
personal liberty. (Poland and Hungary, for example, do. Russia and Ukraine
do not.)
Cuban fascism is in its eighth decade of power, and liberty is still
actively crushed by a police state. The Chinese Communists imposed their
totalitarian regime in 1949. It currently exists in modified form over 73
years later. The regime has gradually allowed the Chinese people some
degree of economic freedom, but it remains a one-party state where
freedom of speech, press, and free elections are strictly controlled.
In America, the 2020 presidential election was, to some degree, an
election in name only. For years before the election, Democrats and their
allies relentlessly attacked Trump with false allegations. Super-wealthy
Democrat donors flooded swing states with rivers of campaign funds. Mark
Zuckerburg reportedly spent $419 million to help elect Democrats in
battleground states. (S182) Blue states extended early voting by weeks and
distributed tens of millions of ballots that undermined voter ID laws.
Democrat allies in the media censored Trump, Republicans, and
conservatives. They hid embarrassing stories, promoted the Woke fascist
agenda, and allowed Biden to hide in the basement during the campaign.
Whether outright illegalities changed the outcome is not clear, but given the
balance of control over information achieved by Woke fascism, we may be
on the cusp of a one-party state. The outcome of elections is skewed when
one side controls most of the levers of information and power. If one party
controls nearly everything, the outcome is almost inevitable. Only
billionaire donors, top executives, Democrat politicians, and a relative
handful of elites will have some degree of real liberty in a Woke fascist
state. Everyone else will be spoon-fed, manipulated information, and lose
control over important life decisions. There will be a de facto one-party
state, and elections will be a mockery.
Crushing the Individual
In fascist countries, individual "rights" are privileges granted at will by the
state. Rights are distributed according to political status. In Nazi Germany,
Jews had no rights, not even to their bodies or lives. Nazi doctors
experimented on Jewish victims; Nazi executioners murdered them. Even
ordinary Germans didn't have rights. Instead, they had revocable privileges
for employment, food, or home ownership. Individual "freedom" depended
on Nazi Party status, loyalty to the state, and so on. These were not rights
but concessions made by the government for its convenience. In return,
citizens owed complete allegiance to the state, even offering up their lives
in military service. Ordinary Germans had no input, no electoral
representation, and no right to participate in how their society was
organized and run. Nazi "elites" made all decisions. People did not exist as
individuals but only as subjects without rights. Hitler summed it up this
way: "Above the liberty of the individual, however, there stands the liberty
of our Volk [the German People]. The liberty of the Reich [the State] takes
precedence over both." (S183)
Woke fascism assumes that individuals are acceptable as long as they think,
act, and feel according to community standards. In other words,
individuality is stripped away. What counts is the state, or rather, the people
who rule it. Mussolini put it this way: "Fascism accepts the individual only
in so far as his interests coincide with the state's." (S184) Each person and
every institution is expected to speak with one voice. We see it every day.
The Democrats, BLM, Antifa, universities, schools, and many large
corporations don't tolerate dissent from woke dogma. Only two United
States senators, Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema – two Democrats out of
276 in Congress – dared to resist Biden's agenda. And they paid the price
– relentless harassment, intimidation, and threats. Democrats and
progressives attacked Manchin and Sinema when they ventured outside of
the Party's consensus to express the slightest individuality. If senators find it
difficult to buck the fascist consensus, what will be the fate of ordinary
Americans? The answer is clear: ordinary Americans face unremitting
pressure from government agencies, the January 6 committee, Big Tech,
Big Media, activists, and the entire soul-crushing panoply of Woke fascism.
People who refuse to cooperate must prepare to resist or surrender their
rights and those of their children or even be jailed under false pretenses by
the politicized Department of Justice.
The battle against fascism is not new. A century ago, Yevgeny Zamyatin's
1920 dystopian novel "We" described citizens of an imaginary socialist
Utopia. People lived in buildings with glass walls. Everyone “woke” up at
the same time, did the same things, dressed alike, thought alike, and
watched each other endlessly repeat the same routine. Woke fascism’s
dreams differ only in detail from Zamyatin's vision of a world without
individuality.
Hitler viewed Germans the same way. He believed the state's goal was to
create the "new man." According to him, "there will no longer exist any
individual arbitrary will, nor realms in which the individual belongs to
himself. The time of happiness as a private matter is over.” He also said,
"The state is a means to an end. Its end lies in the preservation and
advancement of a community of physically and psychically homogeneous
creatures."
Individual FNDs may not see the linkage between their Utopian dreams and
their own true status as people who support or practice fascism. FNDs
resent comparisons to Nazis, but the affinity between them is striking. The
fate of free speech and individual liberties under Nazi or communist
regimes looks painfully like Woke fascism. In 2022, a professor at
Georgetown Law School openly exercised his right to free speech and
expressed opposition to Biden's nomination of a "black woman" to the
Supreme Court based chiefly on skin color. The next day, 350 students
wrote a letter addressed to the administration demanding his termination.
The dean immediately emailed the entire school, calling the professor's
words "damaging to the culture of equity and inclusion that Georgetown
Law is building every day." Equity and inclusion, of course, mean positive
racism described earlier in this book. The professor, who foolishly imagined
he had a right to free speech, took down his post. He was suspended and
forced to recant publicly and abase himself for speaking his mind.
Knowledgeable observers expected him to be fired. (S185) Woke fascism
usually doesn't kill or imprison. It mainly relies on public humiliation, job
termination, and crushing the dreams of dissenters. Digital repression is
used rather than messy Chinese-style public trials and dunce caps. How far
are the progressive students and administrators at Georgetown Law from
the mind-numbing sameness of the citizens of We? Not far. How far from
night-time marches on campus to burn books? Too close.
It's a Question of Ideology
The crushing of free speech at Georgetown Law reveals how woke ideology
based on racial "equity," intolerance, and Marxism undermines fundamental
liberties. The same process is grinding down constitutional and other
freedoms in thousands of companies, schools, and government agencies.
Millions of FNDs who staff and attend these organizations believe, just as
Germans who supported Hitler in the 1930s, that they are on the side of
justice. But they are not. They are on the side of fascism.
Organizations that innocently or optimistically adopt any part of Woke
fascism are likely to turn against one or more constitutional liberties
gradually. As we saw earlier, The New York Times abandoned the principles
of free speech under pressure from its FND reporters and editors. Free
speech fell victim to political correctness. Pressure from the same group
drove out staff who still believed in the neutral presentation of the news.
One suspects that the FNDs in control of the paper will ensure new hires
look, sound, think, and act like reallife examples of the We principle. The
MOST essential ideal of the paper – free speech – was crushed at the Times.
A similar process seems to have taken place at the famed and influential
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). For over a century, it waged a
continuous battle to protect free speech and basic constitutional liberties
against the heavy hand of government. The ACLU's often successful legal
actions defended the First Amendment and profoundly influenced free
speech. Today, their website still extols their historic commitment to
protecting free speech, but that legacy is under attack from within by
leaders and staff dedicated to racial "equity." The ACLU appears to
exemplify how an organization devoted to freedom and liberty has been
successfully hijacked by Woke fascism and turned from defending the
Constitution to undermining it.
Historically, the essential principle of the ACLU philosophy was its
determination to defend constitutional rights even if it strenuously disagreed
with the people it defended. Over its long history, it argued that the Bill of
Rights protected even Nazis, communists, and racists. It was content-
neutral and defended the essential principle of free speech and other rights.
Today that seems no longer the case.
What changed? The ACLU retreated from its defense of free speech. In
2016, it took up arms against President Trump and his supporters by taking
a full-page ad in The New York Times denouncing the president-elect. The
growing woke contingent at the ACLU viewed Trump's election as proof of
America's racism. They abandoned all pretense of neutrality and pumped
money into progressive political campaigns. Left-wing Georgia Democrat
Stacey Abrams received $800,000 in funding. The organization spent an
additional one million dollars on an unsuccessful ad campaign to keep Brett
Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court. (S186)
Old-time supporters looked on with shock as the ACLU began to practice
woke-style racial politics at the expense of fundamental civil rights. Internal
resistance to defending free speech mounted as the ACLU hired a stream of
staffers steeped in woke doctrines and racism. A new militant director
apparently abandoned all pretense of neutrality and vigorously pursued
woke racial theories. When one staffer publicly wished a Republican
senator dead of Covid-19, the organization apologized but didn't sanction
the hater. The woke staff apparently came to view free speech as something
terrible or at least suspect. They believe free speech unfairly helps the
powerful and people they dislike – white Americans, Republicans, and
conservatives – Trump voters! The director of the organization's Racial
Justice Program summed it up along ideological lines: "First Amendment
protections are disproportionately enjoyed by people of power and
privilege." (S187) Lenin put it more succinctly: "Free speech is a bourgeois
prejudice." (S188)
Even ACLU management was suspect. A letter from 200 woke staffers
condemned the organization's alleged institutional racism even though a
majority of its managers were minorities and its director Hispanic. The
letter described the ACLU's true calling as: "our broader mission... includes
advancing the racial justice guarantees in the Constitution and elsewhere."
One presumes "elsewhere" means the adoption of Woke fascist theories of
race that will reduce the Constitution to a historical footnote.
The situation was similar to The New York Times staff revolt described
earlier. Relatively moderate liberal managers hired a few woke staff, who
then hired more like themselves, and before anyone realized it, the
organization's historic mission was shoved aside. In the end, the ACLU
caved just as Gramsci predicted. In 2018, it published new guidelines that
downgraded free speech: "Speech that denigrates such groups [minorities,
etc.] can inflict serious harms and is intended to and often will impede
progress toward equality." In other words, free speech is bad; racism is
good. Thus ended a century-long defense of free speech that might offend
us. Woke fascism has transformed the ACLU.
The moral of the story is simple. Organizations that hire FNDs must prepare
to defend their principles and internal culture. This is an unavoidable reality
because, as we have seen, FNDs have absorbed part or all of the various
ideologies of fascism. They are not only willing to argue their point but are
also ready to impose their values on everyone else. The most fundamental
belief of fascism is that no other viewpoint can be allowed to exist: "Thou
shalt have no other gods before me."

20 MAKING SELF-DEFENSE ILLEGAL

You can’t use a gun for self -protection in Canada, that’s not a right that
you have, in the constitution or anywhere else.— Pierre Trudeau, Prime
Minister of Canada
The right to self-defense is the single most important constitutional or
human right. Nothing is more essential. It defends our natural right to exist
as living beings physically. Without the basic right to self-defense, human
beings are little more than slaves – servants of a slave owner or a
government official. Undermining or denying the right to self-defense is
equivalent to taking away our humanity. Without it, we lose our personal
autonomy, and our basic humanity is transferred to the state. This is the
greatest burden imposed by fascism on its citizens.
No person living in a fascist state has a right to self-defense except as
tolerated by the government for its own convenience. Fascists believe self-
defense is for themselves and close supporters
– no one else. The state might choose to tolerate self-defense by a citizen
against another citizen, but not as an inherent natural right. And, in such
states, the right to keep and bear arms is non-existent. In a non-fascist
society, self-defense is a basic right limited only by the need to ensure that
an act of self-defense is justified by the actual threat and circumstances.
Any supposedly "liberal" state that curtails the right of self-defense is not
free.
For example, in April 2022, a French man used a gun to defend himself
and his young daughter against four home invaders, killing one. He was
arrested and charged with murder. Shortly after the incident, the president
of France made the following comments:
Everyone must be safe, and the public authorities have to ensure it …
But I am opposed to self-defense. It's very clear and undisputable because
otherwise, the country becomes the Wild West. And I don't want a country
where weapons proliferate and where we consider it's up to the citizens to
defend themselves.
In other words, the French President considers his citizens to be cattle.
More or less the same attitude of Woke fascists toward Americans. (S189)
Natural law grants every human the right to self-defense against
physical attack with force if necessary. It imposes a moral duty to defend
family and others from attack. This idea comes from the Founder's belief
that citizens have a right to self-defense. They also have the right, and the
moral duty, as a "People" to resist tyranny by force if necessary. In natural
law, as understood by the Founders, the People are the ultimate source of a
government's authority. When a government usurps or unjustly violates the
constitutional rights of the People, they have the right to defend themselves
and change the government if Independence:
Governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed,
– That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these
ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute
new Government... required. According to the Declaration of
are instituted among Men [and women],
A Classic Usurpation
Canada in 2022 is a contemporary example of a usurpation violating self-
defense and other basic human rights. Prime Minister Trudeau's use of force
to disperse peaceful "Truck Convoy" protesters was pure fascism. First, he
justified his actions by claiming his fellow citizens were racists, extremists,
and generally bad people. According to Trudeau:
We are not intimidated by those who hurl insults and abuse at small
business workers and steal food from the homeless. We won’t give in to
those who fly racist flags. We won’t cave to those who engage in vandalism
or dishonour the memory of our veterans. (S190)
Then, he abused his authority and deprived protesters of their civil
rights without warrants, evidence, or proof of wrongdoing. He imprisoned
them without bail and seized their property and bank accounts. He released
the names of their supporters to the press in order to punish and intimidate
them. This usurpation was an abuse of an existing emergency law originally
intended for authentic emergencies, not peaceful protests. Indeed, it can be
argued that the Canadian emergency powers law is itself an illegal
usurpation because it gives officials virtually unlimited power to ignore
basic human and civil rights. Trudeau and his officials betrayed their trust
and became tyrants. They unleashed and encouraged the violence and
illegality of thousands of police who engaged in a "police riot" against
unarmed and peaceful citizens. They completely disregarded the basic
human rights of the Canadian protesters. The Canadian government
violated the natural rights of its citizens to be secure in their persons, not
assaulted, nor deprived of their personal property without due process.
Thousands of Canadians were treated like cattle
– the fate of all citizens in a fascist state.
Trudeau's usurpation of natural rights is virtually identical to
government repression of citizens in communist China and Cuba, where
people who disobey are beaten, arrested, jailed, spied on, and often stripped
of their personal possessions. Fascist rulers act without due process or enact
a sham legal process for propaganda purposes. Police are encouraged to use
force freely. Due process, freedom of speech, assembly, petition,
movement, and private property are casually violated or abolished. There is
no functional difference between what the Canadian government did in
February 2022 and what Castro's communist regime did to protesters in
2021. It established a precedent making it clear to the Canadian people that
the government can and will crush dissent or discourse it dislikes by using
convenient, even absurd, pretexts. Trudeau and his "Liberal Party" are
fascists. The more they proclaim they acted to protect Canadians, the more
obvious their culpability.
The Right to Self-Defense
Self-defense is an ancient right of citizens derived from English "Common
Law" that evolved over centuries before the thirteen colonies became the
United States. Common law was the original basis for American law. It
asserted that even the poorest, most humble man (and woman) has the right
to defend his "castle" or home from attack. And, by a logical extension of
that idea, individuals walking down the street or engaging in everyday
activities can legitimately defend themselves from assault. There is no legal
or rational requirement in a free society for a man or woman to suffer an
illegal physical attack passively. It is irrational to expect a victim to quietly
lie down and die while waiting for the police to show up. Nothing could be
more dehumanizing.
The right to self-defense has been upheld many times by state courts largely
on the basis of common law and common sense. For example, in People v.
La Voie, the Supreme Court of Colorado wrote, "When a person has
reasonable grounds for believing, and does in fact actually believe, that
danger of his being killed, or of receiving great bodily harm, is imminent,
he may act on such appearances and defend himself, even to the extent of
taking human life when necessary, although it may turn out that the
appearances were false, or although he may have been mistaken as to the
extent of the real actual danger." (S191)
This much seems clear. A person who reasonably believes he or she is
about to be violently attacked has a right to self-defense. In other words, a
person has a legal right to protect him or herself against an attack that might
result in death or serious injury. The courts have long recognized the
principle that an innocent person has the right to use self-defense to avoid
physical harm. (S192) State governments decide when, how, and under
what circumstances a person may use violence for self-protection, but it is
recognized in every state. Over twenty states expressly protect the right of
selfdefense in their constitutions. The other states permit self-defense
because it is implicit in their state constitutions or recognized by common
law. It also makes sense.
The states are also bound by the US Constitution. The US Supreme Court
ruled in McDonald v. Chicago that the Fourteenth Amendment requires the
states to obey and enforce the Second Amendment. (S193) The Second
Amendment, again via the Fourteenth Amendment, also protects the right to
self-defense. The Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that
guns can be used for "traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense
within the home.” (S194)
Self-Defense Attacked
Woke fascism uses a variety of familiar tactics to undermine and, if it can
obliterate the right to self-defense. Fascism attacks its basic legitimacy by
associating it with white supremacy and systematic racism. For example,
many states allow a person to "stand their ground" rather than run away
when confronted by a potential attacker. Standing one's ground is often the
safest and the only rational option when confronted by an attacker.
Woke fascists disagree. Their goal is to outlaw self-defense, and, as so often
is the case, they rely on the claim of race to justify their position. They
insist that self-defense and standing one's ground are racist and empower
white men. When a white man is attacked and stands his ground, he is a
racist engaged in "murderous vigilantism, especially against Black men."
When a black or Hispanic man stands his ground, he is just defending
himself. This bizarre double standard is typified by a former official on the
US Commission on Civil Rights who described stand-your-ground and
concealed carry laws as "a license to kill." (S195) This approach, in the
author's opinion, is obvious racism against white men in particular, and
whites in general, but that's the point. Woke fascism is built upon a
foundation of blatant racism and double standards.
Propagandists construct their arguments against self-defense by using
isolated examples. They smear all white citizens by associating them with
small, repulsive hate groups. The logic is: that white men sometimes stand
their ground and use guns in self-defense; a tiny minority of white men are
associated with white supremacists; therefore, all white men need to be
treated like "white vigilantes" and deprived of their rights. The few real or
alleged doings of "hate groups" are trotted out and used to smear all white
men through direct or indirect guilt by association:
Organized hate groups have taken note. Leaked chat logs revealed that
when planning an armed march in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August 2017,
neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups discussed the applicable rules for
shooting and killing people under Stand Your Ground.
We can all agree to dislike neo-Nazis, but does their plan to know and
follow stand-your-ground laws prove that self-defense is racist and that all
white men are vigilantes?
The same source claims:
These laws almost exclusively serve white men, providing protections
and immunity to those white Americans who claim self-defense while not
affording the same protections to Black Americans. Stand-your-ground
laws embolden armed vigilantism, and their unequal application is
emblematic of the type of structural racism embedded within our criminal
justice system. (S196)
Is this true, or is it the use of race for political reasons? A scientific
study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine found that
stand-your-ground laws are NOT related to homicide rates. The study
examined twenty-five years of national data and found that "stand your
ground laws have no effect on the rate of firearm-related homicide." (S197)
Also, notice the use of the word "emblematic" (above), meaning "an
object symbolizing and suggesting another object or an idea." (S198) In this
example, stand-your-ground laws and, by implication self-defense are
treated as the same thing as racism. And, of course, anything identified as
racist by Woke fascism or left-wing organizations is automatically assumed
to be pure evil regardless of evidence. Self-defense, therefore, must be
eliminated immediately. In reality, blacks have the same legal rights as
whites. The Constitution protects everyone's rights. If black men are not
getting equal protection of the law, and that certainly happens on occasion,
fix the problem rather than eliminate the rights of all. That would be
emblematic of a truly just and rational society! A non-fascist one.
The Attempted Legal "Lynching" of Kyle Rittenhouse In the highly
publicized Rittenhouse shooting case, Woke fascism did everything in its
power to weaken and undermine the right to self-defense. Kyle Rittenhouse,
a seventeen-year-old, was threatened, chased, and confronted by adult
attackers (one armed with a pistol) during a violent riot in Kenosha,
Wisconsin. Rittenhouse was armed with an AR-15 rifle. Confronted and
cornered, he shot three of his pursuers and attackers. From that moment
until now (months after his acquittal), his case was a model of how Woke
fascism attacks self-defense as illegitimate and uses the legal system to
persecute its enemies. (See Appendix C for a refresher on the basic facts of
the incident)
Sending a Message
First and foremost, Woke fascism used the Rittenhouse incident to send a
message: there is no right to self-defense for the average American.
Rittenhouse had to be crushed for daring to exercise his constitutional
rights. The American people had to see how their right to self-defense
against physical attack, riots, and arson no longer existed; and was always
false. Rittenhouse became an example, a warning: no matter what the
Constitution or the law says, you have no right to self-defense. The warning
falls into the same general category as the January 6 persecution, the
prosecution of Roger Stone, the raid on former New York Mayor Rudolf
Giuliani's home by the FBI, and New York State's endless investigations of
Trump. These are relatively milder versions of Lenin's admonition to his
"comrades:" You must make an example of these people… Do all this so
that for miles around people see it all, understand it, tremble...."
For fascists, it was all a matter of racial "justice." Rittenhouse was white.
His "victims" were white protesters incensed by alleged racial injustice. As
such, they had "honorary" status as minorities because they were fighting
racism. Rittenhouse's critics claimed he had no right to be present or
interfere while rioters burned down the city. He and the other white citizens
were guilty of whiteness. The destruction of downtown was what they
deserved. Woke fascists considered the ruin of the city as legitimate revenge
against an evil society and its inhabitants. It was presumptuous of
Rittenhouse to assume he had a right to defend himself or others. He was
tainted by white privilege. The physical attack on Rittenhouse, and his
subsequent prosecution (persecution) for murder, was a warning against
everyone, especially whites, who resist the left's determination to punish
and change America. That was, and remains, the logic of Woke fascism. It's
all very blatant.
The media was relentless in their personal attacks on the man, and on the
concept of Rittenhouse, as a white male with rights. The left-wing Boston
Globe featured the following headline. Notice the emphasis on race and
white supremacy:
Kyle Rittenhouse, white supremacy, and the privilege of selfdefense:
Rittenhouse has the benefit of boyhood — white boyhood (S199)
 A headline could hardly be more blatantly racist. Let's rewrite it. "John
Doe, black nationalism, and the privilege of self-defense: Doe has the
benefit of boyhood — black boyhood." Imagine the outrage if a major
newspaper published an article like that! But racism against whites by Big
Media is routine and evokes little or no notice or reaction.
Rittenhouse was "lynched" by the media. They ignored or explained
away videos clearly showing him cornered and attacked by an armed
assailant while sitting on the ground. The media’s rule is: don't believe your
lying eyes. He was accused of racism, white supremacy, white privilege,
and a host of similar insults. Pundits on camera called him a "murderer,"
"reckless," "a lawbreaker," and a member of a "white supremacist group. "
His every move was condemned. His act of self-defense was mocked and
dismissed as motivated by a taste for violence. Pundits demanded that
Rittenhouse be tried for murder. Local prosecutors obliged. He was charged
with murder and imprisoned for months. And while he languished in a jail
cell, the message went out: you have no right to self-defense. Forget the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The trial was a disaster for Woke fascism. The prosecution failed to
explain away blatant evidence proving Rittenhouse was the victim of an
armed attack. Inept prosecutors tried to persuade the jury that the videos
showing the attack on Rittenhouse meant nothing. Their claims were
contradicted by the pistol-wielding attacker, who admitted under oath to
pointing a loaded pistol at the defendant just prior to being shot. When
Rittenhouse cried on the witness stand, the prosecution, and the media,
dismissed his sincerity as a fraud.
In the end, the prosecution was reduced to claiming that ordinary
citizens have no right to self-defense. The naked truth emerged from behind
the hype and misrepresentation of the media. Woke fascists claimed
Rittenhouse, as an American, especially a white male, was obliged to accept
whatever physical assault his attackers might choose to inflict upon him.
The prosecutor made it clear, "Everybody takes a beating sometimes, right?
"
The truth was out. The prosecution's argument assumed Rittenhouse had
no rights. He should have taken the beating. He should have stayed home
and let the city burn. There was no right to be armed even though the
assailant had a pistol. His injuries were just "scrapes." He should have kept
running (or crawling) away even after being kicked to the ground.
According to prosecutors, Rittenhouse had no reason to fear serious harm or
death from multiple adults armed with a pistol. In fact, the prosecutor
claimed the seventeen-year-old, confronted by several adult attackers,
wasn't a "real man" because "he cowardly [sic] shoots a man, instead of
fighting back."
Rittenhouse was found not guilty and released. He later promised to sue
media outlets that lied about him. The message is clear. The media will
persecute people who exercise the right of self-defense for the "wrong"
reasons. Blue state and city prosecutors will arrest, imprison, prosecute, and
harass people they don't like because of skin color or political viewpoint.
Evidence and the Constitution are no protection.

21 SCRAPPING THE SECOND AMENDMENT

That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's
cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there. —
George Orwell (S200)
To disarm the people...is the most effectual way to enslave them. — George
Mason (S201)
Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe and
preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would
ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them. — Thomas Paine
(S202)
What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from
time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take
arms. — Thomas Jefferson (S203)
A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. — The
Second Amendment
The Founders created the Bill of Rights to protect fundamental liberties
from the possibility that a corrupt, power-hungry government might one
day abuse its authority over the people. It lists the basic rights citizens have
to protect themselves against an arbitrary and tyrannical government.
Thomas Jefferson summed it up this way: "[A] bill of rights is what the
people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or
particular, and what no just government should refuse." (S204)
 Listing rights is one thing; protecting them is another. The Constitution
secured rights through a series of "checks and balances" that distribute
power and authority across three branches of government. The Bill of
Rights lists liberties, but what if the safeguards in the Constitution and our
government fail? What then? The Founders had an answer taken from their
own experience: if all else fails, let the people own guns and, if absolutely
necessary, use them in defense of liberty and the Constitution. Thus, gun
ownership is not just about self-defense against violent or threatening thugs
but plays a central role in safeguarding the Constitution against a tyrannical
government. The Founders viewed guns in the hands of everyday citizens
as a fundamental part of the Constitution, not as an afterthought or an act of
tolerance by officials.
The Founders put the most critical rights in the First Amendment. The
Second Amendment provided the final and ultimate defense of those
constitutional liberties – an armed people in case some future authoritarian
government attempts to destroy freedom. Thus, the Bill of Rights preserves
the American people's fundamental freedoms and provides a last-ditch
means of protecting those rights.
It's important to understand the outlook of the men who signed the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Only a few years before, they had
experienced the violence and deprivation of the Revolutionary War (1775 –
1783.) Twenty-two of the thirty-nine signers were veterans. (S205) They
suffered through tyranny, military occupation, looting, and bloody battles.
They understood what it was like to rebel against an arbitrary and
oppressive government because they personally participated in the
rebellion. Some fought in the early battles that pitted civilians, armed with
privately-owned muskets and shotguns, against a well-equipped
professional army. The signers knew rebellion and war firsthand. They saw
for themselves that an armed population was an important final barrier to
dictatorship. The Founders direct experience of the dangers of
governmental abuse inspired the Second Amendment as a means ensure
Americans could stand up to a dangerously out-of-control government if
needed. The author is not suggesting that we have arrived at the moment
feared by the Founders when the people must act, but the Second
Amendment must be preserved.
Men armed with privately-owned weapons fought the initial battles
against an oppressive government and its standing army. Thousands of local
militiamen – consisting of civilian craftsmen, shopkeepers, and farmers –
fought at the battles of Lexington and Concord (1775) and used their own
weapons to defeat British troops. The successful siege of Boston and the
Battle of Bunker Hill (1775) were fought mainly by volunteers armed with
privately owned muskets. The men who wrote and signed the Second
Amendment knew from experience that the right to "keep and bear arms"
applied to all citizens, whether or not they were members of an organized
"militia." George Mason, for example, an influential delegate to the
Constitutional Convention, helped create the Bill of Rights. He defined the
meaning of "militia" this way: "I ask who are the militia? They consist now
of the whole people, except a few public officers." (S206) In other words,
the Founders believed that the "militia" consists of all armed citizens with
the right to "keep and bear arms" guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
"Standing Armies" and the Second Amendment
In the 1830s, James Madison, former president and co-author of the
Constitution, identified three factors that might enable an oppressive
government to control the people. It must have: "a standing Army, an
enslaved press, and a disarmed populace." (S207) Is it possible that the
three factors Madison warned against exist today? Perhaps. The Federal
Government has a large standing army and a vast array of police agencies
that appear to be teetering on the brink of becoming wholly politicized by
the Woke fascism of the Biden administration. As described in Part IV, the
mainstream media and press have been tamed and are far too friendly and
supportive of Woke fascism. In addition, gun ownership is under attack as
never before, creating the possibility of a "disarmed" populace. Democrats
and Woke fascists mock the Founder's hope that an armed populace could
resist tyranny with AR-15 rifles. Biden sarcastically joked, "You need F-15s
and maybe some nuclear weapons" to challenge the US government. (S208)
Yet there is hope. The police agencies of the Federal government may
yet be saved from Woke fascism. A new conservative and libertarian media
is evolving as a counter-weight to mainstream fascist control of
information. Despite unrelenting attacks, the Second Amendment still
stands as the final barrier should it someday be needed.
"Standing Armies" and Guns
The Founders believed an armed population was the final defense
against the danger of a corrupt government using a standing army (or
police) to destroy democracy. The solution, they repeatedly warned, was to
ensure the right of the people as a whole to keep and bear arms. The Second
Amendment was always intended to protect the right of ordinary people to
own guns for self-protection and as a barrier to oppression. Samuel Adams,
a key organizer of the Revolution, assured his contemporaries that:
The Constitution shall never be construed...to prevent the people of the
United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.
(S209) (Adams never met Joe Biden!)
Many non-fascist governments fear the idea of armed citizens capable
of self-defense. Politicians and officials prefer to monopolize all forms of
power, leaving everyday citizens helpless and exposed to tyranny. Once
again, Madison identified the problem: "governments are afraid to trust the
people with arms." (S210)
Recent events confirm the Founders' wisdom. Standing armies and
politicized police are a mortal danger to freedom. In many democracies,
police act as little more than mercenaries rather than principled defenders of
constitutions or human rights. Perhaps this is not surprising. All too often,
police put their paychecks, jobs, and pensions above constitutional
principles. Americans naively hope that police will resist enforcing illegal
orders from wayward politicians. Most citizens view them as allies and
protectors against crime and disorder. They expect the police to respect the
Constitution. Unfortunately, police officers (and Federal agents) are not
trained to refuse to carry out illegal or unconstitutional orders from their
chain of command. Like ordinary citizens, they are subject to intimidation
through arrest or financial pressure. (The author doesn't intend to malign the
many police officers who do their duty without surrendering their integrity
to corrupt politicians.)
Sadly, police are sometimes more than willing to serve fascist leaders.
In Canada, the Ottawa police showed themselves perfectly willing, even
eager, to use force against the Trucker Protest with clubs, beatings, threats,
trampling of disabled old ladies with horses, etc. It was difficult to tell the
difference between Canadian cops and police in Communist East Germany,
the Soviet Union, Cuba, and other fascist states. Police in Australia, New
Zealand, and Austria didn't hesitate to enforce extreme lockdowns. They
arrested people for just standing outside their homes. Transgressors were
sent to confinement in armed camps, almost the same way as in Communist
China. Cops in New York and dozens of other American cities enforced
whatever freedom-crushing measures Woke fascist mayors dreamed up.
 During World War Two, some police and bureaucrats in occupied
countries cooperated with Nazis in rounding up Jews and resistance fighters
for deportation to death camps. After the Nazi conquest of the Netherlands,
government bureaucrats continued to carry out their usual duties for the
occupiers and helped the Nazis locate and persecute Jews. Many French
gendarmes rounded up Jews and resistance fighters, delivering them to the
German occupation forces for torture and execution.
Fascists and Guns
Let's take a moment and look at how fascism views guns. Fascists agree
with the Founder's analysis that an armed populace is a serious potential
obstacle to a wayward government. Mao Zedong understood the power of a
people armed because he personally led a fascist revolution that overthrew
China's incompetent and corrupt government. His attitude towards gun
ownership was clear: "All political power comes from the barrel of a gun.
The Communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can
ever be used to command the party." (S211) Marx told workers to resist
being disarmed: "Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be
surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated by force
if necessary." (S212)
Leading fascists have always been adamant about gun ownership on their
terms. Hitler understood the power of guns in the hand of opponents. He
told audiences, "the most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be
to allow the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms." (S213)
According to Lenin, guns belong in the hands of revolutionaries, not
opponents: "One of the basic conditions for the victory of socialism is the
arming of the workers... and the disarming of the bourgeoisie the middle
class." (S214) Lenin wasn't kidding. He ordered subordinates to crack down
on guns owned by noncommunists, "act with all energy. Mass searches.
Execution for concealing arms."
Lenin hoped that armed workers would use guns and violence to impose
their rule on society:
Dictatorship is rule based directly upon force and unrestricted by any
laws. The revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat [workers] is rule won
and maintained by the use of violence by the proletariat against the
bourgeoisie, rule that is unrestricted by any laws. (S215)
In general, the fascist solution to the threat of an armed people is
twofold – first, disarm potential opponents; second, rely on armed police,
the army, or supporters to control society. The goal, as Madison said, is to
"Disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them."
(S216)
A few years ago, Nicolas Maduro, the communist dictator of Venezuela,
put Lenin's words and Madison's warning into practice. First, his
government banned private gun ownership and sales. Then, he organized an
armed militia consisting of his socialist/fascist supporters, claiming: "We
have reached 3.3 million organized militia members who are trained,
armed, and ready to defend Venezuela's union." Maduro made his intentions
clear: "what we failed to achieve with votes, we would do with weapons."
Maduro transferred 400,000 military-style guns to his militias. Maduro
ruined the economy of his country but remains in power because his armed
supporters routinely beat up opponents and use guns to intimidate and kill
enemies of the regime. (S217)
Woke fascists, Their Allies, and Guns
A reasonable degree of gun control to reduce crime and shootings is not
necessarily fascism. Not every gun law is fascist in origin or intent. There is
room for debate over reasonable laws on age limits, verifiable mental
illness, restrictions on automatic weapons, gun registration, gun ownership
by convicted felons, and concealed carry laws. But Woke fascist aspirations
become obvious when gun control advocates ignore or circumvent the
Constitution with extreme laws or court decisions that effectively ban guns
or make them practically unobtainable. Regulations and laws that make gun
ownership almost impossible through taxation, confiscation, manufacturer
lawsuits, and other drastic limitations are clearly fascist because they ignore
or violate the Constitution and strengthen authoritarian government. The
attempt to deprive ordinary citizens of their right to own guns for self-
defense against criminal violence and, if ever necessary, against tyranny is
not only unconstitutional but unwise.
Seemingly innocent, "reasonable" gun laws can be perverted by those
whose true goal is to ban private ownership. In 1931, the preNazi German
government-imposed gun registration as a measure allegedly intended to
prevent antisemitic violence. Officials promised to keep registration records
out of the hands of extremists. Two years later, Hitler and the Nazis took
control of the government and used the supposedly confidential registration
records to force Jews and political opponents to surrender their guns. Gun
clubs were banned, their leaders imprisoned, and police were ordered not to
issue gun permits to Jews. (S218)
Could something similar happen in the US? Federal firearms law makes it
illegal for the US government to maintain a national database of gun
owners. Yet, the Biden administration secretly began assembling
information on 54-million-gun owners as a prelude to what many people
believe is the goal of passing highly restrictive and unconstitutional gun
laws. (S219) What are Biden's intentions? During an interview with
Anderson Cooper, Biden admitted he intended to ban assault weapons.
Biden was asked about people who think his administration's actions
"means they're going to come for my guns." Biden replied, "Bingo, you're
right if you have an assault weapon. The fact of the matter is they should be
illegal. Period." (S220) Biden is currently (summer 2022) weak politically
and probably unable to pass restrictive gun legislation, but that doesn't
mean he won't make the attempt if conditions are right. The sad and
horrible mass killing of school children in Uvalde, Texas (May 2022) by a
mentally ill teenager using an AR-15 type weapon provided Biden with
ammunition for his determination to ban "assault weapons."
Anti-Second Amendment media outlets fact-checked claims that Biden
wanted to ban rifles and pistols. When Second Amendment activists took
him at his word, fact-checkers softened or minimized his intentions by
pleading "lack of context." Biden's statement provided unambiguous
evidence regarding his intentions. CNN factcheckers apparently disregarded
the candidate's actual words. Instead, they quoted his campaign website in
an attempt to conceal his blatant antipathy to "assault weapons." (S221)
At a town hall meeting (July 2021), Biden questioned the need for rifles and
pistols that shoot rapidly. He said: "I continue to push to eliminate those
things." (S222) Fact-checkers leaped into action, saying, "No Joe Biden
Doesn't Want to Ban Handguns," adding, "The most popular handguns
would face no restrictions under Biden's policies." (S223) In reality, the
fact-checkers created a straw man – weapons with high-capacity magazines
– and then knocked it down. They claimed Biden had no intention of
banning "the most popular handguns." In fact, thirteen out of fifteen of the
most "popular handguns" in the US are semi-automatic pistols of various
calibers with quick-change magazines. (S224) All of them shoot as rapidly
as the typical nine-millimeter pistol, and their magazines are easily changed
several times a minute.
Biden says he wants to ban quick-firing rifles and pistols. He is setting up a
scenario in which the ban of one weapon type creates a case for banning all
similar or related weapons – a goal obscured by carefully worded fact-
checks. In a speech to the nation on June 2, 2022, Biden said very plainly,
"we need to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines." Democrats
in Congress proposed included limiting magazines for pistols to ten rounds,
which would make illegal tens of millions of existing weapons.
Congressional bodyguards would be exempted.
Biden is not alone in his desire to disarm the general population. President
Obama agreed with this sentiment, "I don't believe people should be able to
own guns." Senator Diane Feinstein, a top Democrat, remarked: "If I could
have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban,
picking up every one of them... 'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,' I
would have done it." (S225) But why nitpick? Banning guns of all or most
types is the explicit purpose of the Democrats. Senator Charles Schumer,
the Majority Leader in the Senate, is determined to eliminate or severely
curtail gun ownership regardless of the Constitution: "We're going to
hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy! We're going to
beat guns into submission!" And, in the process, beat the Bill of Rights into
submission. (S226)
Democrat Beto O'Rouke was very specific during a presidential debate
when he exclaimed, "Hell yes, we're going to take your AR15." "No, it's not
voluntary.... it is mandatory... It will be the law. You will be required to
comply with the law." (S227) The line drew intense applause from the FND
audience hand-picked for the occasion by the Democrat Party. As district
attorney of San Francisco, Kamala Harris endorsed a friend of the court
brief in the Heller case that claimed Americans do not have an individual
right to own a gun.
Beating the Second Amendment into Submission The lack of respect
for the Constitution is apparent. Biden, Schumer, O'Rourke, Feinstein, and
their allies made statements in complete defiance of the Bill of Rights.
Choosing to pursue a political objective by disregarding and undermining
the Constitution is, by definition, a probable form of fascist behavior.
Disarming law-abiding Americans by "beating guns into submission,"
forcibly confiscating rifles, and banning various pistols ignores the intent of
the Founders when they wrote the Constitution. The ingenuity and
persistence of the attempts to eliminate private gun ownership are endless.
 Using the Courts
There is no space here to examine the 1,400 legal challenges (S228) to the
Second Amendment and other attempts to restrict or abolish gun ownership.
Many of these cases involved persuading Federal or state courts to interpret
the Second Amendment out of existence. For the most part, they failed, but
not before partially curtailing some constitutional rights. For example, in
1975, Democrats in Washington, DC, enacted the Firearms Control
Regulation Act law, which effectively banned handguns. The law required
firearms to be kept disassembled or trigger locked at home and, therefore,
impossible to use for self-defense in an emergency. The law was an
apparent attempt to evade the Bill of Rights indirectly by making gun
ownership difficult and impractical.
The law was challenged, and the case landed in the Supreme Court in 2008.
(S229) The Court definitively ruled that the Second Amendment applies to
individuals. The right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. It is not
based on the old anti-gun argument that "militia" means a body of part-time
soldiers sponsored and paid by the US or state governments. In other words,
the Court listened to Founders like George Mason. The Court ruled that a
"wellregulated militia" did not refer to organized bodies but to all men (now
men and women) subject to be conscripted – in other words, virtually every
adult. (S230) It also held that forcing people to keep guns disassembled
violated the Second Amendment's intent to allow people to use guns to
protect themselves against attack. You can't deter or stop an assault with a
disassembled gun. (Unless your assailant is very patient.)
Two years later (2010), the Supreme Court ruled (S231) a 1982 Chicago
gun law unconstitutional. The law effectively banned pistols of all types by
making new registration almost impossible and by also requiring all
handguns to be registered. The intent, and effect, was to abolish the Second
Amendment in Chicago for pistols, the most popular and affordable
firearms. The law disarmed honest citizens while criminals who ignored
gun laws remained armed. The Court rejected the Chicago law. It ruled that
the Second Amendment protects gun ownership because the Fourteenth
Amendment extends the protections of the Bill of Rights, such as gun
ownership, to all citizens. States must respect the Second Amendment.
These two cases illustrate how politicians and officials attempt to evade and
undermine the Constitution. Their goal is to circumvent constitutional
restrictions on government authority through the use of indirect, sometimes
clever, but often outrageous legal manipulations. Some argue that the
motive behind laws designed to evade the Second Amendment is not fascist
but a result of "good intentions." However, the growing disrespect for the
Bill of Rights among officials over the past several decades, and especially
since the onset of Covid-19, reflects a willingness to ignore or undercut the
rule of law. Undermining fundamental liberties through devious or quasi-
legal methods is a form of fascist behavior regardless of rationalizations and
excuses. Weakening the Second Amendment through trickery and evasion
helps set a precedent that can be used to undermine any part of the
Constitution. Contemporary Woke fascism is at least partly the result of
decades of "beating" the rights of Americans – like free speech, freedom of
assembly, and the rule of law – into submission.

22 DISARMING THE POLICE

Black Lives Matter! Abolish the police and ICE! Smash white
supremacy! Build a Workers World! — Workers World (S232)
Fascist ideas about police and law enforcement are disarmingly simple.
When in power, they use police as enforcers; otherwise, they view police as
dangerous opponents who protect "bourgeois" society from revolution.
Consequently, the existing police have to be abolished, disarmed,
persecuted, fired, jailed, or killed. Once eliminated, fascists create new
forms of highly politicized police organizations to "ruthlessly" (Hitler's
favorite word) enforce the party's will against civil society. In Nazi
Germany, the police were absorbed into the Party and supplemented by new
organizations like the Gestapo and Sicherheitsdienst (SD), an elite police
intelligence unit.
In the Soviet Union, the old police forces were dissolved, scattered,
jailed, and often executed. In 1917, Lenin created the "Cheka," (later known
successively as the OGPU, NKVD, and KGB), an all-powerful police
agency reporting directly to the Communist Party. The Cheka was a "secret
police" organization that, over eight decades, enforced Soviet rule by
arresting, imprisoning, and murdering millions of people. In January 2022,
Biden created a new DOJ "unit" to fight domestic terrorism as an add-on to
existing anti-terror task forces in the US. Its target is a largely fictional
danger called "White supremacy," not Islamic terrorism, violent black
nationalists, or ultra-violent criminal gangs terrorizing America's cities.
American fascism has not reached the mass murder stage in its war
against the police, but it has declared war on law enforcement. It is doing
everything it can to carry out Lenin's demand for the "abolition of the
police." (S233) The most obvious approach is the progressive demand that
cities and states defund police, supposedly to divert funds to the
"community," but actually to neutralize or replace "bourgeois" police with
something more politically controlling. For example, the "defunding"
movement wants to disarm the police, force them to "stand down" in the
face of riots, eliminate anti-crime programs, restrict their legal rights,
undercut community support, and generally demoralize cops everywhere.
Words generally precede deeds. Some of the more aggressive members
of the left wing have adopted the rhetoric of mass murder. In the words of
BLM demonstrators, "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon," is one example
of many.
All of this is ideological but wrapped in the usual layers of propaganda
complacency "defunding" progressive fascism – the weakening of political
resistance to their program. Lenin's approach to dealing with the police is
the basic underlying model for progressive fascism. He viewed the police as
a political "instrument of the government" that had to be abolished. It would
be replaced by a "people's militia" led by fascist revolutionaries and
recruited from "oppressed" classes like workers. (S234) Sounds like the
Democrats demand to defund the police.
Most importantly, the new enforcers would be the "revocable agent" of
the new regime. In other words, a politicized armed force is at the disposal
of society's new masters. The leaders and theorists of progressive fascism
don't discuss Lenin's model publicly because doing so might make the
general public nervous. Instead, they talk freely about "re-imagining law
enforcement," eliminating "systemic racism," or diverting funds to "better
uses." Fighting crime – the true purpose of local police – is mentioned only
in the context of more "humanity" and "justice" for criminals (and rarely, if
ever, for crime victims).
and misinformation to avoid disturbing the of the average American voter.
Demands for
rarely mention the deeper ideological goals of
 The Fascist Love-Hate Relationship with the Police The Nazis
initially viewed the police as a hostile force blocking their program of
political violence. In 1923, Hitler attempted to overthrow the government of
Bavaria by force (equivalent to an American state). The so-called "Beer
Hall Putsch" failed when local police, armed with rifles, opened fire on
3,000 Nazis attempting to seize government buildings. Four police officers
and twelve Nazis were killed in the crossfire. The attempted coup d'etat
collapsed. The prudent use of force quickly dispersed the would-be
revolutionaries. Hitler was arrested, convicted, and spent a year in a VIP
prison cell. The Nazi revolution was delayed by almost a decade. The police
played a crucial role in protecting democracy from intimidation until Hitler
won at the ballot box, which he could not gain by direct force.
After the Nazis won the 1933 election and took control of the government,
Goebbels commented, "the rest is easy." What did he mean? Simply, once
in power, the Nazis no longer needed to consider public opinion, elections,
or the rule of law as enforced by civilian police backed by the military. The
police could be subverted and politicized by their new masters. And in fact,
the Nazis radically reorganized the police. There was little or no internal
resistance. Why? Four reasons: first, the German police were a paramilitary
organization trained to follow obediently orders issued by their department
heads. Second, many police officers sympathized with the Nazis. Third, the
police needed their paychecks and didn't want to lose their jobs. Fourth,
police officers who resisted were fired and faced internment at a
concentration camp where life was short and brutal.
As the new chancellor, Hitler was legally empowered to appoint his
followers to top police posts. He appointed Hermann Goering (1893 - 1946)
as the Interior Minister in charge of Germany's police forces. Goering
nationalized law enforcement. He created the dreaded secret police agency
known as the Gestapo to protect the regime. He fired hundreds of non-Nazi
officials and organized an auxiliary police force consisting of Nazi Party
members, Brownshirts, and members of the SS. (S235). Henceforth, the
Nazis issued orders, and the police obeyed.
Biden won the 2020 election, and as president, he is authorized to appoint
senior officials as heads of the Department of Justice, the FBI, and other
Federal law enforcement agencies. So far, the senior managers he appointed
have shown themselves willing to use Federal agencies to intimidate and
suppress political opponents. The new leadership got to work ordering
stand-downs, re-writing rules, firing "extremists," scheduling equity
training, and demoting managers and employees who might object to
politicizing Federal law enforcement. Attorney General Merrick Garland
and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin imposed new rules and procedures
to enforce the regime's control of Federal agencies and the armed forces.
New hires began to be selected for their political attitudes, racial
characteristics, and willingness to back the regime's values and goals. Older
employees – with families, careers, and years of retirement-eligible service
– learned to keep their mouths shut and do as they're told.
Disarming the Police
Unlike the German police, who used rifles to stop the Nazis from occupying
government buildings during the 1924 attempted coup, American cops often
found themselves virtually disarmed in the face of BLM, Antifa rioters, and
armed thugs. Woke politicians and officials severely restricted firearm use
in dangerous situations. Police were frequently forbidden to use even non-
lethal methods like tear gas to quell rioters who attacked them with rocks,
bricks, frozen water bottles, clubs, and fireworks. And, of course, lethal
force was banned. A month after the BLM riots began, the Seattle City
Council passed an ordinance outlawing the use of tear gas and pepper spray
against violent rioters. The Oregon legislature passed a law severely
restricting the use of tear gas, rubber bullets, and other crowdcontrol
devices by police anywhere in the state. (S236) Philadelphia's city council
banned police use of tear gas, rubber bullets, and pepper spray against "First
Amendment" protected activities – including riots. (S237) Somerville,
Massachusetts, banned police tear gas and severely restricted pepper spray.
(S238) In Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, the city council prohibited the use
of tear gas. Officials left the police in these and other cities almost nothing
but their bare hands to subdue hundreds, sometimes thousands, of
aggressive and violent rioters. No wonder two thousand police officers were
injured during the BLM riots.
In some blue cities, Democrat officials ordered police to "stand down,"
allowing rioters and protesters to take control of downtown neighborhoods.
In Minneapolis, the mayor ordered police to stand down and allow rioters to
torch a police station. Bans on crowd control devices often forced police to
retreat from violent "protesters. " For example, in Portland, Oregon, police
stood by and watched helplessly while crowds of rioters smashed store
windows and trashed downtown. (S239) A year later, Portland police were
ordered to stand down while left and right-wing groups assaulted each other
with fists, clubs, and chemical sprays on downtown city streets in scenes
reminiscent of street battles between Nazis and communists in Germany.
(S240) Officials ordered police in many cities, including Fayetteville,
Raleigh, and Sacramento, to allow rioters to run wild. In virtually every
case, the stand-downs led to increased violence, mayhem, and intimidation
of ordinary peaceful citizens who watched as their streets were taken over
by lawless BLM, Antifa rioters, and professional criminals.
Stand downs and limits on police tactics that weaken and even eliminate
policing predated the BLM riots. Progressives had been hard at work for
decades unraveling law and order. The process accelerated in blue states
and cities during the Trump Administration. Programs like broken windows,
policing, plainclothes, and anti-crime units were reduced or abolished.
Arrests dropped, prosecutions decreased, and bail for even violent crimes
became an exotic rarity. From 2010 to 2020, the groundwork was laid for
the deliberate and systematic breakdown of law and order.
Broken windows policing, for example, was initially adopted in New York
City during the 1990s by Republican Mayor Giuliani to cope with decades
of growing street crime and murder, especially in minority neighborhoods.
The theory was simple. When a city ignores small "quality of life crimes"
like open drug use, petty theft, vandalism, and shoplifting, it gets more and
more crime and an inexorable rise in serious criminal activity. Focusing on
minor street crime and gangs lowered crime overall, which is what occurred
in New York and other cities. Crime of all types decreased, and as
predicted, New York murder rates dropped from a staggering 2,200 in 1990
to 313 in 2013. (S241) Over a two-decade period between 1995 and 2018,
broken windows resulted in hundreds of thousands fewer crimes and crime
victims. It also saved thousands of lives of people (mostly minorities) who
would have been murdered otherwise. Broken windows policing kept career
criminals and thugs off the streets and made New York dramatically safer. It
worked – which is why it came under attack.
It is difficult to calculate how many lives were saved through good policing
and enforcement of the laws against violent criminals. However, if the
annual murder rate in New York City had remained around 2,000 as it was
in the days before the advent of broken windows, thousands would have
died unnecessarily. At least 1,000 more deaths might have been inflicted
annually by criminals on New Yorkers for 20-plus years. The carnage
would have been immense. Perhaps 20,000 to 30,000 lives, many of whom
would have been black, would have been lost.
New York City led the way with broken window policing and then led the
effort to abolish it in the 2020s. Progressives, who were irretrievably
committed to racial politics, waged a long war against broken windows and
other policing strategies that saved lives and made cities livable. Activists
launched a multi-pronged attack. Leftwing academics generated studies
claiming to discredit the broken windows theory. They attacked the very
concept of police forces, arresting criminals, bail, and prisons. The primary
critique was racial. Obsessed with race and its political usefulness,
progressives condemned broken windows as "discriminatory." In 2017, the
New York Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
issued a report demanding the abolition of broken windows policing. The
Committee acknowledged that:
NYC is currently experiencing unprecedented levels of safety: in 2017,
NYC achieved the lowest per-capita murder rate since 1951, experienced
the fewest shootings in the modern era, and saw robberies drop to their
lowest levels since 1965. (S242)
Yet despite acknowledging this remarkable drop in crime, they
recommended New York City "completely abandon" the broken windows
policing that made it possible. They urged the city to:
• fully decriminalize the "quality-of-life" crimes.
• abandon... summonses and arrests for first-time offenders of low-level,
nonviolent crimes and violations.
• use community service or restorative justice programs as alternatives to
criminal and civil summonses for all lowlevel, nonviolent crimes and
violations.
• no person under eighteen [should] be arrested for lowlevel, nonviolent
crimes or violations.
• encourage the NYPD to ensure that its gang intervention policies are not
over-inclusive.
• move toward zero criminal enforcement in schools.
Urged on by fifty left-wing advocacy groups (S243) in a letter sent to
Woke fascist mayor de Blasio in March 2020, New York City and State
dismantled broken windows and virtually eliminated cash bail. These and
related actions were the preludes to the 2020 BLM riots that led to a
dramatic rise in killings, shooting, violent assaults, looting, and rampant
petty crime New York is now enduring. There were 319 murders in New
York in 2019, 468 in 2020, and 485 in 2021. (S244) Shootings, robberies,
and felony assaults were up in 2019. Arrests for minor offenses plummeted
as police stopped enforcing quality-of-life street crimes that broken
windows previously prevented. Major crimes rose about 60 percent from
February 2021 to March 2022. (S245) "Disarming" the police made New
York and other blue cities more violent, dirtier, and less safe for law-abiding
citizens, but that's the point.
Demoralizing the Cops
Progressive policies in blue states and cities demoralized police officers
who are quitting in record numbers. From 2020 to 2021, police manpower
dropped as city cops resigned, retired early, or relocated to pro-police
suburban police departments. In Chicago, the number of officers dropped
from 13,218 in 2019 to 12,258 in 2021. In New York City, 2,600 cops quit
or retired in 2020 compared to 1,500 the prior year. Police staffing fell at
much higher-thanaverage rates in Seattle, Fayetteville, Portland,
Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Salt Lake, Louisville, and many other cities. In
June 2021, Portland's entire crowd control squad quit in disgust. Overall,
according to the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF),
America's largest cities suffered a 24% increase in the number of police
who quit their jobs. (S246)
Police have been overwhelmed by deliberate pressure brought by Woke
fascists and their allies. Police morale is low because of the impact of BLM
riots, the lack of support by progressive politicians, and the futility of
making arrests when district attorneys don't prosecute. The drumbeat of
criticisms by Woke fascists in Big Media contributes to the virtual collapse
of policing in many cities. According to the president of the LELDF, "The
issue of people leaving the profession has to do with morale... They feel
that it's no longer a profession they're willing to risk their lives and limb
for." A November 2021 poll of 6,000 New York police officers found that
56 percent regretted going into law enforcement. Almost 80 percent are
afraid to fight crime aggressively, and 79 percent think crime will worsen.
The reason? Police fear "criminal liability, being sued, or being unfairly
disciplined." (S247) New York City (see below) abolished qualified
immunity for "excessive force," and the result has been a general reluctance
by police officers to make arrests. Similar morale problems abound across
blue states in general.
 Qualified Immunity: Restricting Protections for Police Qualified
immunity is a legal doctrine providing individual police officers with
limited protection against being personally sued for damages arising from
alleged violations of a civil right. It prevents people who interact with
police from filing endless frivolous lawsuits that discourage officers from
doing their jobs for fear of losing their homes, life savings, and pensions.
However, it does not prevent people with legitimate grievances from taking
a city or police department to court to seek damages, or under certain
limited circumstances, from holding a cop liable. It is difficult to understand
why anyone would want to be a police officer without legal protection from
the often violent, aggressive, intoxicated, or uncooperative people
encountered in their work.
One of the surest ways to neutralize the police is to create financial
disincentives that discourage police officers from doing their job. What
could be more demoralizing for cops than making them personally liable for
monetary damages when they arrest someone? In recent years, progressives
(with assistance from some gullible libertarians) have gradually eroded
"qualified immunity." The result has been a disastrous collapse of police
morale in affected cities and a breakdown of law and order.
Arresting lawbreakers in big cities is the most basic task of the police and
the most dangerous. Arrests often turn into physical confrontations with
suspected criminals in which both the perpetrator and the police officer
might be injured or even killed. Arresting criminals is risky. In 2020, over
60,000 police (S248) were assaulted while enforcing the law, and about
20,000 were injured. Remarkably, police are still generally willing to take
the risk of making an arrest if they are protected from personal liability
against false accusations of "excessive force."
Nevertheless, for political and ideological reasons, Woke fascism has
aggressively sought to eliminate or weaken liability protections for police
officers. Notably, in March 2021, progressives in the US House of
Representatives pushed through the "George Floyd Justice in Policing Act"
designed to overhaul policing and abolish qualified immunity nationwide.
Fortunately, the Senate did not approve the bill. However, several states,
including New York, New Mexico, Connecticut, and Colorado, "abolished"
or attempted to restrict qualified immunity.
Lack of Support
Police correctly interpret the attack on qualified immunity as a clear sign
that officials and vast swaths of the public in many cities do not support
them. They see a relentless attempt by anti-police officials at all levels not
only to withhold support but to block and ban it altogether. In Chardon,
Ohio, the local school superintendent banned the pro-police "Thin Blue
Line" banner from school after the local high school football team
displayed it during a game. He was backed up by the school board
president, a progressive who allegedly had previously accused Trump of
causing Antifa violence. Undaunted, residents held a pro-police rally in
defiance of the antipolice attitude of elected officials. In the Northwood-
Kensett district in Iowa, the local school superintendent condemned as
"insensitive" a pro-police poster used by a girls’ volleyball team to raise
funds. Two football players at the Little Miami High School were
suspended for displaying a "Thin Blue Line" banner banned by school
officials at a game. Public pressure and a petition signed by 19,000
residents forced reluctant school officials to revoke the suspensions.
In New York City, mayor di Blasio approved a giant BLM mural on Fifth
Avenue but refused to permit the installation of a Blue Lives Matter mural.
De Blasio justified his decision by saying that BLM "transcends any notion
of politics... this is about something bigger than any one group." (Fascists
always assume their political and cultural beliefs "transcend" all other
values.) In San Francisco, officials launched an investigation of a police
officer who dared speak the truth to power when he told a complaining
local citizen, "This is happening to you guys because San Francisco is too
progressive." In Norfolk, Virginia, a police captain with 19 years on the
force was fired without his pension for anonymously contributing $25 to the
Kyle Rittenhouse defense fund. The Guardian, an extremely left-wing
British newspaper, obtained his name from hackers and published it on the
internet. City officials bowing to Woke fascism ignored his First
Amendment rights and fired him. In San Francisco, the Hilda and Jesse
restaurant allegedly asked three police officers, who came in for lunch, to
leave because their sidearms made the staff feel "sick" and
"uncomfortable." Barraged by complaints, management apologized but
didn't reverse their ban on armed cops. (S249)
Defunding the Local Police
The ultimate way to undermine cops is to abolish police departments while
simultaneously claiming that defunding law enforcement makes people
safer because policing itself is allegedly harmful. A study cited by CNN
(S250) claimed that less policing reduces crime – although how and why is
not clear. The baseline assumption of "defunders" is a narrative that attacks
police as racist, dishonest, violent, homophobic, and inefficient. But these
claims are based on manipulated and questionable evidence that magnifies
relatively uncommon exceptions rather than the great bulk of everyday
reality. For example, police are falsely accused of genocide based on the
relatively rare shootings of 13 unarmed black men when approximately
8,000 plus black men were murdered in 2020 (S251), chiefly by other black
men.
Counterarguments are a waste of time. The real purpose of activist
organizations like BLM is to achieve Lenin's goal of abolishing the police
as defenders of society. BLM's Marxist view on police was adopted by a
left-wing website, which insisted that "the immediate disarming and de-
militarization of police is a necessity as we move forward toward
community safety." A BLM co-founder described defunding police as
eliminating a dangerous threat to black Americans: "[Defunding] means
that we are reducing the ability for law enforcement to have resources to
harm our communities." A BLM organizer told a reporter, "Police should
not be here. They should not exist." Progressive Democrats agree. Ocasio-
Cortez, whose views and sympathies are fascist, was very clear: "Defunding
Police means defunding the police.” (S252)
What the Public Wants is Unimportant
A solid majority of the American people oppose the demand to defund the
police. As often happens, fascists and their supporters claim the public
backs their plans even when they don't. For propaganda reasons, the press
and other media create the impression of strong support by a large majority
of voters. Exaggeration is a tactic used to discourage resistance. It creates
the illusion that a majority of Americans support fascist demands and seeks
to delegitimize opponents of fascism.
Historically, fascists were almost always in the minority when they seized
power. Lenin and his Bolsheviks were a small, highly organized minority
when they took over Russia. Hitler and the Nazis won the 1933 election that
propelled them into power with a declining plurality, not a majority.
Fascists were also in the minority when they seized power in Russia, Italy,
Spain, China, and Cuba.
In the US, Woke fascists agitated for defunding police without success
during the Ferguson riots of 2014. It was not popular with most Americans.
In 2020, George Floyd's death created a tactical opportunity to re-introduce
the idea. This time it gained traction, but far less than supporters claimed.
Big Media championed the idea, but it never came close to winning over a
majority of Americans. According to a Gallup poll (July 2020), only 15
percent of poll respondents supported abolishing the police. Support ranged
from 33 percent for people under 35, Democrats 27 percent, blacks 22
percent, and whites 12 percent. Poll results vary, but an Ipsos/USA Today
survey in early 2021 found that opposition to the defund the police
movement rose to 58 percent of all Americans, 67 percent of whites, and 84
percent of Republicans. Support dropped to 28 percent of blacks and 34
percent of Democrats. (265) Americans want their police back. (S253)
It turns out a solid majority of Americans want as much or more policing,
not less. Gallup found that 81 percent of black Americans want police to
remain on the job in their neighborhoods. A public research firm,
TechnoMetrica, found that 42 percent of respondents agreed with the idea
of an increase in police funding, while 34 percent are comfortable with
current spending. In Maryland, likely voters supported a large increase in
police budgets, with 88 percent of blacks, 89 percent of whites, and 74
percent of Hispanics in favor of more spending, not less. In Minneapolis,
where the local city council championed the defund movement, voters
overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to replace the police. At that very
moment, Big Media propaganda was amplifying demands for defunding;
data collected by the Department of Justice revealed that 83 percent of
Americans who called the police for some form of assistance expressed
satisfaction with the response. (S254)
In blue cities, progressives ignored popular discontent with the idea of
defunding police. Influenced by Woke fascism, over 20 major cities made
substantial cuts to police budgets that significantly increased serious crime.
Portland, Oregon, cut the 2020 police budget by $27 million in response to
the BLM riots. In 2020, the murder rate increased by 83 percent, and in
2021 the city broke its 1987 murder record by September. Shootings soared
to over 1,000. Minneapolis cut $28 million from the 2020 police budget,
and as of September 30, murders rose 16 percent, and robberies rose 5
percent. Gunshots were up 28 percent, and carjackings were up 35 percent.
New York City cut its police budget by $1 billion – onesixth. The murder
rate in 2020 went up a record 41 percent over 2019. In 2021, murder rates
remained at the high 2020 level, and rape, robbery, felonious assault, and
grand larceny increased dramatically. Seattle cut police funding by 20
percent in 2020 and slashed nearly $50 million more in 2021 despite a city
vote that endorsed more spending on public safety. Compared to 2019,
Seattle in 2020 saw a major increase in gun violence. By September 2021,
more people were shot and killed than in all of 2020. Austin, Texas, cut or
reallocated $100 million from law enforcement. By November 2021, Austin
suffered 84 murders compared to its previous record of 59 set in 1984.
(S255)
The rush to defund, disarm, and demoralize police speaks volumes about
the intent of Woke fascism to eliminate or neutralize law enforcement. But
it is only part of the story. The next chapter details the assault on the rights
of ordinary citizens to exercise their constitutional rights to live in a
peaceful and ordered society.

23 CHAOS IN THE STREETS

We do not argue with those who disagree with us, we destroy them. —
Benito Mussolini (S256)
I'm ready to put these police in a f***ing grave... I'm at the point where
I want to burn the f***ing White House down. — BLM leader to a crowd
of protesters (S257)
We own the streets. –— A BLM street chant
We are coming neither as friends or neutrals. We come as enemies! As
the wolf attacks the sheep, so come we. — Joseph Goebbels (S258)
We need the real, nation-wide terror which reinvigorates the country
and through which the French Revolution achieved glory. — V. I. Lenin
(S259)
There is, even now, something of ill-omen amongst us. I mean the
increasing disregard for law which pervades the country; the growing
disposition to substitute the wild and furious passions, in lieu of the sober
judgment of Courts. — Abraham Lincoln (S260)
Violence against political opponents nearly always plays a significant
role in the rise of fascism. The Nazis and Italian Fascists used street
violence to intimidate and disrupt other political parties. Communists in
Russia, China, Cuba, Spanish fascists, and others used organized military
force, plus street violence, to directly confront and defeat government
police and armed forces.
In 2020, the sudden blooming of street violence for political purposes in
the US followed the general pattern of power grabs by fascist groups in
Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and other fascist states. Democrat
officials in blue cities encouraged violence by excusing and minimizing the
severity of riots and arson, which they blamed on alleged systemic racism.
Democrat governors, mayors, and public attorneys fomented street violence
by ordering police to stand down in the face of rioters. Mayors and city
councils in Minneapolis, Seattle, New York, and elsewhere ordered police
to abandon traditional methods and tactics used worldwide to deal with
street violence and crime. Police in many cities lost most of their ability to
make arrests, defend themselves against assault, and quell rioting. Even
when the police managed to act, progressive district attorneys and judges
released arrested rioters without charges. This paralleled pro-Nazi officials
in parts of Germany who sided with Nazi street thugs and allowed them to
use violence to intimidate rivals despite police attempts to halt them.
Political violence and the complicity of party officials are an old story.
Hitler, Mussolini, and other fascists used street violence to suppress rival
political parties during elections. Nazi leaders frequently dispatched
hundreds or thousands of Nazi Party Brownshirts (Otherwise known as the
"Sturmabteilung") to attack rival political parties' meetings, demonstrations,
and gatherings. Nazis broke up rival marches and protests using clubs,
wooden poles, fists, and other objects. Hundreds of people were brutally
beaten and even killed by marauding Brownshirts. The lesson: don't defy
the Nazi Party.
The Nazis did not have it all their way. Other fascist political parties,
particularly the German Communist Party, also used organized gangs of
thugs against rivals. The two fascist parties fought over the cities and streets
of Germany. Innocent bystanders were killed. Heads were broken, and the
police struggled to cope. Both sides suffered heavy casualties.
Yet, violence intensified when police failed to quell Nazi attacks on
rivals. Local Nazi officeholders blocked police efforts to stop the
bloodshed. Brownshirt violence peaked in 1932 when Hitler ran for
president of Germany. The Nazi militia committed thousands of acts of
violence against rivals. Hitler stayed aloof from the violence and
disingenuously pretended to distance himself from the actions of his
supporters while Nazi Party officials orchestrated the violence behind the
scenes. Nazi-controlled or influenced newspapers and news organizations
depicted Nazis and Brownshirts as innocent victims of violent attacks.
Journalists and Nazi politicians represented Nazi aggression as peaceful
protests. Life in the cities deteriorated as gangs armed with improvised
weapons rampaged through the streets. Jewish and other businesses were
burned or looted. Nazi graffiti covered the walls of downtown. Few dared
oppose their control of the streets.
Italian Fascists in the 1920s used street violence against political rivals
before, during, and after elections. Fascist leaders organized gangs of thugs
known as "Blackshirts" who used fists and clubs to terrorize political
enemies. Gangs of Blackshirts intimidated rival political parties, beat up
opponents, broke up political rallies, and made election campaigning
difficult and dangerous. They suppressed rival campaigns and discouraged
opposition supporters from turning out to vote. Groups of forty or fifty
Blackshirts were sent into scores of Italian cities and towns to attack
Socialist political meetings, burn down party offices, and intimidate local
politicians and officials. Their violence killed over two thousand people.
Progressive Democrats and their radical allies worked hand-inhand in
2020 to use violence against traditional voters and politicians. Democrats
used indirect tactics to encourage street violence. Governors, mayors, and
city councils often told police to stand down rather than protect people and
property. In New York City, Philadelphia, and Saint Louis, radicalized DAs
released violent protesters without hearings or charges. At least 8,000 BLM
and other "protesters" arrested for riot-related crimes faced no charges at
all. Police were ordered to avoid confronting rioters and forbidden to use
traditional methods like tear gas to break up rowdy and destructive crowds.
The evidence suggests many Democrat officials worked behind the
scenes to promote violence to undermine political opposition to their radical
agenda. Progressive politicians who condoned or excused political violence
against their political rivals clearly don't believe in democracy. There is
indirect evidence of Democrat Party complicity. Is it a coincidence that
street violence and riots died out after Biden won the 2020 presidential
election? What would have happened on the streets had he lost?
BLM and Antifa rioters didn't hesitate to break up protests by ordinary
citizens. In Denver (July 2020), a peaceful pro-police demonstration led by
the Republican Minority leader in the state legislature was attacked by a
large crowd of anarchists and violent radicals dressed in black. Peaceful
citizens exercising their First Amendment rights were assaulted and beaten.
The Denver police chief allegedly ordered cops to "stand down" and let the
beatings occur. The police would not even defend their own supporters! In
New York City, pro-police demonstrators were violently attacked by a
crowd of "counter-protesters" seen in video using clubs and poles to attack
police escorting the protest.
There were months of nightly attacks on the Federal court buildings in
Portland. Protesters set fires, threw firebombs, shot ball bearings from hi-
powered slingshots, and pointed lasers at the eyes of Federal law officers (at
least three suffered permanent vision loss). (S261) They tore down fences,
clubbed law officers, threw firebombs, and smashed hammers against doors
to try to break into the buildings.
Besides Fox News, few media outlets showed these images to the
American public. Democratic candidate Joe Biden ignored the violence
against police and government property. Federal officers guarding the
buildings were accused of "brutally attacking peaceful protesters."
Democrat Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, called Federal officers
"stormtroopers." Portland's radical progressive mayor excused the violence.
He accused the Federal Government of "occupying" the city and demanded
they leave, which would have allowed protesters to loot and burn down the
courthouse complex. He encouraged what he called "protests," saying, "I
want to thank the thousands of you who have come out to oppose the
Trump Administration's occupation of this city." (About 150 Federal
officers were "occupying" a city of 654,000 people!) The mayor even
managed to get sprayed with tear gas as he joined a protest that, as usual,
turned violent. The violence gradually subsided but hasn't disappeared. In
May 2022, Antifa rioters dressed in black attacked a demonstration by
Republicans in Portland by throwing smoke bombs and other objects.
(S262) How ironic that Antifa activists, who insist they are "anti-fascist,"
dress in black like Italian Fascists.
The Purpose of Violence
Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every
form of power politics and any dictatorshiprun state has its roots in the
street. — Joseph Goebbels (S263)
Street violence is part of a multi-pronged attack on society and its
defenders. Fascist tactics employ a mixture of violence, intimidation, fraud,
propaganda, censorship, legal maneuvers, and racism. The idea is to keep
opponents off-balance.
The role of street violence in a fascist political campaign is to create
disorder, undermine the rule of law, intimidate political opponents, and
frighten voters. On the other hand, it emboldens and energizes fascist
supporters. The spectacle of uncontrolled street violence is amplified by
fascist-friendly media. Ordinary citizens and opponents of fascism become
discouraged as resistance seems hopeless as well as dangerous. As Lincoln
suggested in the quote at the beginning of this chapter, violence also
weakens the people's ties to their leaders. Governments lose legitimacy and
popular support when the streets Ordinary citizens Founders in the
Preamble to the Constitution called "domestic tranquility." If it fails to do
so, it faces collapse.
appear controlled by violent demonstrators. expect the government to
ensure what the
Justifying, and Excusing, and Street Violence
Street violence is a useful political tactic designed to help fascists impose
their will. Once meaningful resistance is overcome, violence shifts from
street thuggery to a fascist-controlled political or secret police. Street
violence is then relegated to museums glorifying the revolution.
Violence has to be justified until absolute power is achieved. Since most
people, even many party members, dislike violence, it is necessary to justify
aggression as a "necessity" and blame it on the victims. Fascists always
deny their responsibility and blame their violent acts on others. Hitler, in a
speech delivered on October 14, 1933, falsely claimed that during the "Nazi
Revolution," his 400,000 Brownshirts "did not smash a single storefront
window, did not loot a single shop, and did not damage a single building –
unscrupulous agitators are spreading tales of atrocity...". In fact, the
Brownshirts initiated hundreds of riots that inflicted many thousands of
injuries on the followers of other political parties. In fierce street fighting,
Brownshirts suffered 14,000 injuries, indicating the vast scale of political
violence they perpetrated. (S264)
In 2020, mass violence in the US was overwhelmingly committed by BLM
protests that turned into riots. Antifa added its brand of chaos by fomenting
numerous planned riots. The American people saw dozens of cities
engulfed by street violence. Burning and looting created terrible "optics"
that the Biden campaign and its supporters disingenuously explained away.
Big Media and progressives launched a twofold propaganda campaign.
First, they denied or minimized the severity of the violence. The protests
were supposedly "mostly peaceful." Violence was "limited" to a handful of
cases and so on – a mere seven hundred riots or so. Their second tactic
created a false equivalency which suggested many riots were linked to
"white supremacists" and Trump. The mainstream media widely
exaggerated and condemned a handful of minor counter-protests by "right-
wing" groups like the "Proud Boys." Big Media attempted to persuade
Americans that BLM street violence was "understandable" and was
triggered or exacerbated by Trump and his followers.
The Biden campaign's clever propaganda response to BLM street violence
was to condemn all violence, slyly implying that responsibility for hundreds
of riots was equally shared by "both sides." Biden refused to direct his
admonition against violence to its actual perpetrators: BLM and Antifa.
Biden condemned "all" violence in the generic sense:
I want to be very clear about all of this: Rioting is not protesting.
Looting is not protesting. Setting fires is not protesting. None of this is
protesting. It's lawlessness, plain and simple. And those who do it should be
prosecuted… Violence will not bring change, it will only bring destruction.
It's wrong in every way.
Reuters, CNN, and other Big Media outlets lauded Biden's statement as
a forthright condemnation of all violence and looting. But was it? Biden
indirectly justified Antifa and BLM riots by ridiculously calling on Trump
supporters to "stop acting as an armed militia." Days later, he claimed
Trump would "do anything to hold onto political power." The implication
was clear. Trump is the real villain desperately fomenting street violence.
Trump supporters are an armed militia responsible for riots and disorder,
not BLM and Antifa. This is how fascists used a false equivalency to
transfer responsibility for the violence they caused to others. (S265)
Biden carefully avoided condemning BLM, the source of most violence,
because they were his dedicated supporters. He ignored Antifa, an
organization that was, in spirit as well as action, the Democratic Party
militia.
Biden, Democrats, and Big Media ignored or excused statements by BLM
leaders that encouraged and justified violence. For example:
If this country doesn't give us what we want, then we will burn down
this system and replace it. All right? And I could be speaking figuratively. I
could be speaking literally. It's a matter of interpretation. (S266)
Prior to 2020, Big media justified, even glorified, street violence and
perpetuated the carefully nurtured false equivalency. In 2018, CNN's Don
Lemon rationalized and excused Antifa violence in a way he would never
have done with violence committed by Trump supporters:
Listen, no organization is perfect. There was some violence. No one
condones violence, but there were different reasons for Antifa and for these
Neo-Nazis to be there…One, racists, fascists, the other group, fighting
racist fascists. There is a distinction there. (S267)
Antifa, according to Lemon, are the good guys fighting the good fight.
His CNN comments paralleled the supposed words of Lenin, "you can't
make an omelet without breaking some eggs." The invocation of "Neo-
Nazis" and "racist fascists," accurate or not, is about magnifying minor
incidents into a contrived pattern to support the false equivalency claim.
Note the implied willingness to excuse violence for the right reasons –
"Don't blame us; we had no choice."
"Anti-Racism" - An Excuse for Political Violence
Systemic racism is a convenient justification for street violence.
Progressive fascists have declared American culture, history, politics, and
economics systematically racist. Therefore, they claim violence against
"oppression" is acceptable and reasonable. This blanket rationalization is
the ultimate excuse because it condemns everything American and justifies
anything – riots, assault, looting, street crime, and arson, as long as it is
perpetrated by black Americans and white "anti-racist" FNDs. Progressives
fail to grasp the irony of white radicals leading the fight against anti-racism
on behalf of blacks.
Woke fascism uses violence to intimidate and break their opponent's
will to resist. It's a classic "good guy bad guy,” us against them
rationalization. America is racist; therefore, "revolutionary" violence is
good. Condemnation of our violence is bad because you (unenlightened
white Americans and millions of "Uncle Toms") are racist and impure of
heart. We are righteous; you are not.
For example, a year after the George Floyd riots, a Minneapolis
politician excused burning down a police station by calling it an "act of
pure righteousness." It's good to burn down police stations because law and
order are merely oppressive racism in action. He allegedly went on to say,
"Fetishizing decorum [law and order, civil peace] over substance is a
hallmark of white supremacy." (S268) Per fascism, law and order is merely
a meaningless fetish – an irrational attachment to whiteness.
What happened when Minneapolis Woke fascists got their way and "de-
fetishized" the city to cure its whiteness? The result was a massive increase
in murders and other violent crimes in poor and black neighborhoods.
Murders rose from 48 in 2019 to 84 in 2020 and 96 in 2021 – one shy of the
old record. (S269) Incidents of violent crime rose from 4,322 in 2019 to
5428 in 2020 and to 5,945 in 2021. (S270) It turns out that getting rid of
alleged whiteness was a disaster for the city's minorities. Who knew?
Like Hitler, Lenin, or Stalin, Woke fascists invoke their ideology to
excuse or overlook street violence and murder. A progressive professor
allegedly defended a murder committed by an Antifa member who admitted
to killing a "Patriot Prayer" demonstrator in Portland. According to the
professor, "He killed a fascist. I see nothing wrong with it, at least from a
moral perspective. Tactically, that's a different story. You could say the
same thing about John Brown." (S271) His words sound a lot like Don
Lemon quoted above. Killing an ideological enemy is good. "Tactically," it
may be the wrong time or place. It's about tactics, not right and wrong.
Revolutionary violence is also broadly excused by progressivefascist
organizations. The Portland branch of Democratic Socialists of America
(DSA) claims the dubious distinction of being one of the country's most
prominent Marxist groups. In 2019, they allied with Antifa. As BLM and
Antifa-inspired rioting spread in 2020, the Portland DSA insisted that
"Violence does not delegitimize a protest." (S272) They went on to state
that "violence is part of all successful protest movements, and the vast
majority of violence is inflicted on the protesters by the ruling class." In
other words, we rioters are allowed to commit violent acts at will, and if
anyone stops us, we become the righteous victims of violence. The
implication is that revolutionary violence is acceptable; defense against it is
not. In other words, they see themselves as martyrs for the revolution – our
violence is good. The Brownshirts would have recognized this argument as
one of their own.
The DSA also justified smashing windows, robbing stores, burning
down buildings, and trashing neighborhoods as non-violent. They tweeted
that "looting, vandalism, etc., are also not violent. No people are being
harmed." First, individuals; then, they deny that downtown is a violent act.
The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) – the most prestigious English
language dictionary – defines violence as, "The exercise of physical force
so as to inflict injury on, or cause damage to, persons or property; action or
conduct characterized by this; treatment or usage tending to cause bodily
injury or forcibly interfering with personal freedom." (S273) Woke fascism,
of course, would claim the OED is a tool of white supremacy – but then
what isn't?
Progressive writers and "intellectuals" across America added their
voices to the chorus, justifying looting, rioting, vandalism, and violence. A
professor from Stanford University argued that the word "looting" is racist.
Merely uttering it is an act of white supremacy. In Defense of Looting, a
popular progressive book by Vicky Osterweil argues that looting is a social
good. An Atlantic magazine article justified BLM riots by comparing them
to the American Revolution. Another writer compared looting to the famed
Boston tea party (1773) and claimed, "looting is as American as apple pie."
(S274) Not really. The Boston citizens dressed as "Indians" threw the tea
into the harbor to make a political point about democracy. Unlike BLM
protesters and other looters, the Patriots did not steal the tea for their use or
set fire to the ships carrying it. The patriots separated personal avarice from
the political protest. How very unprogressive of them.
Progressives generally excuse looters from responsibility for their
actions. They argue that black Americans were looted for years, so it's okay
for them to loot other people now. White progressive looters get a pass
because they're "anti-racists." This argument is based on the systemic
racism claim that society is to blame and never did anything good for black
people – which is wildly inaccurate. they justify violence against physically
wrecking a city's Progressives believe there is no need to establish a clear
causal connection between a given looter's actual loss and real damage done
to that individual by the organization or person they are looting. The
argument is simple: America is systematically racist; all blacks are victims
of the system; therefore, looting Walmart or the local grocery store, as one
BLM street leader put it in 2020, is "reparation," not a crime. Yet, looting is
illegal in at least 190 countries with different histories and populations than
the US. In other words, it is not some form of justice. It is simply
criminality.
Intimidation
Woke fascists routinely use intimidation against their opponents. They
publish private home addresses, cell numbers, email addresses, and other
information about political opponents on the internet, perhaps hoping their
aggressive followers will commit an act of violence. Extremist supporters
"protest" outside the homes of judges, conservative journalists, officials,
police chiefs, and others. They are sending a message that Hitler's Nazis
would approve.
In May 2022, a Supreme Court employee leaked news that Roe V. Wade
was about to be reversed by the Court. In response, angry, Woke fascists
called for "protests" at the homes of conservative Justices in an obvious
attempt to intimidate them into changing their vote. Biden and the
Department of Justice could have enforced Federal laws against
intimidation of the justices and against protests at their homes, but to no
one’s surprise, they did nothing. So much for the rule of law.
Democratic politicians generally encourage, excuse, or look the other way
at intimidation by Woke fascists who, after all, are their close allies.
Sometimes Democrats are more openly involved. Maxine Waters, a
Democratic congresswoman, actively encouraged intimidation against the
Party's political enemies on at least two occasions.
In 2019, Waters urged a crowd in California to harass and intimidate Trump
Administration officials and their families: "If you see anybody from that
cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get
out, and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them
they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." (S275) Progressives began
hounding and threatening officials in public places like restaurants, even in
the presence of their families. The message was clear, give us what we want
or else.
In 2021, Waters demanded the conviction of police officer Derek Chauvin
for killing George Floyd. She told an angry crowd to "stay on the street....
get more active, we've got to get more confrontational. We've got to make
sure that they know that we mean business." In other words, convict him or
else. Waters later disingenuously walked back her comments, but her
provocative words followed months of violent, angry demonstrations that
made her use of the phrase "more confrontational" a clear, implied threat.
(S276)
BLM, Antifa, and other Woke fascists didn't need encouragement from
Waters. They happily organized acts of intimidation. In 2018 Antifa
published on Twitter ("doxed") the addresses of conservative commentators
Ann Coulter, Tucker Carlson, and Sean Hannity. Twitter delayed (some
would say stalled) removing the offending information. Antifa "protesters"
wearing black clothing and masks went to Tucker's home to intimidate him
into silence. Marching outside of his house, they reportedly chanted:
"Tucker Carlson, we will fight, we know where you sleep tonight." (S277)
During the protest, they broke his front door. Twitter belatedly suspended
the "Smash Racism DC" account, which inspired the Antifa protests at
Carlson's home. Antifa's message: keep your mouth shut or else. Carlson
later moved his residence to an undisclosed location to protect himself and
his family.
Intimidating public officials, including senior police officials, is all in a
day's work for progressives. In August 2020, 200 angry protesters showed
up at the home of the Seattle police chief. Neighbors described the protest:
It was not peaceful. They were here to intimidate. Scare people. Scare
children. There were children out there and they were asking them what
schools they went to. They were yelling the most horrible things you've
ever heard in your entire life. (S278)
In August 2020, protesters invaded a gated community and vandalized
the home of the Los Angeles police chief. Anti-police protesters vandalized
the home of the Portland, Oregon, police commissioner. Protesters swarmed
the podium of retired Detroit police chief James Craig when he announced
his run for governor as a Republican in September 2021. Craig had to cut
short his announcement and retreat to safety with the help of supporters.
Even relatively moderate Democrats, like Representative Josh Gottheimer
in Bergen County, faced the wrath of protesters who trespassed at his home
and refused to leave until police intervened.
Protesters repeatedly harassed moderate Democrat senators Joe
Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema for opposing various parts of the Biden
administration's "Build Back Better" legislation. In a women's room and on
an airplane, Sinema was harangued and video-stalked by protesters.
Manchin was accosted at his houseboat, in his car, and by a gang of
demonstrators on a public street. Other protesters attempted to intimidate
Manchin by demonstrating at the Ohio home of Manchin's daughter in the
early hours of the morning. (S279)
BLM and Violence
Radical revolutionary violence in the US dates back to the late 19th century.
For example, in 1901, an anarchist gunned down newly elected President
McKinley (1843 - 1901.) In 1920 an anarchist bomb planted on Wall Street
killed 38 people and injured 200 others. (S280) In the 1960s, 1970s, and
early 1980s, left-wing extremists, like the Students for a Democratic
Society (SDS) and its offshoot, the Weather Underground, committed
numerous acts of violence, including riots, intimidation, arson, and
occupation of private and public buildings. There were thousands of
bombings across the country over several years – 2,500 between 1971 and
1972 alone. Dozens of people died or were injured by bombs and other
violence. Hundreds or more were injured during riots and demonstrations.
(S281)
Today radical violence has mostly moved away from bombs. The emphasis
is on digital intimidation, street violence, confrontation, and getting people
fired from their jobs. BLM, for example, officially promoted street protests
that, though often peaceful, frequently morphed into violence, arson, and
looting. It could hardly be otherwise when BLM leaders, as quoted earlier
in this chapter, threatened violence and looting while also calling for
peaceful demonstrations. The call for non-violent protests created a false
image of peaceful protest, quickly endorsed by Big Media. Only the
peaceful public face of BLM was presented to the public. Big Media
showed videos of hundreds of thousands of people across the country
peacefully demanding racial justice – powerful images that aroused a
sympathetic response from many Americans. BLM violence got little
coverage.
Yet nearly 95 percent of all riots in the summer of 2020 involved BLM.
(S282) Protests often turned violent because BLM had another under-
reported face – which encouraged revolutionary violence and mayhem. A
top BLM leader (quoted above) said, "give us what we want [or] we will
burn down this system and replace it." The message was a direct call for
violence. A year later, a BLM leader warned New York City mayor-elect
Eric Adams not to restore the police anti-crime unit to fight the wave of
murder and violence engulfing the city. "If they think they are going back to
the old ways of policing, then we're going to take to the streets again...
There will be riots. There will be fire, and there will be bloodshed." (S283)
Do what we say or else.
BLM spoke with two voices – a peaceful face for public consumption
combined with implicit and explicit threats of violence if their demands
were not met. This clever approach made it possible for sympathetic
journalists and politicians to jump on the bandwagon while ignoring or
minimizing protest violence. In one of many examples, Pennsylvania
Governor Tom Wolf, a Democrat, excused a night of BLM violence by
terming riots that involved arson, looting, and the injury of twelve police
officers as "peaceful protests." (S284)
BLM protests and riots were far from "mostly" peaceful, as claimed by Big
Media. In 2020, at least 25 people died participating in "political
demonstrations.” (S285) Civilians, not police, killed all but one. Accurate
numbers about how many people were injured or hurt during protests are
hard to obtain. BLM sympathizers in the media and nonprofit researchers
minimized the extent of the violence. Media fact-checkers protected BLM's
peaceful image. It is almost impossible to find a fact-check that doesn't
dismiss or creatively excuse BLM violence. However, the true scale of the
violence is suggested by various sources, including local news reports,
private organizations, police departments, and the Department of Justice.
The National Police Chiefs Association (S286), for instance, indicated that
the ten-week period from May 25 to July 31 was extremely violent. They
provided the following statistics:
• 2,000 police officers injured.
• 72 percent of law enforcement agencies reported police injured during
protests.
• 2,385 looting incidents.
• 624 cases of arson.
• 97 police vehicles burned.
• 16,200 people were arrested for protest-related crimes.
• $2 billion in property damaged or destroyed. (S287)
Antifa and Violence
Antifa is a loose association of self-styled anarchist, communist, and
radically left-wing political organizations that claim to be antifascist. The
group is relatively small outside of Oregon and Washington state and has
nothing like the national influence of BLM. Ironically, Antifa's behavior
and political extremism meet the criteria of fascism discussed in Chapters
One and Two. By definition, communism and left-wing anarchism are
essentially fascist in nature. Ideologically Antifa insists it is anti-racist, but
it fully embraces the anti-white racism of BLM and Woke fascism.
Ironically Antifa adopted many of the positions of early Italian Fascism,
which was socialist in outlook, and advocated the seizure of capitalist
factories and unused land. (S288) Antifa's followers generally consider
themselves members of a revolutionary elite devoted to eliminating
"fascism," which they associate with capitalism. Although they correctly
identify Nazis and the KKK as racist, they absurdly also view
conservatives, Republicans, and the much-reviled Trump voters as fascists
and potential domestic terrorists.
Ironically, Antifa and many of its supporters engage in practices long
associated with fascism. Antifa protesters and rioters often wear all-black
outfits strikingly reminiscent of Mussolini's Blackshirts. Fascists often
associate their movements with specific colors. Antifa wears the black garb
of anarchism. Communists and socialists use red, although the early Soviet
secret police often wore black leather. Nazis adopted a black swastika on a
white and red background as their flag, brown for their street-fighting
Brownshirt thugs, and black for their murderous elite, black-uniformed
Schutzstaffel (SS). The Italian Fascist party flag was all black with a
depiction of a fasces (the ancient Roman symbol of authority) in the center.
The stage for Biden’s infamous speech on America’s soul featured lurid red
light and black shadowing.
Like Nazis, Italian Fascists, and communists, they feel justified in using
violence and intimidation against anyone they don't like. They have little
respect for the rule of law or the Constitution, which they think is merely a
bourgeois artifact of the ruling classes. Individual liberties like freedom of
speech and the press are permitted only for themselves and their allies.
They have physically attacked or attempted to intimidate guest speakers
they deem fascist or racist at major universities to keep them from speaking.
Antifa has violently attacked journalists, police, Federal officers, and
innocent bystanders. Antifa violence is consistently downplayed by Big
Media and the Biden administration, which excuse, ignore, and minimize
the threat to ordinary citizens.
Antifa's most notable contribution to political violence was its siege of the
Federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon (2020 to 2021). The nighttime
attacks began after the death of George Floyd and lasted for nearly eight
months. As the riots gradually died down, the protective fencing was taken
down – at which point the riots resumed, and the fencing was put back in
place. A total of 277 Federal officers were injured in the Portland
courthouse riots:
Officers were assaulted nightly there for months — slashed, hard
objects thrown at them, struck with objects like hammers and baseball bats,
and blinded with lasers. (S289)
Police and Federal agents arrested 300 people for violence at the
courthouse – including 80 for arson and possession or use of explosives.
Right-wing Violence
This book identifies both the extreme left and right as fascist (see Part One).
Our primary focus is on left-wing or Woke fascism because it represents by
far the greatest existential threat to American civilization, democracy, and
freedom. The press has identified several right-wing organizations like the
"boogaloo boys"
– reportedly a loosely associated network of allegedly "antigovernment"
extremists – in a relentless effort to detoxify BLM and Antifa violence.
These groups are linked to occasional acts of violence and may indeed be
fascist. Some have adopted the traditional trappings of fascist behavior –
racism, antisemitism, and confrontational street violence or intimidation.
The Biden administration claims that right-wing white supremacy is the
primary threat to the US. Right-wing fascism is mainly moribund,
concentrated in a few locations, and utterly lacks significant influence, even
at a local level. Big Media generally uses the meme concerning right-wing
violence as a blanket justification and excuse for approved violence by
BLM or Antifa. It's not that right-wing fascism doesn't exist, but compared
to left-wing fascism, it is insignificant except for occasional violence
usually committed by one or two individuals.
The January 6 riot, touted by Big Media and Democrats as evidence of
"domestic terrorism," was less severe, less destructive, and a far less violent
event than dozens of BLM and Antifa riots. Big Media and Democrats
insist January 6 is a unique case and rarely if ever, compare it to the violent
riots in major US cities in the fiery summer of 2020. January 6 was indeed a
riot (though a mild one), but it was a drop in the bucket from an objective
viewpoint compared to BLM riots downplayed by the press. Biden
administration and Woke fascist Democrats like Adam Schiff weaponized
January 6 in much the same way as Hitler, and the Nazis used the infamous
Reichstag fire to justify their assault on democracy.
Silencing Political Opponents
America's FNDs consciously or otherwise imitate many tactics pioneered
by Nazis, Italian Fascists, and communists. They use or encourage
intimidation and street violence to silence their critics and drown out
alternative narratives. They sometimes attack and disrupt rival political
rallies by beating up or intimidating attendees and defying efforts by police
to stem the violence. For example, attendees at a political rally at the Trump
White House during the 2020 campaign were threatened and menaced by
BLM protesters. In 2020 BLM and Antifa rioters "ruled the streets" with
fists, clubs, loose lumber, rocks, bottles of frozen water, fireworks, small
explosives, lasers, knives, and sometimes guns.
Like Nazi politicians in the 1930s, blue state governors and mayors often
ordered police to allow rioters to burn and loot at will. In a replay of Nazi
violence in the 1930s, blue state district attorneys often refused to prosecute
people arrested for rioting and looting. Public events at colleges and
universities have suffered systematic and planned disruptions that
sometimes turn violent and are overlooked by sympathetic or intimidated
administrations. Like the Nazis and Italian Fascists, Antifa has a history of
assaulting "hostile" journalists covering Antifa "demonstrations."
Fascist regimes often organized street violence for a specific political
purpose. In 1938, during Krystallnacht (named after the piles of broken
glass on sidewalks from broken store windows), the Nazi regime sent
Brownshirts into the streets to attack Jews, their businesses, and homes.
Italian fascists sent gangs of street thugs into smaller cities to attack the
offices of rival political parties, where they committed brutal assaults often
ignored by the police. And ironically, just as senior management at large
German companies funded the street activities of the Nazi Party, today's
Fortune 500 firms reward BLM with multi-million-dollar contributions (or
is it tribute?)
And Then the Political Violence Stopped
Street violence is a tool used by fascism to further its political goals until it
has successfully seized power. Fascists generally abandon the rough and
tumble of street violence and thuggery once they control the government
and get their hands on the extensive police authority of the state. Street
violence in Germany mostly disappeared after the 1933 election, which
enabled Hitler to seize absolute control of the German government. Once in
power, Hitler banned rival political parties, took over the police and the
courts, and destroyed the constitution. Street violence was replaced by the
highly organized and all-pervasive Gestapo secret police and other official
security agencies. Violence and intimidation moved indoors into
government police headquarters and concentration camps.
Is it a coincidence that most organized political violence in the United
States miraculously stopped after Biden was elected? Factcheckers claim
the halt in violence is just one of those things. They vociferously challenge
the idea that Biden and the Democrats were linked to, or approved of BLM
and Antifa violence. Their theory seems to be that rioters are simply tired of
looting and burning down neighborhoods in Chicago, LA, New York, and
140 other cities. Perhaps they ran out of storage space for their loot?
Perhaps the election mollified their anger at society? Who can say?
Yet Biden and the Democrat Party were the clear beneficiaries of BLM
riots, just as they benefited from the general weariness and fear engendered
by the Covid-19 pandemic. As extensive violence destabilizes society. It
discussed earlier, weakens political adversaries and, as Lincoln said,
delegitimizes a government that cannot, or will not, protect its citizens.
Street violence makes voters long for a respite from riots and looting.
Perhaps most of all, it makes leaders (in this case, Trump) appear
ineffective or even incompetent. Biden used this Democrat-generated image
to portray himself (ridiculously, as it turns out) as the "adult" and "unifier"
who would soothe America's tortured soul.
Biden won the election. Political street violence ended up being replaced by
a record surge in criminal violence. Since then, the Biden administration
and Democrats have increasingly relied on the coercive power of state
agencies to intimidate their erstwhile political opponents. Trump voters,
white middle, and working-class Americans have been broadly accused of
white supremacy and are presumptively assumed to support domestic
terrorism. The US military has been politically purged of "extremists" and
"white supremacists." The FBI has conducted the single most aggressive
criminal investigation in its history against the perpetrators (mostly
trespassers) of January 6. More than a year and a half after the event,
congressional Democrats are still conducting an endless politically
motivated investigation into the "origins" of the so-called "insurrection."
Scores of people arrested for alleged participation on January 6 are
languishing in jail – many in solitary confinement! Democrat-appointed
judges refused to grant them bail, although half of all BLM rioters and
arsonists were released without charges.
Murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals are arrested and released
without bail, but angry parents who insist on their right to participate in
their children's education are deemed "domestic terrorists." OSHA was used
to order large companies to fire millions of workers who refused medical or
conscience-based reasons to get Covid-19 vaccinations. (F60) The Biden
administration accumulated a list of 54 million American gun owners as an
apparent prelude to curtailing the Second Amendment. Trump's home was
raided by the FBI, which refuses to release information explaining the raid.
This is merely a shortlist of how the Biden administration is using or
misusing government agencies to intimidate opponents now that political
street violence has been put on hold.
What would have happened if Trump had won in 2020? Fascistfriendly
fact-checkers deny Democrats planned violence if they suffered an electoral
defeat. Why? For four years, Democrats used the utterly fake Russia Hoax
as an excuse to reverse the outcome of the 2016 presidential election and
"dump Trump.” The two impeachments of Trump were based on the
patently false Russia Hoax and a transparently nonsensical interpretation of
a phone call between Trump and a foreign leader. They encouraged BLM
riots and ignored Antifa violence. Is it likely the Democrats and Big Media
would have accepted defeat in the 2020 elections without mobilizing BLM
and seeking a decision on the streets?
24 EMERGENCIES AGAINST LIBERTY
It is necessary... if need be - to resort to all sorts of stratagems,
maneuvers, and illegal methods, to evasion and subterfuges in order... to
carry on Communist work... at all costs. — V. I. Lenin (S290)
You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's
an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before. — Rham
Emanuel, Democrat, and former Chicago mayor (S291)
Emergencies have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of
individual liberty have been eroded – and once they are suspended, it is not
difficult for anyone who has assumed emergency powers to see to it that the
emergency will persist. — Friedrich Hayek (S292)
Fascism is about control, and one way to achieve it is to take advantage
of an existing emergency or, if necessary, create one. It's a clever scheme
used over and over again by power-hungry fascists. War, famine, disease,
civil unrest, terrorism, and other crises are often exploited by fascist
officials and politicians for their own purposes.
Emergencies weaken or disrupt the rules of everyday life. Suddenly the
ingrained habits of normal existence fade into the background as the glare
of a major nationwide emergency distracts attention. Emergencies threaten
and disrupt everyday life.
In an emergency, the general public is often overwhelmed by fear and
anxiety. The prospect of financial ruin, a breakdown in law and order, or
even the possibility of death makes people desperate. A crisis creates a
sense of urgency and danger that fascist politicians have often used to
stampede the public into accepting legal and social changes they might
otherwise oppose. Democrat politician Rham Emanuel summed it up: "You
never let a serious crisis go to waste… it's an opportunity to do things you
think you could not do before." Hitler would have agreed.
Fascists will use a real emergency if one is available. If not, they may
use propaganda, false information, and other strategies to make a bad
situation worse and, therefore, easier to exploit. Sometimes they invent a
crisis and use it to break down resistance to their attempts to seize or
enlarge their political authority. In their hands, real or invented emergencies
become blanket justifications for suppressing liberty and re-organizing
societies into fascist Utopias. The worse things are, the greater the
opportunity. Any emergency is better than none.
Lenin Used an Emergency to Crush Liberty
In 1917, Russia was in the middle of a genuine national emergency. It was a
losing a long, bloody war with Germany. The old Imperial government was
collapsing. The army mutinied. The police were helpless in the face of riots
and disorder. A caretaker government took over but was powerless and
aggressively undermined by Communist agitators. The country was
bankrupt. In the middle of this national crisis, Lenin and the Communists
staged a military coup and seized control against little resistance. Lenin
declared the creation of a one-party state and, within forty-eight hours,
suspended freedom of the press. He justified censorship, saying: "We...
have always said that when we reached a position of power, we would close
the bourgeois press. To tolerate bourgeois newspapers would mean to cease
being a Socialist." (S293) Freedom of speech became a crime punishable by
death or imprisonment.
Over the next few months, the revolutionary Communist government
created a secret police organization that would eventually arrest, imprison,
and murder literally millions of opponents. Strikes were broken up. The
country's private banks were seized and used to finance the new
government. Even a promised national election was held, which
Communists lost, but Lenin overturned by force. The modest civil liberties
allowed by the previous regime were abolished. Russia remained a one-
party, Communist dictatorship for the next 70 years.
A Progressive President Uses a War Emergency for Politics While
Lenin was crushing civil liberties in Russia, President Woodrow Wilson
(1856 - 1924) was censoring free speech in America. Wilson was an early
progressive devoted to massively expanding the Federal Government and
"reforming" various aspects of American society. Like most progressives,
he was a champion of Federal intrusion into everyday life. His major
accomplishments included the creation of the Federal Reserve, the Federal
Trade Commission, and the Internal Revenue Service. He also supported
the extremely intrusive and hated Eighteenth Amendment, which prohibited
the sale of alcohol and opened to door to organized crime.
It would probably be unfair to define Wilson as a fascist. He did,
however, get the US involved in World War One, and in some respects, he
behaved like a fascist. He treated the First Amendment as a mere
inconvenience. Wilson and Congress used the war emergency to justify a
crackdown on free speech. They enacted two laws that severely restricted
free speech – the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918. The
Sedition Act gave the US government the power to prosecute and imprison
Americans who opposed Wilson's war policies. The Act made it illegal "to
incite disloyalty within the military; use in speech or written form any
language that was disloyal to the government, the Constitution, the military,
or the flag; advocate strikes on labor production; promote principles that
were in violation of the act; or support countries at war with the United
States." (S294) Over two thousand people were arrested and one thousand
were convicted for violating the act and fined or imprisoned. The US
Supreme Court at the time sided with the government and let the
convictions stand. It wasn't until after the war that the Court began to come
to the defense of free speech. Ironically, the ACLU, which today has
retreated from defending free speech, was a leader in fighting Wilson's
restrictive laws.
Hitler Exploits the Reichstag Fire Emergency
We have already seen how Hitler used the Reichstag fire (1933) to create a
national emergency that gave him a plausible excuse to pass the Enabling
Act of 1933, which effectively turned Germany into a fascist dictatorship.
Even today, historians are not sure whether the fire was the act of one man,
a communist conspiracy as Hitler claimed, or a Nazi plot. What is certain is
that Hitler exploited the fire to impose a national "state of emergency."
(S295) He claimed special extra-constitutional measures were needed "in
defense against Communistic violence endangering the state." The resulting
Enabling Act abolished civil rights and authorized police to arrest anyone,
for any reason, anytime, anywhere. All rival political parties were banned.
There were no free elections in Germany until 1949 – four years after Hitler
committed suicide at the end of World War Two.
A Flood of Recent "Emergencies"
Recent emergencies since 2020 have created almost endless opportunities
for power-grabbing fascists. Covid-19 was exploited by globalists in many
countries to weaken democracy and civil liberties. The Chinese
Communists led the way by imposing severe lockdowns enforced by
heavily armed police. In 2020 millions of citizens of Wuhan and other cities
with high Covid-19 infection rates were imprisoned in their own homes.
Covid-19 cases were forcibly sent to internment camps with few medical
facilities, where many died. The cycle repeated itself in 2022 when the
pandemic broke out again in Shanghai – China's largest city. Millions of
residents were imprisoned in their homes. Police physically locked people
into their own apartments. Family pets were seized and beaten to death with
clubs. Shanghai, the country's most advanced and sophisticated city,
became a warning to the Chinese people that the government has complete
control over their economic and social life.
The Australian government generally followed the Chinese model. Infected,
exposed citizens and the unvaxed were locked down and arrested if they left
their homes. Special internment camps and "medi-hotels," supposedly more
humane than those in China, were set up for the quarantined. A 9:00 PM
curfew was enforced by a heavy police presence, especially in working-
class neighborhoods. People were arrested and beaten for just standing in
front of their own homes. (S296) All was justified in the name of fascist-
like "communal responsibility" as panicked Australians were terrified into
giving up their personal liberties.
In 2022, Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau used false claims about peaceful
protests to justify a harsh political crackdown that ignored the civil rights of
thousands of demonstrators and their families. President Zelensky of
Ukraine exploited the Russian invasion in 2022 to abolish eleven rival
political parties by alleging they had "links" to the Russians. In the US,
Covid-19 was eagerly exploited by blue state officials and the Federal
Government (see below). The BLM riots created an emergency relentlessly
exploited by Woke fascists to defund the police, empty the jails, scrap
American history and culture, and impose racist equity in communities,
schools, and corporations.
Covid-19: The National Emergency that Enabled Fascism The
Covid-19 pandemic was, without a doubt, a genuine worldwide emergency.
It killed one million Americans, sickened millions of others, and made life
miserable for everyone else. Unfortunately, the miseries of the pandemic
crisis often became an excuse for politicians, public officials, bureaucrats,
activists, and privately-owned companies to undermine the civil liberties of
the American people. The constitutional rights of Americans came under
attack as never before. Were officials consciously embracing fascism? Who
can say? However, their behavior was often blatantly fascist. As quoted
above, Democrat Rahm Emanuel declared: "You never let a serious crisis
go to waste." And they didn't.
 The Covid-19 emergency offered a nearly perfect opportunity to
exercise power, limit freedom, and intimidate Americans. The Federal
Government, and many governors and mayors, undermined some of the
most important constitutional liberties. As Covid-19 waxed and waned,
Federal and state officials, especially in blue states, behaved like dictators
ruling by decree rather than by legislation. Governors and mayors in
California, New York, Michigan, New Jersey, Oregon, Washington, and
other states largely bypassed state legislatures. They often imposed
draconian rules that restricted the US and state constitutions.
The First Amendment: Freedom of Speech Suppressed Free speech
was attacked almost from the beginning of the pandemic. Perhaps the first
victim of censorship was the truth about the origin of Covid-19. The
medical bureaucrats at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the
Center for Disease Control (CDC) refused to admit that the pandemic
"escaped" from the government virology lab located in Wuhan, China,
where the first cases appeared in 2019. Government officials and Big Media
promoted a false narrative. They claimed, against all logic, that Covid-19
was a naturally occurring bat virus from a "wet" food market just down the
street from the Wuhan lab and its dangerous experiments with deadly
viruses. The experts ignored, and Big Tech suppressed, the claim that
Covid-19 was gene modified by Chinese scientists and later escaped from
the Wuhan Lab. Leading American and European virologists supported the
NIH story. Why?
Could the reason be that the NIH, led by chief government virologist
Anthony Fauci, funded risky experiments on viruses at the Wuhan lab?
Perhaps these experiments contributed to the outbreak of Covid-19 – a
possibility Fauci denies. We learned that American scientists had allegedly
been involved in or encouraged research that may have contributed to the
disaster. The pro-China bias in the CDC and NIH almost certainly enhanced
the urge to suppress the story. Up to this point, one could argue that the
preceding was simply a "Cover Your Ass" effort to protect the reputations
of those involved. But what explains the behavior of Big Tech and Big
Media?
In September 2020, Twitter banned or obstructed stories about the origins of
Covid-19. The company suspended the account of a Chinese virologist who
claimed Covid-19 was man-made. (S297) Big Tech used its vast power to
keep the story quiet. Facebook banned posts claiming the virus was man-
made. In an interview in July 2021, Fauci claimed it was "most likely" that
Covid-19 had a natural origin, though he didn't rule out a lab leak. (S298)
The story was crushed. The NIH wanted the report suppressed, so Big Tech.
Big Media obliged. It wasn't until May 2021, in the face of growing
evidence and public interest, that the company relented and lifted the ban.
(S299)
Big media relentlessly attacked and undermined the story that Covid-19
was man-made or had escaped from the Wuhan Lab. Leftwing journalists
and pundits apparently assumed that if Trump (the universal boogeyman)
believed the story, it must be false. Carefully chosen experts dismissed the
possibility of Chinese government involvement, while highly qualified
dissenters were attacked or ignored. As late as the summer of 2022, the
World Health Organization (WHO) continued to insist the origin was
unknown. At a WHO meeting held in June 2022, Tedros Adhanom
Ghebreyesus, its director-general, told assembled officials: "We do not yet
have the answers as to where it came from or how it entered the human
population." Yet he also confided to a senior European official that the most
likely explanation was an accident at the Wuhan Lab. (S300)
As always, Woke fascists were eager to slap a racist label on events.
Progressives claimed that it was racist even to think the origin of Covid-19
might be linked to China. Simply calling the disease the "Wuhan" virus was
a supposed act of racism. A New York Times reporter claimed the story had
"racist roots." (S301) Science, it appeared, was irrelevant. Race trumps
facts.
The suppression of Covid-19 origin theories appears to have whetted the
appetite of Big Tech and Big Media for further use of their power to censor
political speech. It intensified the Woke fascist thirst for canceling offenders
and strengthened a similar urge among government officials. Undermining
and ignoring the First Amendment quickly became acceptable. Officials
such as the Surgeon General of the United States encouraged powerful tech
and media companies to block "misinformation." On the other hand,
incorrect or misleading statements by officials and Big Tech mysteriously
disappeared from social media and news organizations. Reports in August
2022 revealed that Biden officials secretly conspired with Twitter to censor
Covid-19 information that didn't fit the administration's narratives. (S302)
Big Tech and Big Media aggressively spread claims by government
officials that the nationwide lockdowns in 2020 would "flatten the curve” of
the pandemic. By contrast, skeptical studies by dissenting scientists were
ignored. Two years later, a "meta-study" by Johns Hopkins University
(February 2022) reviewed dozens of scientific studies, which showed that
skeptics had been correct. Lockdowns were ineffective and caused
extensive social, economic, and health damage. (S303) True to form, Big
Media virtually ignored the study. CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times,
Washington Post, ABC, NBC, and CBS used their power to keep
uncomfortable facts away from the general public. However, liberal
researchers who disagreed with the study's conclusions received plenty of
new coverage. (S304)
Skeptical information about the Covid-19 vaccine was widely suppressed.
Big Media downplayed or ignored the numerous side effects and potential
risks of the vaccine calling it "misinformation" or "misleading." They
endlessly repeated government claims that the vaccines were completely
safe and would prevent the spread of the pandemic. In December 2020,
officials claimed the vaccines were 90 percent or more effective in
preventing infection. That number dwindled steadily, leading to the third
"booster" shot. It turned out the vax was not very effective in preventing
Covid-19, although it seems to have lessened its intensity. Once the
omicron variant arrived, vaccines reduced hospitalizations but were almost
useless in preventing the spread of the disease – the vax's original purpose.
Big Tech zealously helped the CDC and officials in blue states impose
harsh mask mandates while suppressing evidence that masks were of little
value. In the early days of the pandemic, NIH and Fauci declared masks to
be of little value. Weeks later, Fauci suddenly promoted masks and then
even urged the use of double masks. Finally, in January 2022, officials
admitted that cloth masks were virtually useless. Even N-95 masks turned
out to be of limited value. During this almost two-year period, Biden, the
CDC, Democratic governors, and other officials continued to mandate
masks indoors and even outdoors. The Biden administration insisted on
nationwide mask mandates well into spring 2022, even though they knew
masks were of little value. However, even mask-promoting blue state
officials eased restrictions as voters seemed poised to punish them in the
2022 off-year elections.
Woke fascists took advantage of the Covid-19 emergency to justify their
attacks on free speech. They used it as an excuse to silence independent
sources of ideas and information on the internet. For example, woke censors
went after Joe Rogan, known for his outspoken podcasts, for spreading
allegedly "misleading" information about Covid-19 vaccines. Rogan's crime
was interviewing Robert Malone, a noted medical doctor, and researcher
who helped develop the mRNA technology used in Covid-19 vaccines.
Malone was a critic of the CDC and of Covid-19 policy. But Malone was an
excuse. Rogan's real offense was providing a free speech platform Woke
fascists didn't control. Their goal was to tame or shut him down
permanently. If they could make an example of a media powerhouse like
Rogan, others would think twice before speaking up. The message was
clear, keep your mouth shut or lose your career and your livelihood.
What was the official response of the US government to an effort to censor
free speech? Not surprisingly, Biden's White House spokesperson endorsed
a crackdown on Rogan and asked for more censorship: "Ultimately, our
view is that it's a good step, it's a positive step, but there's more that can be
done." Never mind oldfashioned concepts like freedom of speech or the
president's oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
A similar anti-free speech message was delivered countless times during the
pandemic. Free speech was often crushed. Digital platforms like YouTube
banned medical doctors from advocating treatments like
hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. In some cases, dissenting doctors had
their medical licenses challenged, threatening their ability to practice
medicine and earn a living. Others found themselves isolated and even
sanctioned by hospitals for speaking out. The Covid-19 crisis became a trial
run for banning free speech that appears to have encouraged Big Tech to
extend its censorship into the political arena during the 2020 elections.
The First Amendment: Freedom of Assembly Racialized In many
(primarily blue) states, governors ignored the constitutional right of
assembly. They arbitrarily limited the number of people who could gather
in public places, private homes, and businesses. These restrictions were
allegedly based on "science" but had little actual scientific support. Many
rules appeared to have no objective scientific justification and bypassed
existing laws and state constitutions.
For example, in Massachusetts, the governor's "Covid-19 Order #59"
limited assembly to "10 persons for indoor gatherings, 25 persons for
outdoor gatherings." (S305) New Jersey's governor arbitrarily declared the
"indoor gathering limit will decrease from 25 to 10 people." The outdoor
gathering limit will decrease from 500 people to 150 people." (S306) In
Ohio, the governor banned activities at social events: "No socializing or
activities in open congregate areas and no dancing. Guests must be seated at
all times." (S307) At first, crowd limits were inspired by medical necessity
but were often set without solid scientific data. These measures, like other
"emergency" rules, were imposed largely by "decree" and generally
disregarded the Constitution, state constitutions, and inconvenient laws or
regulations. The Woke fascist nature of these limits became apparent during
the BLM riots when officials did nothing to enforce restrictions on
demonstrators and rioters. The right to assembly of peaceful citizens who
did not riot or demonstrate remained heavily restricted. At the same time,
BLM demonstrators were allowed unfettered access to the streets despite
the pandemic.
The First Amendment: Freedom of Worship Ignored Governors in
ten states flat-out banned gatherings for religious worship in direct violation
of the First Amendment to the Constitution, which protects freedom of
worship. Religious observances in places of worship were declared illegal.
In some cases, police dispersed worship services held outside while
attendees sat in their cars with windows up. The Covid-19 emergency
justified a blanket prohibition of religious worship in California,
Washington, Idaho, Alaska, Montana, Minnesota, Illinois, New York,
Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Delaware. Twenty-two states
limited religious gatherings to ten or fewer people. Again, this was done
with little regard for evidence, safety measures, or constitutional or legal
rights. Only a few states respected the constitutional right to worship:
Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas,
Texas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, South Dakota, North Dakota, Utah,
Colorado, and Arizona. (S308)
The Fourteenth Amendment: Racism Legalized Governors issued
numerous decrees that disregarded civil rights, and they did so in defiance
of the Constitution. In 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment was added to the
Constitution to keep state governments from ignoring or abridging civil
rights. Originally intended to protect freed slaves, the Supreme Court
applied it to every American regardless of race. The Amendment made it
illegal to violate anyone's civil rights. States could not ignore the
constitutional rights of their citizens or deny them due process or equal
protection of the law. In a famous court case – Gitlow v. New York (1925),
the Supreme Court ruled that the due process clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment prevented New York state from enforcing a law that infringed
the rights of its citizens to exercise free speech. Here's the relevant text:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws.
Ironically, given the recent virtual abandonment of the right to free
speech described earlier, the ACLU formerly played an essential role in
persuading the Supreme Court to protect free speech, even if offensive. A
century ago, the ACLU argued that a radical newspaper published by
Communists could legally publish Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto,
which called for the violent overthrow of the government. (S309)
The fundamental principle of the Fourteenth Amendment was equal
protection of the law for all citizens regardless of their race. Officials are
not allowed to deny any group, originally black Americans, and
subsequently all citizens, equal rights. Neither the states nor the Federal
Government can lawfully ignore a person's constitutional rights based on
skin color. Yet several states prioritized life-saving medical treatments for
Covid-19, favoring blacks over whites. New York state limited access to
monoclonal antibodies and other therapies based on race. Officials justified
this racist policy by claiming that non-whites were at greater risk than
whites. Here is what the Department of Health claimed as a justification:
Non-white race or Hispanic/Latino ethnicity should be considered a risk
factor, as longstanding systemic health and social inequities have
contributed to an increased risk of severe illness and death from Covid-19.
(S310)
Woke fascists claimed that since black Americans are more prone to
obesity than whites, they are more at risk from Covid-19 and should get
priority access to treatments. It's all about the unconstitutional and racist
principle of equity, which privileges one race over another. The use of
equity to justify medical treatments is an attack on individual rights. New
York state's rule ignored the fact that a typical obese white woman, for
example, is equally at risk for complications as a typical obese black
woman. Woke fascists are playing God when they use skin color, rather
than medical science, as the basis of potentially-life saving treatments. The
Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution was intended to assure that
individuals would be treated equally by the government and not favored or
disadvantaged on the basis of skin color or other arbitrary social or political
characteristics.
The Ninth Amendment: Your Body is No Longer Yours
The Ninth Amendment protects the many liberties and freedoms not
explicitly listed by the Constitution. These so-called "unenumerated rights"
include the rights to privacy, bodily integrity, and autonomy and have been
recognized from time to time by the courts. The Amendment states: "The
enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to
deny or disparage others retained by the people." In other words, these and
other essential rights exist and cannot be invalidated legally.
Federal and state Covid-19 vaccination mandates, which required
Americans to get injections of a partially tested, experimental vaccine, were
an extreme violation of the right to privacy, bodily integrity, and autonomy.
Prior to the pandemic, the courts recognized that Americans had the legal
right to refuse medical treatment. The Supreme Court ruled in the Cruzan v.
Director, Missouri Department of Health case (1990) that officials or
doctors cannot force someone in a coma to undergo or be deprived of
lifesaving treatments without their prior consent. This decision explains
why hospitals recommend patients have an "end of life" document prepared
before undergoing a potentially harmful medical procedure. Forcing or
blackmailing people to get vaccinated against their will by using threats and
mandates violates this principle.
The argument that the government has the authority to protect the
community through forced vaccinations is unreasonable because the Covid-
19 vaccines went through a greatly accelerated testing period. The FDA
approved Pfizer, Moderna, and other vaccines on an emergency basis
despite a relatively high incidence of potentially harmful or even fatal
problems, including female reproductive issues, blood clots, and
myocarditis. Although the CDC claimed these issues were "rare,” by
February 4, 2022, the VAERS system reported a total of 1,103,855 adverse
events from Covid-19 vaccines, including 23,615 reported deaths, 127,855
hospitalizations, 12,069 heart attacks, 32,436 cases of
myocarditis/pericarditis, 23,836 lifethreatening events, and 42,260
permanently disabled. (S311) Overall, about one in about five hundred
vaccinations resulted in a serious health issue.
 The official position of the CDC is that compared to the over 543
million doses administered, these numbers are minimal. The total number
of deaths, serious illnesses, and disabilities associated with the Covid-19
vaccine is much higher than the CDC likes to admit. Forcing people to take
a potentially harmful or lethal medication violated the right to refuse
treatment. Adding insult to injury, the US government granted immunity to
vaccine makers that prevent lawsuits for death or injury from Covid-19
vaccinations. There is thus no legal recourse for people who suffered severe
side effects from the legally required vaccines.
Although no direct comparison is possible, there is an echo of Nazi
medical experimentation on death camp prisoners in the official attitude that
society can control or dispose of human subjects experimentally for the
greater good. The US government and governors believed they had the right
to compel citizens to use an experimental drug with unknown consequences
in the near and long term – justified in the name of the "greater good"
during an emergency.
Biden, governors, mayors, and even courts ignored this most basic of all
constitutional rights. They disregarded strong scientific evidence that
vaccinations provide fewer protective antibodies than natural immunity
present in people who survived Covid-19. Officials abused emergency
powers to impose vax mandates. They used coercive and punitive measures
to penalize the unvaxed who were also publicly excoriated. Police were
diverted from protecting the public from criminals to hounding
unvaccinated patrons in restaurants and stores. Restaurants were forced to
enforce vax mandates and turn away the unvaxed. Thousands of military
members, Federal employees, police officers, firefighters, municipal
workers, health workers, and airline pilots faced termination for refusing
vaccinations. Biden ordered OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health
Agency) to force large companies to coerce employees to accept
vaccinations or lose their jobs – a measure the Supreme Court declared
illegal.
The Pentagon refused religious exemptions (itself an arbitrary violation
of due process required by the Fourteenth Amendment) for tens of
thousands of military personnel who objected on religious grounds to
getting vaxed. The military announced it would discharge thousands of
personnel even if doing so lowers the readiness and capabilities of the
armed forces. And that is exactly what happened. The Army (and Air
Force) took a hard line and approved few exemptions. The result? In July
2022, the US Army admitted that it was unable to meet recruiting goals, and
troop strength was expected to fall short by at least 10,000 soldiers, not to
mention the other branches of the military. (S312)
The Fifth Amendment: The CDC Becomes America's Landlord
The Fifth Amendment protects private property from being taken from its
owners without due process. It states no person shall be "deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property
be taken for public use, without just compensation." The Amendment
prevents the government from arbitrarily seizing property without following
legal requirements and offering fair compensation. It also protects property
from a "regulatory taking," in which government action or regulations
deprive an owner of the use or value of a property without compensation.
(Property law is complex. Zoning, for example, can limit the use of
property if carried out using due process of law.)
The CDC's emergency prohibition (moratorium) on evictions may have
been the most extreme, illegal, and unconstitutional fascist act in the history
of the US government. Without any legal authority whatsoever, the head of
the CDC issued a decree that ordered landlords in Covid-19 infected
counties (almost 90 percent of US counties) to stop evicting tenants
regardless of state and local law. With a single order, the CDC, without
authority from Congress or existing law, took control of a significant
portion of the American economy and curtailed property rights, and ignored
centuries of law and court decisions. A Federal official arbitrarily imposed
an emergency rule without legal authority and without holding legally
required rule-making procedures, hearings, and the opportunity for public
comment. In effect, a public official engaged in a regulatory "taking,"
stripping millions of property owners of control over their private property.
Biden ordered an extension of the ban.
The precedent was clear. If the CDC, or the president, could stop evictions
in the name of public health, why couldn't they limit rents or decree that
landlords had to turn over their property to renters without compensation?
The CDC action usurped Congressional authority and established a
precedent for activist Federal agencies to ignore the Constitution and state
law at will. Fortunately, the Supreme Court voted six to three, ruling that
the CDC had acted illegally. The eviction ban was overturned. However, a
change of just two votes on the Court would have vastly extended the
power of government agencies to ignore the Constitution and other laws at
will. Freedom in America hangs by a thread.

25 A CALL TO ACTION
The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether
Americans are to be freemen or slaves; whether they are to have any
property they can call their own… and themselves consigned to a state of
wretchedness from which no human efforts will deliver them. The fate of
unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct
of this army. Our cruel and unrelenting enemy leaves us only the choice of
brave resistance, or the most abject submission. — George Washington
(S313)
This book has documented the relentless Woke fascist assault on you,
your family, friends, and fellow Americans. The facts are clear. Woke
fascism is determined to destroy or transform every aspect of society.
Everything is under attack. Every belief, social activity, or cultural practice
has been undermined, delegitimized, and even outlawed. Americans' most
basic rights and heritage are under attack: free speech, freedom of the press,
parental rights, democracy, work, sexuality, history, education, self-defense,
and even the right to eat meat. The entire system of culture, law, and
economy is being dragged down to destruction and ruin.
These and other outrages are being inflicted on America and Americans
every day. What is to be done? What can ordinary people and readers do to
fight against this intolerable wave of fascism sweeping the country? The
answer is…
Become a "Revolutionary"
Yes, a revolutionary, not a dishonest, hypocritical, souldestroying Woke
fascist revolutionary eager to impose his or her will upon others, but like
the Founders, an American revolutionary who respects and defends the
Constitution and American civilization. We are engaged in a culture war for
the soul of America, and it can only be won with your participation and
help. As George Washington asked, "Where are our Men of abilities? Why
do they not come forth to save their country?" (S314) Be one of those men
and women.
 Think for Yourself
First of all, think for yourself. (If you're reading this book, you already do.)
Fascist-friendly politicians, Big Tech, Big Media, Big Education,
progressive billionaires, activists, and celebrities are eager to impose their
ideas and whims on society, don't let them. Reject their propaganda, bizarre
notions, and twisted thinking. Take everything they say with a proverbial
"grain of salt." Never forget that the left always has an agenda for what they
say and what they don't say. The New York Times, CBS, and MSNBC did
not accidentally ignore the Hunter Biden laptop story. They deliberately
kept it out of the news for political reasons. It would still be front-page
news years later had the story been about Donald Trump and his family.
Therefore, be skeptical. Don't believe left-wing government officials,
mainstream media, and Big Tech without plenty of solid evidence to back
up their claims. Always ask yourself, what is their agenda in this particular
story? For example, many school boards insist that they are not teaching
"CRT" to children but at the same time, resist releasing actual teaching
materials and course outlines to the public. Why? What are they concealing
from parents who dare ask questions? Despite denials, CRT and similar
fascist ideas are taught in schools across America as a part of the radical
agenda of many teachers and administrators. The same is true for those
teachers using a "trans" agenda to groom young children sexually. Kids are
often warned not to tell their parents about activities promoting gender
neutrality or other sexualized concepts. The goal is to influence children,
change their thinking, and convert them to radical ideas early enough to
circumvent parental rights until intervention is too late. Remember that
Woke fascism always puts its agenda ahead of other considerations,
including truth.
Thinking independently means using multiple sources of news and
information. Don't rely on just one news organization. The best way to
avoid the relentless brainwashing of the left is to reduce the footprint of Big
Media and Big Tech websites and programs in your life. If you must use
them, be skeptical and never let down your guard. In the author's opinion,
they are hopelessly biased and influenced by Woke fascism. However, they
can be a source of useful news and information if viewed with caution on a
case-by-case basis. For example, while writing this book, the author
gathered information from many sources, including left-wing news
organizations like the New York Times or local CBS News outlets. The trick
is to be skeptical of their interpretations of fact and always suspicious of
their motives.
Speak Up
The time has come for thinking individuals to speak out. If you don't like
the country's direction, "say something." Be heard. Don't let FNDs
dominate the conversation or the national discourse. If you and other
Americans remain silent, then politicians, corporations, and the government
will only hear the continual drumbeat of Woke fascism. Ordinary
Americans, once known as the "silent majority," have become an oppressed
majority because we have remained quiet; "silence gives consent."
Speaking out works. It may take time, but if enough people speak up, they
will be heard. Contact your state legislators, congressmen, senators, and
local officials. Let them know what you think of their policies or actions.
Go to school board or town council meetings and speak out. Call and
complain. Let your local cable company know whether you like or dislike a
program on one of their channels. Speak up if you are offended by Woke
fascist content in an article or editorial on the internet or newspaper. If you
disagree with a corporate policy – perhaps like Disney's promotion of the
"trans" lifestyle to young children, let them know. Your individual voice
counts.
Don't be silenced by the left. Politely stand up to your FND relatives, co-
workers, friends, teachers, or employers. People on the left assume no one
will dare challenge their often-incoherent opinions and assumptions. Instead
of being silent or shrugging your shoulders, respectfully give them the facts.
Use logic against their emotional arguments. Challenge their
misinformation and demands. Ask them for evidence to back up their
opinions.
Reject Woke Fascist Labels and Language
Don't accept the insulting and misleading terminology of the left. No
American who believes in freedom and the Constitution should accept the
validity of Woke fascist language. Women are not "menstruating people! "
A mother is not a "birthing person." Woke fascism uses language as a
weapon to intimidate opponents and undermine the cultural values of
mainstream America. We are all familiar with the relentless outpouring of
insults directed against whites and Asian Americans who are accused
unfairly of being racists, "homophobes," or "transphobic." Terms like white
supremacy, white privilege, and white fragility, supposedly meant to be
descriptive, are really nothing more than insults designed to label and
intimidate political opponents of Woke fascism. They are used as rallying
cries to browbeat other Americans into compliance and obedience. Refuse
to adopt their politicized and phony word games.
The truth is that none of these terms have any real legitimacy outside of
left-wing university English departments or Wokefriendly media. Even
words like "racist" or "racism" have lost their original force and meaning.
In the past, these words described actual bias and discrimination based on
racial stereotypes. Today, they have become stereotyped insults used against
political opponents and betray the "racist" content of modern-day fascism.
These and other terms often say more about the accuser than the accused.
Woke fascism itself is a racist enterprise that freely uses blatant
oldfashioned racism in the same way as Nazis – for political intimidation
and hate. Their terms and insults are the vocabularies of aggression against
society and against those who disagree with their program. Reject them!
Make Some Small Sacrifices
What is freedom worth to you? How about democracy or the American way
of life? The answer is measured by the effort you are willing to make.
Without sacrifice, it's all talk. The Founding Revolutionaries made
enormous sacrifices for the cause of liberty. George Washington left his
comfortable estate to spend seven years in the field commanding the
Continental Army. John Adams made the arduous two-week-long, 400-mile
trip on horseback from Boston to Philadelphia many times, even through
snow and ice and over dirt roads. His wife, Abigail Adams, stayed behind
on her own to take care of their children and faced epidemics of smallpox
and dysentery far more deadly than Covid-19. Thousands of Americans
sacrificed their lives in battle, fighting for freedom. Many others lost
homes, and farms were looted and burned to the ground by British troops.
So, the question is, are you willing to make small sacrifices to defeat the
assault on America, your values, and your way of life?
Sacrifice means dedicating a little time, effort, and money to support the
fight for freedom. Don't give your hard-earned money to corporations
whose social policies are offensive or promote policies that advance Woke
fascism. If you don't like Disney's agenda of social and sexual manipulation
of children, don't visit their theme parks or let your kids watch the Disney
Channel. Avoid their products even if you have to find substitutes or visit a
more familyfriendly theme park. For instance, you might boycott Coca-
Cola's products if you don't like their biased hiring policies that appear to
set quotas based on race and sex. Cancel your subscription to Netflix if its
left-leaning programs offend you. Consider dropping Twitter, Facebook,
and other social media that censor free speech and undermine your personal
values and ideals. Apply the same logic to local businesses when they
support Woke fascism. After the BLM riots, some restaurants refused to
serve police officers. If you disagree with the anti-cop attitude of a local
business, you might stop going there even if you like their food. You might
also politely tell them the reason. Why give money to a company that
supports politics and culture you dislike?
Contributing to political campaigns means sacrificing time and money to
elect or re-elect politicians who fight fascism and defend the Constitution.
Paying attention to the news and keeping track of Biden's latest antics are
essential but take time. Remember that FNDs in schools, government, and
corporations assume you won't notice their cultural agenda. And it is a
small but definite financial sacrifice to subscribe to conservative or
libertarian websites and publications that defend free speech and oppose
fascism.
Get Involved
There are many interactive ways to get involved and make a difference.
Refusing to do business with a woke corporation is one method. If you're a
parent or just a concerned citizen, take the time to go to school board
meetings, ask questions, and express your support or opposition to school
policies. Go to county, city, or town hall meetings to see what local officials
support or oppose. Go out and make your voice heard.
Join grassroots organizations that support parent rights, oppose defunding
the police, or advocate for preserving constitutional liberties. Volunteer as a
campaign worker for local, state, or federal politicians who fight for
American cultural values and democracy. Actively participate in the effort
to recall district attorneys who refuse to enforce the law by putting
criminals ahead of law-abiding citizens. Go to political rallies and meet-the-
candidate events to support people dedicated to protecting your values. Start
your own grassroots organization if you have the time and are so inclined.
Buy a few shares of stock in a woke-friendly corporation, attend the annual
stockholder's meeting, peacefully confront company officials and call out
their anti-American policies. (The left has done this effectively for
decades.)
Another way to get involved is to support the "infrastructure" of American
conservatives and libertarians battling Woke fascism. Subscribe to your
favorite conservative or pro-freedom websites and magazines. Buy books
by conservatives or libertarians. Contribute to or even join conservative
organizations that actively promote your values. Create a blog, write
articles, or a book.
Vote
Most important of all, always vote in every election, including primaries.
Support candidates who have a track record of opposing Democrats and
Woke fascism. Vote against "RINOs" in primary elections. Oppose
"Republicans" who sell out your values, compromise with fascism, and do
the bidding of wealthy campaign donors. Encourage your friends and
family to vote. Go to political rallies. Give money to candidates you like
(but don't be discouraged if they sometimes let you down). Contact
politicians and officeholders and let them know how you feel about their
job performance – good or bad. Visit their local offices and ask to speak to
the office manager and give your opinion peacefully and respectfully. Make
an appointment to meet your local state legislator or congressman. They
will probably avoid you but try. If you have an opportunity to meet with an
official, politely speak your mind.
Use the Courts
If you or someone in your family is fired or harassed for your beliefs, race,
religion, or sex, find an aggressive lawyer and sue for damages. Be a good
employee but bring a lawsuit if your legal or constitutional rights are
violated—sue for wrongful discharge. Consider suing your employer if you
suffer racial or ethnic-based discrimination in the workplace. It is illegal to
discriminate in hiring or promotion based on race, sex, or gender. Sue for
slander, libel, or defamation if an organization or individual makes baseless
accusations against you, your family, or your business. Fight back.
For example, in 2016, an employee at Gibson's Bakery caught a black
student from Oberlin College student allegedly shoplifting. Students at
Oberlin protested and accused the bakery of "racism." The school's student
government supported the claims of racism, and a college dean distributed
fliers denouncing the bakery. The company was falsely accused of a history
of racial discrimination, and the college stopped buying its products. The
bakery proclaimed its innocence, sued Oberlin for libel and won a $31
million judgment upheld on appeal.
 Biden's America in 2033
Without your active help and that of millions of Americans like you, our
country will descend into a catastrophe of gigantic proportions. In less than
two years, Joe Biden and his supporters have done untold damage to the
United States. The borders are open, and up to five million illegal
immigrants have entered the country. Violent crime is rampant. The
economy is ravaged by nearrecord inflation. The country is in recession
(even though Biden denies the obvious.) Schools sexually groom young
children and teach them to hate themselves, their families, and their own
country. Woke corporations and media censor free speech at unprecedented
levels. A new and virulent form of racism is turning Americans against each
other. Crime is literally out of control.
This is just the beginning if you don't join the fight. What will America look
like in a decade? If you read this book, you understand that most of the
things in the scenario described below are already occurring in blue states
and, to a lesser extent, across America.
Here is the world Woke fascists plan for you and your children. If it all
seems unlikely, keep in mind that many items listed below are already a
reality in many parts of America:
In 2033, a mere ten years away, America is ruled by the Democrats as a de
facto one-party state. Elections are rigged. Republicans lack power or
influence but are tolerated strictly for show. "RINO" officeholders quietly
cooperate with the regime. For all practical purposes, there is no political
opposition. There is an alliance between the Democratic Party and the
"donor class" – the billionaire oligarchs who own or control most prominent
corporations and industries. The government encourages and protects
monopolies that cooperate with the regime. Small businesses are
disappearing; those that remain are crippled by regulation and taxes. The
needs and desires of the citizenry are ignored. Party politicians and officials
are openly corrupt. Police and FBI "task forces" raid the homes of political
opponents. Enemies of the regime are arrested on various trumped-up
charges and imprisoned without bail, sentenced to jail terms, have their
bank accounts seized, lose their jobs, and are blacklisted.
Propaganda relentlessly promotes hatred and jealousy between races, sexes,
genders, and economic classes to divert attention from the apparent decay
of society and culture. The mainstream media eagerly manufactures news
that supports and glorifies Party leaders and their policies. Doubters or
opponents are depicted as evil, meanspirited, and stupid. Information and
opinions contrary to the Party line are suppressed. Entertainment content
relentlessly promotes Woke fascist cultural values.
The Constitution exists in name only. The rule of law has disappeared.
There is a blatant double standard. Ordinary citizens have no enforceable
rights. Citizens are tracked and monitored by advanced technology.
Corporations impose a social credit system on "customers." Dissenters are
punished by losing banking, streaming, internet, and other services. High-
level regime officials, supporters, oligarchs, and their families are immune
to prosecution. Public schools teach children to eagerly accept the regime
and its Utopian culture and be "good citizens."
America's cities are decrepit. Homeownership for the average citizen has
been replaced mainly by mass housing and rentals owned by giant
corporations. Private farms have gone corporate. Party elites and oligarchs
live privileged and protected lives far from the chaos and poverty of
American society. The homeless fill the streets. Car ownership is
increasingly rare. Most Americans travel to work on worn-out,
overcrowded buses and trains. Politicians, officials, oligarchs, and well-
connected regime supporters travel by limo and private jets, surrounded by
heavily armed bodyguards. Crime is out of control. Murder and violence are
common everyday occurrences. Gangs of thugs loot stores at will.
Politicians downplay or ignore crime and its victims. Criminals have more
rights than citizens. Selfdefense is illegal. Guns have been confiscated. The
jails have been emptied. Non-political criminals are returned to the streets
with little or no punishment.
The borders are wide open and provide cheap labor for the oligarchs and
their corporations. Most city neighborhoods are terrorized by violent
criminals, gangs, addicts, the homeless, and aggressive mental cases. Parks
are dangerous, run-down, and filled with substance abusers. Random
violence is everywhere. Drug smuggling is out of control. Overdoses kill
hundreds of thousands each year. People no longer dress up or wear jewelry
in public in a desperate effort to avoid being assaulted or robbed. Politicians
ignore problems, make excuses, and blame society or racism for crime and
disorder, never themselves.
Healthcare insurance companies are gone. The government manages and
finances the health system. Only the rich and officials have access to good
quality medical care. Healthcare is "free" but mediocre. The declining
middle class has to pay extra. Access to medical care is openly based on
racial or sexual considerations. It takes months to see a doctor. Patients
often wait years for "elective" surgery. Hospitals are overcrowded and run
down. Expensive treatments are unavailable to most people. Poor quality
care increases mortality rates from cancer and heart disease. The life
expectancy of the average American keeps dropping. Government agencies
encourage euthanasia for the elderly and the disabled to keep medical costs
down. Party officials, the wealthy, and their families live longer than ever.
The economy is in ruins. Taxes on the middle and working classes are
heavy. Wages are kept low by relentless immigration. Artificial Intelligence
(AI) and automation have eliminated millions of jobs. Population growth is
out of control. Poverty is rampant. Jobs are exported, and only one-third of
working-age Americans work. Many, if not most, people have given up
looking for employment. The middle class is disappearing. Foods like meat,
chicken, and fish are unaffordable for most people except on special
occasions. Coal, oil, gas, and nuclear power have been replaced by
expensive and inefficient renewable energy. Shortages of electricity,
blackouts, and brownouts are normal occurrences. Cities enforce limits on
thermostat settings in winter and summer. The electrical power grid is
failing. Electricity is rationed and very expensive. Clean water is in short
supply. Some cities limit water use.
If this sounds familiar, nearly everything mentioned above already exists to
a significant degree in the US right now. But it's not too late. Get involved
and help make a difference!

APPENDIX A: SAMPLE CODE WORDS

Psychologist Albert Bandura (1925 - 2021) identified sanitizing and
modifying language as a step toward dehumanizing potential victims and
inciting aggressive behavior toward racial, ethnic, or economic groups.
Fascists of all stripes, including many progressives, constantly manipulate
the content of language to condemn and dehumanize their opponents or
would-be victims. But it is important to realize that not everyone who uses
these words or phrases understands their link with fascism or is a fascist.
Many people use these terms because of social, government, educational,
Big Media, and Big Tech pressure to conform.
 Pollywog — A casual term used to describe "fetuses" eligible for
abortion. A pollywog is an immature frog, so by analogy, a human child in
the womb is an insignificant animal without rights. For example, "it's only a
pollywog; kill it."
Fetus — The word fetus is a bit of technical, medical jargon that means:
"an unborn or unhatched vertebrate." (327) Obstetricians use the term
medically, but "pro-abortion" advocates use it politically to deny the
humanity of a baby in the womb. Their rule is always to call a baby
something dehumanizing, like a fetus or pollywog. Disregard the baby's
humanity at all times. For example, "it's only a fetus; kill it."
Kulak — Originally a Russian word describing a relatively successful
peasant farmer, perhaps owning his own land and employing a couple of
farm hands. Once in power, Russian Communists dehumanized the Kulaks
to make it easier to steal their crops and farm animals to feed urban workers
supporting the Russian Revolution. The word Kulak became an insult. For
example, "he's only a Kulak; kill him."
Selfish — Fascists, especially communists, attack the rich as "selfish"
whether or not they earned their wealth, paid their taxes, or gave to charity.
This is a way to justify taking away private property. Joe Biden tells
wealthy people, who already pay over 50 percent of all income taxes, to
"pay their fair share" as if they don't already.
Colonialist — Originally a person living in a European colony outside
of Europe. Used by communists and progressives as a generic term for
white people born outside of Europe, even centuries after colonization. It is
often used as a substitute term in place of Jew when referring to Israelis and
is implicitly anti-Semitic. Progressive Democrats conceal their increasingly
virulent antisemitism by condemning the supposedly racist and apartheid
evils of Israel. Their supporters understand what they actually mean: "Hitler
was right. Jews are evil colonialists; make them disappear."
Homophobe — A term invented to attack anyone who disagrees with
any part of the LGBTQ+ agenda. It is associated with the word "phobia,"
which implies an irrational reaction to a normal stimulus. Homophobia is a
code word that political or social critics use to condemn opponents as rabid
evildoers who should have no rights and whose traditional values should be
dismissed out of hand. For example, if you don't believe in gay marriage,
you are a homophobe.
 Colorblind — The 1960s Civil Rights Movement wanted a "colorblind"
society where everybody, regardless of skin color, had equal rights and
opportunities under the law. Today, progressives claim that a colorblind
society is a form of white supremacy. Equality before the law shifts the
burden of responsibility from society to the individual — which leaves little
scope for government intervention as demanded by Woke fascism.
Equity — A form of virulent and hypocritical racism used by Woke
fascism to justify dramatic social changes in American society. It is punitive
in nature (and illegal under Federal law) and directed at white Americans
collectively as a group based on real and imagined historical events dating
back centuries. Equity is the opposite of equality. Equity is racist.
False Consciousness — Marxists believe the average person has been
manipulated by the ruling class in a way that prevents people from
understanding they are oppressed. For example, according to them,
Americans who believe the US is a good place to live are just mindlessly
repeating a lie taught by the rulers of society to keep them in line. The
solution, according to Woke fascism, is to re-educate (propagandize)
Americans into realizing how dumb they are and instead teach them to
think like fascists: admit white privilege, hate America, adore socialism,
abhor liberty, and the rest of the program.
Racism — Progressives define racism as prejudice backed up by white
control of society. Accordingly, all white people are racists regardless of
their behavior, lifestyle, or beliefs. By this definition, blacks or other
minorities who judge others solely by their skin color are merely
prejudiced, not racists.
Marxist — A euphemism for "Communist." At one time, a "bad word"
was linked with the long Cold War with the Soviet Union. Marxist is a
"soft" term used by educators, activists, and FNDs who are communists but
find it inconvenient, to be honest about their political beliefs. Marxists
typically embrace all or most of the communist cant about capitalism and
society, including socialism, one-party rule, and a police state.
Good white people — A sarcastic term used about white Americans
who believe in racial equality and a "level playing field" but refuse to
accept the Woke fascist narrative that they are racists no matter what they
do or say simply because they have pale skin.
Segregation — Any economic or social factor that leads to separation of
the races in housing, education, and so forth, for bad reasons like "white
privilege." Segregation, once a bad word based on skin color, is now
endorsed by progressives who use the term positive discrimination to
describe the woke-inspired separation of the races for "good" reasons. This
includes all-black university dorms, minority-only graduation ceremonies,
etc.
Justice — The old idea of "fair treatment" has been replaced by
demands for compensation for alleged past wrongs sought from people who
did not cause or participate in that wrong. Progressives use "justice" as an
accusation against society. It is an unending insistence that selected groups
be rewarded for membership in a group allegedly racially oppressed by
society. Progressive justice presumes individuals may be entirely free of
bad behavior but are still guilty of a social "crime" because he or she
belongs to a guilty group like Jews, capitalists, white people, or Asian
Americans. When used by Woke fascism, it is a primarily racist concept
used to justify political extremism.
Individualism — The ancient basis of Western society inherited from
Classical Greece that emphasizes personal responsibility, selfreliance, and
independent thinking. Karl Marx called individualism "selfish," and — by
coincidence — so do progressives. They also call it racist and white
privilege. Whites who assert the importance of individuality are merely
white supremacists.
Objectivity — The long-standing idea that one can examine an idea or
concept without bias —for example, Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.
Objectivity is supposedly another institutionalized tool of racist oppression.
It is one of many basic ideas attacked by race consultants when called in to
"educate" and "enlighten" white employees in race seminars. Hitler and the
Nazis, for example, condemned modern physics and psychoanalysis as
"Jewish" and attempted to create a Nazified version of both. In the 1930s,
the Soviet Union condemned Darwin's theory of evolution because of its
political implications and replaced it with the politically acceptable
evolutionary theory of Lysenkoism, which conformed to Marxist social
theories. Scientists who defended Darwin were sometimes imprisoned.
Whiteness — According to progressives, whiteness is the entire panoply
of alleged racist practices and assumptions that white people supposedly
believe – consciously or unconsciously. Whiteness, that is to say, the
thoughts lives, hopes, and dreams of many millions of people are evil and
must be radically changed at any cost.
 Decolonization — Eliminating social and legal practices associated with
the culture of white racism brought to America four hundred years ago by
early European settlers. Progressives believe nothing has changed in four
centuries. The term is also applied to Israel, whose ultimate destruction,
along with the mass genocide of Israeli Jews, is tacitly accepted as just
punishment for their alleged colonialism.
Internalized racism or racial superiority — Progressives believe all
white Americans have been raised to assume automatically that they are
superior to other races. Marxists think this bias is attributable to "behind-
the-scenes" manipulation by the capitalist ruling class. Woke fascists
believe all white people need to be deprogrammed and taught to think like
themselves. Some actually believe the only solution to white supremacy is a
quiet form of gradual ethnic cleansing that will eradicate white people as a
racial group.
Anti-racist — Originally a common term for someone who authentically
opposes racism. Woke fascists have revalued it to mean any person or group
who claims to oppose racism but is actually guilty of complicity with it.
Democracy — According to Marx, Hitler, progressives, and other
fascists, democracy is a sham designed to perpetuate capitalist control of
society. Lenin, the founder of the Soviet Union, declared:
"In a democratic capitalist republic, the ruling class never relinquish
political power, maintaining it via the "behind-the-scenes" control of
universal suffrage — an excellent deception that maintains the idealistic
concepts of "freedom and democracy." (328)
Interrogating whiteness — The "heroic" act of challenging "racist"
assumptions and behaviors of American institutions, whites as a group, or
as individuals.

APPENDIX B: ABOLITION OF SLAVERY

TIMELINE
The Founders are often accused of hypocrisy because they did not
abolish slavery. It would have been good if they had. Slavery was a
complex problem because of its inhumanity and economic importance to
the Southern states. The Founders were aware of the contradictions between
freedom and slavery, but they were also born in the 18th century. The
society and Constitution they created were among the first brave steps on a
long journey that inevitably led to the end of slavery and full emancipation
for women. In the meantime, the republic they built became a model for
democracy worldwide. We should honor them for their foresight and
wisdom, not condemn them. Nothing is more absurd than to expect 18th-
century men and women to act like 21st-century progressives or even
conservatives. Slavery was an ancient, worldwide practice dating back
before the first civilizations at least 5,000 years ago. It thrived in Europe,
Islamic countries, black Africa, India, China, and even among pre-
Columbian native American tribes. The abolition of slavery in the US
began shortly after the Revolutionary War and was completed by President
Lincoln during the Civil War. Many countries did not abolish slavery until
the late 19th and early-20th centuries. Several African, Arab, and Islamic
countries waited until the mid-20th-century or later to officially end slavery.
It’s still a problem in many countries. Over nine million Africans are
currently held in various forms of bondage and slavery. (330)
It may seem like I am minimizing the awful institution of slavery, but I
am not; along with war, it is the worst human activity in history. My goal
here is simply to point out that slavery in various forms existed throughout
human history and was practiced almost universally from the first
civilizations in Sumer and Pharaonic Egypt. Classical civilizations in
Greece and Rome relied heavily on slavery. As did Europe, China, India,
Africa, pre-Columbian Mexico, South America, and by Native Americans
in what is now the United States. The British, French, Spanish, and
Portuguese colonial empires practiced slavery. Islamic countries in the
Middle East, North Africa, Iran, Turkey, Egypt, and elsewhere were slave-
holding states.
Even today black on black slavery is still practiced illegally in Central
Africa. The Chinese Communist Party currently virtually enslaves Moslem
Uighurs and sells their labor to the highest bidders in the form of multi-
national corporations. Illegal domestic slavery still exists sporadically and
illegally. These facts do not excuse slavery but make it plain that there is
nothing unique about American slavery except for the fact that it was
eradicated at a greater cost in human lives and wealth than anywhere else in
human history. (This list is an expanded version based on wikipedia.com)
1783 - In Massachusetts, all slaves freed
1787 - Slavery banned in the Northwest Territories
1794 - US banned slave trade outside of US territory
1799 - New York state began gradual emancipation of all slaves
1800 - US citizens were banned from the international slave trade
1802 - Ohio state constitution abolished slavery
1804 - New Jersey abolished slavery
1806 - President Thomas Jefferson asked Congress to criminalize the
international slave trade
1807 - The US made the international slave trade a felony
1807 - British Empire banned slave trading
1808 - The US made the import and export of slaves illegal
1818 - The United Kingdom and Spain abolished the slave trade
1831 - Bolivia abolished the slave trade
1833 - British Empire banned slavery except in India and Ceylon
1840 - US abolitionists form the anti-slavery Liberty political party
1843 - Slavery abolished in India and Ceylon
1845 - Illinois freed the last slaves
1846 - Tunisia abolished slavery
1847 - Pennsylvania freed the last slave
1851 - Ecuador abolished slavery
1853 - Argentina abolished slavery
1854 - Republican party formed by anti-slavery Whigs in Wisconsin
1854 - Peru abolished slavery
1854 - Venezuela abolished slavery
1856 - First Republican presidential candidate won 11 of 16 Northern states
1859 - Kansas declared a free state
1860 - Republican Abraham Lincoln was elected president, the Southern
states seceded
1861 - Civil War begins
1863 - Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation abolishing slavery
1865 - Civil War ends. Southern states returned to Union 1865 - 13th
Amendment formally outlawed slavery
1866 - Five Largest American Indian nations ordered to abolish slavery
1868 - 14th Amendment extends equal protection of law to black
Americans
1869 - Portugal abolished slavery
1870 - 15th Amendment bans racial discrimination in elections 1871 -
Brazil law freed children of slave mothers
1874 - Gold Coast abolished slavery
1882 - Ottoman Empire abolished slavery
1884 - Cambodia abolished slavery
1886 - Cuba abolished slavery
1888 - Brazil abolished slavery
1894 - Korea abolished slavery (but not eradicated until 1930) 1895 - Egypt
abolished slavery
1897 - Zanzibar abolished slavery
1902 - Cameroon abolished slavery
1906 - China abolished slavery
1908 - Ottoman Empire abolished the slave trade in Circassian women
1922 - Morocco abolished slavery
1924 - Iraq abolished slavery
1928 - Sierra Leone (black elites can no longer keep slaves) 1936 - Nigeria
abolished slavery
1937 - Bahrain abolished slavery
1942 - Nazi Germany enslaves millions of Jews & Slavs as factory workers
& farm hands
1945 - Nazi Germany - several million European slaves were freed by
Allied troops
1949 - Kuwait abolished slavery
1952 - Qatar abolished slavery
1960 - Niger abolished slavery
1962 - Saudi Arabia abolished slavery
1964 - The Trucial States abolished slavery
1967 - South Yemen abolished slavery
1998 - Ghana female slavery abolished
2003 - Niger slavery criminalized
2007 - Mauritania slavery criminalized
2010? - US and international corporations allegedly begin using slave or
forced labor in China
2017 - Chad slavery criminalized
2022 - Communist China continues its policy of enslaving the Uyghurs

APPENDIX C: RITTENHOUSE BASIC FACTS

 A violent and destructive BLM riot breaks out in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
Kyle Rittenhouse, a seventeen-year-old with family and friends in the city,
gets a ride downtown to help protect local businesses. He is armed with a
rifle bought for him by a friend. Rittenhouse and others post themselves at a
car dealership owned by an acquaintance. (331) Rittenhouse becomes
separated from his friends and walks alone into an area besieged by rioters
clashing with police. He is recognized by a man in the crowd (Joseph
Rosenbaum) who had earlier allegedly threatened him near the dealership.
Rosenbaum chases Rittenhouse. There is a confrontation. Rittenhouse later
said he feared for his life and thought his pursuer would grab his rifle and
use it against him. Rittenhouse shoots and kills Rosenbaum. He leaves the
area and tries to find the police. Several rioters chase Rittenhouse, who
retreats and does not stand his ground. Video shows him kicked to the
ground by one man. Sitting upright and holding his rifle for use, he is struck
in the head by Anthony Huber with a heavy skateboard. Rittenhouse
apparently believed Huber was about to hit him a second time and possibly
grab his rifle. Rittenhouse shoots his alleged attacker. At nearly the same
moment, a third man, Gaige Grosskreutz, allegedly aims his pistol at
Rittenhouse and charges him. Rittenhouse shoots his attacker in the arm.
Rittenhouse eludes his pursuers, finds the nearest police officers, and
surrenders. He is arrested and imprisoned for months before his trial and is
finally released on bail. He is eventually found not guilty of all charges by a
jury and released.
These facts come from multiple news accounts of the incident and trial
testimony. They are only as accurate as the sources. The author makes no
representation of special knowledge of the events described.

APPENDIX D: WHO IS AN FND

One way to identify an FND is by his or her belief system. Gone are the
days when fascists dressed up in uniforms draped with swastikas and wore
red scarves or hammer and sickle emblems (although Antifa members still
get a charge by dressing in black.) Today, the best way to determine
whether someone – family, friend, co-worker, tv personality, politician,
official, etc. – thinks or behaves like a fascist is to listen to what they say or
write. But be fair, for example, although the Democratic Party is, for all
practical purposes, the fascist party USA, not every Democrat fits the bill.
Many oldfashioned liberals and moderates are Democrats out of habit and
are probably unaware of how extreme and fascist the Party has become over
the past decade: "my father and my grandfather were Democrats, so...."
The sample experimental "quiz" statements below help identify FNDs
by discovering their belief system without delving into the painfully
distorted details of their ideas. These questions relate to various aspects of
Woke fascism like racism, hostility to the Constitution, desire to censor
opponents, or condemnation of mainstream American culture. It's a good
bet that people who answer "Yes" to a few of these questions may be
thinking or behaving like Woke fascists.
1. "Hurtful" speech on the internet should be censored to prevent
misinformation…Yes/No
2. People who spread misinformation should lose their social media
accounts...Yes/No
3. Politicians who excuse January 6 should not be allowed to run for public
office…Yes/No
4. All, or most, white people are racist...Yes/No
5. "Positive" racial discrimination or equity is a good way to correct "bad"
racism...Yes/No
6. Objectivity, work ethic, and rugged individualism are part of white
privilege...Yes/No
7. Police should be defunded...Yes/No
8. It is important to stop jailing people who commit crimes...Yes/No 9. All
guns should be confiscated and outlawed...Yes/No 10. Self-defense is a
white privilege...Yes/No
11. American culture is racist and class-oriented and must be
replaced...Yes/No
12. The Electoral College is unfair and should be eliminated...Yes/No 13.
Government should investigate "dangerous" political groups even if non-
violent...Yes/No
14. Websites that promote or spread misinformation should be taken
down...Yes/No
15. Schools should teach new cultural ideas like Critical Race Theory and
Transsexuality...Yes/No
16. Teachers, not parents, should decide what to teach children in public
schools…Yes/No
17. It's okay for private companies speech...Yes/No
18. The US Constitution should updated...Yes/No
19. The Founders who wrote the Constitution were racist
hypocrites...Yes/No
20. The US and other governments should be abolished and replaced by the
UN...Yes/No
21. Democracy is a form of white privilege...Yes/No
22. Government should monitor and intervene to prevent
misinformation...Yes/No
23. Racist or offensive books should be removed from public libraries and
stores...Yes/No
24. Universities should limit free speech on campus...Yes/No 25. The
community is more important than the individual…Yes/No 26.
Corporations should use "social credit" to discourage anti-social
behavior...Yes/No
27. The Bill of Rights is a product of white racism...Yes/No 28. Israel and
Jews who support it should be shunned...Yes/No 29. Jews are colonial
racists...Yes/No
30. The government should control and manage the economy for the good
of all…Yes/No
31. The English language should be purged of inappropriate words and
phrases...Yes/No
32. Law and order are a form of white privilege...Yes/No to censor
irresponsible free
be scrapped or radically
33. Universities should professors…Yes/No
34. School principals teachers…Yes/No not hire conservative or Republican
should only hire politically correct

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND READING LIST

Allen, William Sheridan. The Nazi Seizure of Power: The experience of
a Single German Town 1922-1945. Revised edition. Danbury, CT 1984.
Apollodorus. The Library of Greek Mythology. Robin Hard, trans. New
York 2008.
Applebaum, Anne. Gulag: A History. Anchor Books. New York 2003.
Applebaum, Anne. Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944-
1956. Anchor Books. New York 2013.
Billington, James H. Fire in the Minds of Men: Origins of Revolutionary
Faith. Transaction Publishers. New Brunswick 2002.
Bosworth, R.J.B. Mussolini's Italy: Life Under the Fascist Dictatorship
1915-1945. Penguin Books. New York 2007.
Bowen, Catherine Drinker. Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the
Constitutional Convention May to September 1787. Little, Brown &
Company. Boston 1986.
Burnham, James. Suicide of the West: An Essay on the Meaning and
Destiny of Liberalism. Arlington House, New Rochelle, N.Y. 1964.
Bullock, Alan. Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives. Vintage Books, New York
1993.
Chamberlin, William Henry. The Russian Revolution 1917-1918: From the
Overthrow of the Czar to the Assumption of Power by the Bolsheviks.
Grosset and Dunlap. New York 1963.
Chambers, Whittaker. Witness. Regnery Publishing. Inc. Washington D.C.
2001.
Conquest, Robert. Reflections on a Ravaged Century. W.W. Norton &
Company. New York 2001.
Conquest, Robert. The Dragons of Expectation: Reality and Delusion in the
Course of History. W.W. Norton & Company. New York 2005.
Courtois, Stephane. Werth, Nicolas. Panne, Jean-Louis. Paczkowski,
Andrzej. Bartosek, Karel. Margolin, Jean-Louis. Jonathon Murphy and
Mark Kramer, Trans. Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror,
Repression. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts 2001.
De Grand, Alexander J. Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany: The Fascist
Style of Rule. Routledge. New York 1995.
Friedrich, Carl J., Brzezinski, Zbigniew K. Totalitarian Dictatorship
and Autocracy. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts 1956.
Gellately, Robert. Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler: The Age of Social
Catastrophe. Vintage Books. New York 2007
Guderian, Heinz. Guderian. Constantine Fitzgibbon, Trans. New York
1952.
Hayek, Freidrich A. The Road to Serfdom. The University of Chicago Press.
Chicago 1975.
Hayes, Paul M. Fascism. The Free Press. New York 1973.
Hett, Benjamin Carter. The Death of Democracy: Hitler's Rise to Power
and the Downfall of the Weimar Republic. St. Martin's Griffin. New York
2018.
Hollander, Paul. Political Pilgrims: Travels of Western Intellectuals to the
Soviet Union, China, and Cuba. Oxford University Press. New York 1981.
Hughes, H. Stuart. Between Commitment and Disillusion: The Obstructed
Path & The Sea Change 1930-1965. Wesleyan University Press.
Middletown, Connecticut 1987.
Hyneman, Charles S., Lutz. Donald S. American Political Writing During
the Founding Era 1760-1805. Liberty Fund. Indianpolis 1983.
Judt, Tony. Post War: A History of Europe Since 1945. Penguin Books.
New York 2005.
Laqueur, Walter. Fascism: A Reader's Guide - Analyses, Interpretations,
Bibliography. The University of California. Berkeley 1976.
Lynskey, Dorian. The Ministry of Truth: The Biography of George Orwell's
1984. Anchor Books. New York 2019.
Minogue, Kenneth. The Servile Mind: How Democracy Erodes the Moral
Life. Encounter Books. New York 2010.
Neumann, Franz. Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National
Socialism 1933-1944. Ivan R. Dee; Book Club Edition. May 16, 2009.
Orwell, George. Nineteen Eighty-Four. London 1949.
Overy, Richard. The Dictators: Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia. W.W.
Norton & Company. New York 2004.
Payne, Stanley G. A History of Fascism: 1914-1945. The University of
Wisconsin Press. Madison Wisconsin 1995.
Range, Peter Ross. The Unfathomable Ascent: How Hitler Came to Power.
Little, Brown, & Company. New York 2020.
Revel, Jean-Francois. The Totalitarian Temptation. David Hapgood, Trans.
Doubleday & Company. Inc. Garden City, New York 1977.
Rossiter, Clinton. The Political Thought of the American Revolution: Part
Three Seedtime of the Republic. Harcourt, Brace, and World, Inc. New York
1963.
Rossiter, Lyle H. Jr. The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of
Political Madness. First World Books, St. Charles, Illinois 2006.
Sandel, Michael J. Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of a Public
Philosophy. The Belknap Press of the Harvard University Press.
Cambridge, Massachusetts 1996.
Shirer, William L. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi
Germany. Gallery Books.
Trotsky, Leon. The Permanent Revolution & Results and Prospects:
Introduction by Luma Nichol. Red Letter Press. Seattle 2010
Tucker, Robert C. Stalin in Power: The Revolution From Above. Stalin in
Power: The Revolution From Above 1941. W. W. Norton & Company. New
York 1990.
Unger, Aryah L. The Totalitarian Party: Party and People in Nazi Germany
and Soviet Russia. Digital Version. Cambridge Press, 2010.
West, Thomas G. Vindicating the Founders: Race, Sex, Class, and Justice
in the Origins of America. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. New York
2001.
Wilson, Edmund. To the Finland Station: A Study in the Writing and Acting
of History. New York Review Books. New York 2003.
Woods, Gordon S. The Creation of the American Republic 1776-1787. W.
W. Norton & Company. New York 1972.
Woods, Gordon S. The Radicalism of the American Revolution. Vintage
Books. New York 1993.

SOURCE NOTES
S1 Bowen, page 190
S2 takimag.com/article/one-big-lie/
S3 hoover.org
S4 Herlemann, Horst and Murphy. Shaun Quality Of Life In The Soviet
Union. New York, NY 2019
S5 aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet
S6 Fox News, The Tucker Carlson Show, April 2021
S7 azquotes.com
S8 Gellately, page 216
S9 Unger
S10 Marx, Karl and Engels, Frederick. Address to the Central Committee
to the Communist League. March 1850. marxists.org/archive S11
Trotsky
S12 Lenin, V.I., What is to be done? Burning Questions for Our
 Movement. 1901-1902. marxists.org/archive
S13 azquotes.com
S14 azquotes.com
S15 Freud, Sigmund. Civilization and Its Discontents. General Press. New
Delhi 2018.
S16 azquotes.com
S17
fcit.usf.edu/holocaust/RESOURCE/DOCUMENT/DOCJEWQN.
HTM
S18 azquotes.cm
S19 Quoted in Toland, John. Adolf Hitler. Book Club Associates, London
1977. page 116.
S20 Marx, Karl. Suppression of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung.
goodreads.com
S21 Mao Zedong. Selected Works: The period of the socialist revolution
and socialist construction. 1977. azquotes.com
S22 Hoft, Jim. LA Black Lives Matter Mob Hurls Racist Insults at Black
Police Officer. (VIDEO) gatewaypundit.org 9/24/20.
S23 Williams, Thomas D. Ph.D. Keith Olberman: Trump Supporters Are
"Maggots," Must Be Prosecuted. National Review. October 10, 2020.
S24 Hitler, Adolf. Speech of January 30, 1941. My New Order
S25 azquotes.com
S26 DiAngelo, Robin. White Fragility, quoted in NPR interview June 9,
2020.
S27 whec.com/archive/fact-check-new-york-prioritizing-non-whitepeople-
for-Covid-19-treatment/
S28 Kenosha Speech Showed The Difference Between Joe Biden With A
Teleprompter And Without A Teleprompter Is Scary,
thefederalist.com September 3, 2020
S29 foxnews.com/politics/biden-says-he-is-going-to-transform-thenation-if-
elected
S30 azquotes.com
S31 morefamousquotes.com
S32 Marx, Karl and Engels, Friedrich. The Communist Manifesto. Chapter
IV. marx-ists.org
S33 azquotes.com
S34 thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/cultural-marxism-
imaginaryconspiracy-or-revolutionary-reality/
S35 azquotes.com
S36 Oxford Bibliographies
S37 usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/01/12/black-nationalanthem-
jim-clyburn-pushes-song-national#hymn/656025000
S38 nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-
defundpolice.htm
S39 thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/cultural-marxism-
imaginaryconspiracy-or-revolutionary-reality/
S40 com
books.google.com/books/about/How_Many_Legs_Does_a_Dog_H
ave_If_You_Cal.html?id=HJVZzQEACAAJ
S41 languagemagazine.com/2020/08/17/the-weaponization-of-english
S42 tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00405841.2019.1665415
S43 insider@insider.com, August 7, 2020
S44 mentalfloss.com/article/61876/11-words-meanings-have-
changeddrastically-over-time
S45 Marx, Karl. The Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political
Economy. good-reads.com/quotes/294258-society-does-not-consistof-
individuals-but-expresses-the-sum
S46 Orwell, George. Visions of a Totalitarian Future in Fascism and
Democracy. Pen-guin Books 2020.
S47 newsweek.com/math-suffers-white-supremacy-according-bill-
gatesfunded-course-1571511
S48 dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9717063/Educators-slam-mathworkbook-
claims-racist-ask-students-right-answer.html
S49 Marx, Karl. The Poverty of Philosophy. marxists.org
S50 americananthropologist.org
S51 thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/cultural-marxism-
imaginaryconspiracy-or-revolutionary-reality
S52 azquotes.com
S53 Kaminsky, Lauren. Utopian Visions of Family Life in the Stalin-Era
Soviet Union, Central European History 44 (2011), 63–91.© Conference
Group for Central European History of the American Historical
Association, 2011.
S 54 newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Socialist_realism
S55 Shirer, page 243; tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/s/socialist-realism
S56 nypost.com, November 23, 2019
S57 It's Time to Let Classical Music Die, nmbx.newmusicusa.org
S58 nypl.org/blog/2016/11/1/shakespeare-around-globe
S59 Shakespeare, William. A Midsummer Night's Dream, III.ii.115
S60 wng.org/articles/canceling-the-classics-1617610565
S61 themusicsalon.blogspot.com/2013/05/susan-mcclary-vsbeethoven.html
S62 quotemaster.org/q58b47cf5deb1d1648aa6cbbd0b7a9c8c
S63 azquote.com
S64 marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1936/12/05.htm
S65 Guderian, page 436
S66 Devine, Miranda. Laptop from Hell: Hunter Biden, Big Tech, and the
Dirty Secrets the President Tried to Hide. Post Hill Press 2021.
S67 Hunter Biden demanded Chinese billionaire pay $10 million for
'introduction alone.' emails show, Rowan Scarborough – The Washington
Times – October 15, 2020
S68 Homan, Thomas. Biden administration instructs ICE to ignore the law
and their oath - 01/27/21. The Hill
S69 Joe Biden at a town hall meeting, July 2021
S70 whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-
briefings/2021/07/15/pressbriefing-by-press-secretary-jen-psaki-and-
surgeon#general-dr-vivekh-murthy-july-15-2021
S71 Judt
S72 aclu.org/issues/national-security/privacy-and-
surveillance/nsasurveillance
S73 securitymagazine.com/articles/95497-court-says-baltimores-
aerialsurveillance-is-unconstitutional
S74 Oxford Dictionaries
S75 There are about twenty-one million black males in the US, divided by
thirteen un-armed black men killed by police in 2019 equals about
1,615,000.
S76 Based on published statistics sourced from
statista.com/statistics/251877/murder-victims-in-the-us-byrace#ethnicity-
and-gender/ statis
ta.com/statistics/1124036/number-people-killed-police-ethnicity-us/
S77 freedictionary.com
S78 thoughtco.com/racism-vs-prejudice-3026086
S79 nypost.com/2019/05/18/nyc-schools-chancellor-richard-carranzahas-
made-whiteness-toxic-doe-insiders-claim/
S80 deseret.com/2018/7/2/20648205/most-black-males-reach-themiddle-
class-or-higher-here-s-what-drives-their-success S81
nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98
S82 DiAngelo, Robin. White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People
to Talk About Racism. Beacon Press 2018
S83 thenewamerican.com/minneapolis-city-councilor-calling-911-forbreak-
in-is-white-privilege/
S84 medicalnewstoday.com/articles/microagressions#types S85 Orwell,
page 220-221
S86 lexico.com/en/definition/scapegoat
S87 APA Dictionary of Psychology. Washington DC 2007
S88 Dr. Corinne Galgay, a staff psychologist at the Washington DC VA
Medical center
psychologytoday.com/us/blog/underdog#psychology/202007/whywhite-
shame-is-term-everyone-should-learn
S89 stateofopportunity.michiganradio.org/post/why-all-white-people-
areracist-cant-handlebeing-called-racist-theory-white-fragility S90 The
Drexel professor who tweeted, "All I want for Christmas is white genocide"
resigned. The Daily Pennsylvanian January 10, 2018 S91
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_transfer_in_the_Soviet_Union;Po
pulation transfer in the Soviet Union,
umass.edu/rso/fretibet/education.html
S92 perkbox.com/.../what-is-positive-discrimination
S93 The Alpena News, July 14, 2020
S94 West Cook News. May 31, 2022
S95 Burns, William. California Now to Discriminate in the Name of
Equality. National Review, June 30, 2020,
S96 Quotes downloaded from the United States Holocaust Memorial
Museum website
encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nuremberg-laws S97 coca-
colacompany.com/shared-future/diversity-and-
inclusion/racialequity/internal-action/black-representation
S97 National Nuclear Lab's Employees Sent to Seminar That Claimed'
Rugged Individu-als' and 'Hard Work" Are "White Male Culture."
reason.com 8/13/20
S99 govexec.com Jan 20, 21
S100 Research shows diversity training is Typically Ineffective. Real Clear
Science. De-cember 5, 2020
S101 Rufo, Chrishopher F., Cult Programming in Seattle. city journal.com
July 8, 2020
S102 Rufo, Chrishopher F., State-enforced racial segregation—by
progressives. New York Post, October 18, 2020
S103 State-enforced racial segregation—by progressives. New York Post,
October 18, 2020
1o4 justice.gov. August 13, 2020
S105 Editorial: Smith College "Affinity Housing" Modern Term for
"Segregation" The Beacon. February 13, 2020; Neo-Segregation and Racist
Rot in Education. National Review. March 17, 2021 S106 Neo-Segregation
and Racist Rot in Education, National Review, March 17, 2021
S107 Explained: Why Coca-Cola is under fire for promoting "reverse
discrimination" and "anti-white"rhetoric. April 20, 2021 S108 Buchanan,
Patrick J., Systemic Racism: NBC expected to slash white workers.
S109 Yelp to Amplify Unsubstantiated Claims of Racism Against
Businesses. The Federalist, October 9, 2020
S110 azquotes.com
S111 nypost.com/2021/07/15/white-house-flagging-posts-for-facebookto-
censor-due-to-covid-19-misinformation/
S112 quotesguy.com/why-should-freedom-of-speech/
S113 James Madison's Lesson on Free Speech. National Review. September
4, 2017
S114 Years after Obama used Facebook to help him win the presidency,
Silicon Valley is under Democratic fire. Center for Responsive Politics via
Washington Post, October 16, 2019
S115 Observer.com. November 2, 2020
S116 Daily Caller
S117 Judicial Watch, May 4, 2021
S118 Judicial Watch, May 3, 2021
S119 washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/equality-notelitism/big-
tech-censors-criticism-of-biden-more-than-600-timesstudy
S120 Devine, Miranda. Big Tech is in the tank for Biden, Democrats. New
York Post. October 14, 2020
S121 Redstate.com. November 9, 2020
S121 Shirer
S123 corruption.news/2020-10-29-mailchimp-terms-of-service-
banningmisleading-content.html article: Mailchimp issues new terms of
service banning all 'misleading' content 'in their sole discretion' 10/29/2020
/ By News Editors
S124 theconservativetreehouse.com November 15, 2020
S125static.googleusercontent.com/media/guidelines.raterhub.com/en//s
earchqualityevaluatorguidelines.pdf
S126googleusecontent.com/media/guidelines.raterhub.com/en//searchq
ualityevaluatorguidelines.pdf
S127 Wall Street Journal. December 8, 2020
S128 Dr David Nabarro, the WHO's Special Envoy on Covid-19, October
2020
S129 Gellately, page 43
S130 azquotes.com
S131 theconversation.com/claims-of-ideological-bias-among-the-
mediamay-be-overblown-135617
S132 Hanson,Victor Davis. Hanson, September 17, 2020
S133 Washington Times. March 08, 2018
S134 Graham, Tim. Anti-Trump media coverage of [the] president amounts
to free advertising for Biden. Fox News, June 13, 2020 S134 Graham, Tim,
Anti-Trump media coverage of [the] president amounts to free ad-vertising
for Biden. Fox News, June 13, 2020 S133
nytimes.com/1992/11/18/us/increasingly-reporters-say-they-
redemocrats.html investors.com/politics/editorials/media-bias-leftstudy/
S137 Goodman, Michael. on 30, 2019
https://nypost.com/2019/11/30/goodwin-the-new-york-Timeslong-descent-
from-credibility/
S138 nytimes.com/2020/06/07/business/media/james-bennet-
resignsnytimes-op-ed.html
S139 Levine, Jon and Kelly J., New York Times staffers say leadership
'terrified of the young wokes.' New York Post, July 18, 2020 S140 Gainor,
Dan. New York Times surrenders to staff revolt over Cotton op-ed as
editorial editor resigns, Fox news 6/7/2; Miller, Judith. The Illiberal Liberal
Media: As Ba-ri Weiss's departure confirms, the New York Times has
narrowed its spectrum of allow-able opinion. Cityjournal.com July 14, 2020
S141 arounddate.com/the-fountainhead-by-rand-ayn/171/
S142 Shirer, pages 241, 242
S143 ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/top10 S144
Exclusive: Target Restores 'Transgender Craze' Book After PJ Media
Inquiry. pjmedia.com, November 13,2021
S145 thehill.com/homenews/senate/533267-simon-schuster-
cancelspublication-of-hawleys-book
S146 thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/518987-poll-
bipartisanagreement-on-the-possibility-of-a-rigged.
S147 reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll/half-of-republicans-saybiden-
won-because-of-a-rigged-election-reuters#ipsos-pollidUSKBN27Y1AJ
S148 apnews.com/article/dr-seuss-books-racist-images
d8ed18335c03319d72f443594c174513
S150 inquirer.com/opinion/commentary/dr-seuss-racist-books-
cancelculture-misinformation-20210303.html
S150 Applebaum, page 156
S151 azquotes.com
S152 lexico.com
S153 azquotes.com
S154 "This is my last territorial demand in Europe" – Adolf Hitler,
September 26, 1938,
iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/1500077760
S155 foxnews.com/politics/mayorkas-border-unprepared-work-18-hours
S156 npr.org/2021/04/19/988876722/capitol-police-officer-briansicknick-
died-of-natural-causes-medical-examiner#ru
S157 washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/08/30/us-afghanistanevacuation-
numbers/
S158 airforcemag.com/article/0698berlin/
S159 encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/wannsee-conferenceand-
the-final-solution
S160 macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/murder-homiciderate;
The rise in murders in the US, explained: The homicide rate is significantly
up in American cities. Here are some explanations for why. Updated,
December 2, 2020. vox.com
S161 cbsnews.com/news/murder-rate-2020-guns-Covid 19/ S162 Preidt,
Robert. Pandemic Silver Lining: Global Decline in Urban Crime. , Health-
Day Reporter, HealthDay News June 3, 2021 S163 The U-shaped crime
recovery during Covid-19: evidence from national crime rates in Mexico
Crime Science volume 10, Article number: 14 (2021)
S164 nytimes.com/2020/11/09/business/small-business-insuranceunrest-
kenosha.html
S165 Casiano, Louis. Police chief association releases number of officers
injured nation-wide during violent protests. Fox News. Updated December
2, 2020
S166 theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-
protestspolitical-unrest-acled
S167 nytimes.com/2020/06/18/opinion/george-floyd-protestslooting.html
S168 nypost.com/2020/06/12/450-nyc-businesses-damaged-duringgeorge-
floyd-protests/
S169 mediaite.com/tv/jake-tapper-confronts-ilhan-omar-on-
israelcomments-do-you-understand-why-people-find#that-language-
antisemitic/
S170 freebeacon.com/biden-administration/harris-tosses-pro-israel-credout-
the-window-with-praise-for-student-accusing#jewish-state-ofethnic-
genocide/
S171 Gellately, chapter 19
S172 quotemaster.org/qabb26857af19c1d2c1b0d5912c5c0844 S173
quotes.famouspeople.com
S174 workingjournalistpress.com/articles/170123/A-lie-told-onceremains-
a-lie-but-a-lie-told-a-thousand-times-becomes-the-truth.php S175
foxnews.com/media/rolling-stone-forced-issue-update-after-viralhospital-
ivermectin-story-false
S176deliberatedefense.com/Founding%20Fathers/Founding%20Fathers.
html
S177 brainyquote.com/quotes/vladimir_lenin_131407
S178 nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html
S179 Revel, page 52
S180
archive.org/stream/TheSpeechesOfAdolfHitler19211941/hitlerspeeches-
collection_djvu.txt
S181 azquotes.com
S182 nypost.com/2021/10/13/mark-zuckerberg-spent-419m-onnonprofits-
ahead-of-2020-election-and-got-out-the-dem-vote/ S183 Speech delivered
at the Lustgarten, May 1, 1939
S184 azquotes.com
S185 freebeacon.com/campus/georgetown-law-school-lashes-out-
atprofessor-critical-of-bidens-racial-supreme-court-promise/ S186
nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html
S187 nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html
S188 azquotes.com
S189 rmx.news/article/macron-rejects-self-defense-after-a-farmer-kills-
aburglar-who-broke-into-his-home/
S190 aljazeera.com/news/2022/1/31/canada-trudeau-denounces-
antivaccine-trucker-protests
S191 People v. La Voie, Supreme Court of Colorado, 395 P.2d 1001 (1964)
S192 digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1143&context=sulr
S193 constitution.findlaw.com/amendment2.html
S194 law.cornell.edu/constitution/second_amendment
S195
splcenter.org/sites/default/files/_stand_your_ground_kills__how_these_nra-
backed_laws_promote_racist_violence_1.pdf S196 efsgv.org/wp-
content/uploads/StandYourGround.pdf S197 bu.edu/articles/2019/state-gun-
laws-that-reduce-gun-deaths/ S198 merriam-webster.com
S199 bostonglobe.com/2021/11/19/metro/kyle-rittenhouse-
whitesupremacy-privilege-self-defense/
S200 azquotes.com
S201 Referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania
governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions
on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788
S202 brainyquote.com
S203 summitdaily.com/news/flitcraft-quotations-on-gun-control/ S204
Jefferson, Thomas., December 20, 1787. aclu.org/other/bill-rightsbrief-
history
S205 digitaldtion.qwinc.com/publication/
?i=44657&article_id=472150&view=articleBrowser&ver=html5 S206
Mason, George. Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention. June 4, 1788
S207 Halbrook, Stephen P., What the Framers Intended: A Linguistic
Analysis of the Right to "Bear Arms.” note 70 page 156,
scholarship.law.edu
S208 businessinsider.com/biden-mocks-gun-right-advocates-who-
sayassault-weapons-needed-fight-government-2021-6
S209 Adams, Samuel. Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87
S210 fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/to-bear-arms-for-selfdefense-a-
right-of-the-people-or-a-privilege-of-the-few S211 goodreads.com
S211 goodreads.com
ad1.htm
S213 goodreads.com/quotes/300562-the-most-foolish-mistake-we-
couldpossibly-make-would-be
S214 azquotes.com
S215 azquotes.com
S216 goodreads.com/quotes/550-to-disarm-the-people-is-the-best-andmost-
effectual
S217 theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/27/venezuela-nicolas-
maduroprotests-violence and thehill.com/opinion/campaign/383968-inthe-
wake-of-a-gun-ban-venezuela-sees-rising-homicide-rate;
dialogoamericas.com/articles/armed-civilians-the-maduro-militia/ S218
Halbrook, Stephen P. How the Nazis Used Gun Control. National Review,
December 2, 2013
S219 dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10183857/Report-Biden-
amassedrecords-54-million-gun-owners-2021-new-crackdown.html S220
wibc.com/blogs/tony-katz/former-vp-joe-biden-admits-hescoming-for-your-
guns/
S221 cnn.com/2020/03/21/politics/fact-check-joe-biden-
guncontrol/index.html
S222 youtube.com/watch?v=u8fJdBusMWE
S223 politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jul/22/national-houserepublicans/no-
joe-biden-doesnt-want-ban-handguns/ S224 thegunsource.com/most-
popular-handguns-in-america/ S225 checkyourfact.com/2019/02/11/fact-
check-dianne-feinstein-turnem-all-in-outright-ban/
S226 azquotes.com
S227 cnn.com/2019/09/12/politics/beto-orourke-hell-yes-take-ar-15-
ak47/index.html
228 washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/11/17/no-courts-dont-treatsecond-
amendment-second-class-right/
S229 District of Columbia v. Heller
S230 constitution.findlaw/amendment2.html
S231 McDonald v. Chicago
S232 workers.org/2020/06/49477/
S233 Lenin, V. I., The Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution,
Pravda April 7, 1917
S234 Lenin, V. I., The State and Revolution; After the revolution, "the
police and the standing army will be abolished and replaced by... a people's
militia."
S235 Shirer, page 191
S236 freebeacon.com October 18, 2021
S237 cnn.com/2020/10/29/us/philadelphia-city-council-protests-
rubberbullets-pepper-spray/index.html
S238 wickedlocal.com/story/somerville-
journal/2021/04/09/somervillecouncil-bans-tear-gas-regulates-police-use-
pepper
spray/7092668002/
S239 freebeacon.com October 18, 2021)
S240 oregonlive.com/opinion/2021/08/portland-police-stand-downsteve-
duin-column.html)
S241 Goodwin, Michael. How NYC championed broken windows policing
and threw it away. New York Post. August 15, 2020 S242 The Civil Rights
Implications of "Broken Windows" Policing in NYC and General NYPD
Accountability to the Public; A Briefing Report of the New York Advisory
Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. March 2018.
usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/03-22-NYSAC.pdf qualified immunity S243
More than 50 Advocacy Organizations Call on Mayor de Blasio to Suspend
Broken Windows Policing and Reduce NYPD Enforcement Actions as
Coronavirus Spreads
changethenypd.org/releases/more-50-advocacy-organizations-callmayor-de-
blasio-suspend-broken-windows-policing-and S244
nypost.com/2022/01/01/nyc-recorded-485-murders-in-2021/ S245
abc7ny.com/new-york-city-crime-statistics-subway/11618737/ S246
deseret.com/2021/8/15/22586410/officer-exodus-salt-lake-citystory-utah-
story-national-wave-of-police-resignations-moralequitting; city-
journal.org/why-cops-are-quitting;
forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2021/04/29/historic-policeexodus-in-
cities-most-impacted-by-racial-justice-unrest-new-datashows/?
sh=3f91b4818cf2; klewtv.com/news/nation-world/24-ofpolice-officers-in-
major-cities-quit-last-year
S247 lawofficer.com/more-than-half-of-nypd-officers-regret-
joiningdepartment/ November 20, 2021
S248 abcnews.go.com/US/60000-officers-assaulted-2020-31-
sustaininginjuries-fbi/story?id=80661264 October 19, 2021
S249 rairfoundation.com Sept. 16, 2020; nypost.com August 11, 2020;
foxbusi-ness.com/economy/san-francisco-restaurant-policeapology;
sfchroni-cle.com/bayarea/article/SFPD-officer-whoallegedly-blamed
burglaries-on-16635799.php Nov 19, 2021 breitbart.com Nov. 20, 2021
S250 Andrew, Scottie. There's a growing call to defund the police. Here's
what it means. CNN June 17, 2020
S251 nypost.com/2021/02/06/these-black-lives-didnt-seem-to-matter-
in2020; Statis-ta.com, Murder in the U.S.: number of victims in 2020, by
race/ethnicity and gender
S252 defundthepolice.org
S253 Few Americans want to abolish police, Gallup survey finds.
Washington Post. July 22, 2020; Fewer than 1 in 5 support 'defund the
police' movement, USA Today/Ipsos Poll finds, US Today. March 7, 2021
S254 Sheriffs: Public wants police in schools, protecting statues, and
arresting criminals. Washington Examiner. August 4, 2020; 88% of Black
Marylanders Want Police Budget Increased. breitbart.com. November 26,
2021; Minneapolis voters reject a measure to replace the city's police
department. npr.com, November 3, 2021; Defund police cries defy public's
trust, support of Police. The Washington Times, June 9, 2020
S255 dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10106211/A-dangerous-time-
PortlandOregon-sees-record-homicides.html;
Oregon-sees-record-homicides.html;
minneapolis-police-budget; kstp.com/news/surge-in-minneapolisviolence-
includes-over-900-rounds-gunshots-fired-from-automaticweapons-in-
2021/6255659/;
nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/12/homicides-surged-in-nyc-in2020.html;
nyc.gov/site/nypd/news/pr1103/nypd-citywide-crimestatistics-october-
2021; cross-cut.com/news/2020/11/seattle-cutsdoesnt-defund-police-
budget-2021; us-news.com/news/beststates/washington/articles/2021-11-
23/city-council-cuts-seattlepolice-budget-drawing-criticism;
kiro7.com/news/local/kingcounty-murder-rates-break-records-seattle-
prepares-even-fewer offic-ers/ZN2KBKHD3VAN5MILLNJTBM47EM/;
theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/07/us-cities-defund-policetransferring-
money-community; states
man.com/story/news/2021/11/09/austin-police-respond-twohomicides-
within-hours-each-other/6351302001/
S256 quotemaster.org/q64426711dd1cc326e34ead84fd9919b0 S257 Vavra,
Kassidy. "BLM leader threatens to ‘burn the White House down’ and put
police ‘in f***ing graves". Updated: 10:26 ET, Aug 30 2020. the-
sun.com/news/1392855/blm-leader-threatens-burnwhite-house-police-
graves/
S258 quotepark.com/quotes/1804499-joseph-goebbels-we-enter-
thereichstag-to-arm-ourselves-with-democ/
S259 books.google.com/books
S260 housedivided.dickinson.edu/sites/lincoln/lyceum-address-january27-
1838/
S261 At least 140 DHS and federal police officers deployed to Portland
have been injured since May. Washington Examiner. August 6, 2020 S262
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10772599/Republicans-Portlandrallying-fund-
police-hit-smoke-bombs.html
S263 minimalistquotes.com/joseph-goebbels-quote-138667/ S264 Gellately
S265 cnn.com/2020/08/31/politics/joe-biden-pittsburgh-
violencespeech/index.html
S266 foxnews.com/media/black-lives-matter-leader-burn-down-system
S267 thehill.com/homenews/media/404116-cnns-lemon-defends-antifano-
organization-is-perfect
S268 Dem Official Says Burning Police Station Was an 'Act of Pure
Righteousness. free-beacon.com August 10, 2021
S269 US News & World Reports. December 31, 2021.
S270 vanlifewanderer.com
S271 Miller, Mike. Professor Defends Murder of Portland Trump Supporter.
Redstate. September 10, 2020
S272 Alert: Democratic Socialists of America Declare War – Violence is
Part of All Suc-cessful Protest Movements. rairfoundation.com September
16, 2020
S273 oed.com/oed2/00277885
S274 Identity Politics is Turning Violent. spiked.com September 9, 2020
S275 time.com/5320865/maxine-waters-confront-trump-staffers-
familyseparation-policy/
S276 cnn.com/2021/04/19/politics/maxine-waters-derek-
chauvintrial/index.html
S277 Gateway pundit.com November 8, 2018
S278 13fox.com/news/protesters-show-up-at-seattle-police-chiefs-homein-
snohomish-county
S279 abc7.com/chief-michel-moore-michael-lapd-police
protests/6392923/; ore-gonlive.com/portland/2020/11/smallprotest-targets-
portland-commissioners-house-hours-failed-vote-tocut-police-funding.html;
freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2021/09/14/james-craiggovernor-
michigan-protests-detroit-will-breathe/8324250002/; northjer-
sey.com/story/news/bergen/2021/10/18/police-removedprotesters-outside-
rep-josh-gottheimers-home-wyckoffnj/8515786002/
S280 Library of Congress. guides.loc.gov/chronicling-america-
anarchistincidents
S281 Burrough, Bryan. The Bombings of America That We Forgot.
September 20, 2016, 2:09 PM EDT Time Magazine.
time.com/4501670/bombings-of-america-burrough/
S282 According to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project
(ACLED); New Study Shows 95 Percent of Riots This Year are Linked to
Black Lives Matter; red-state.com September 16, 2020 S283 O'Neill, Jesse
and Marsh, Julia. BLM leader says there will be 'bloodshed' after spat with
Eric Adams over police reform. New York Post. November 11, 2021
S284 Pennsylvania Governor Wolf calls Philadelphia riots a "peaceful
protest." Foxnews. October 28, 2020
S285 theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-
protestspolitical-unrest-acled
S286 wdrb.com/news/national/police-chief-association-releases-numberof-
officers-injured-nationwide-during-violent
protests/article_db673920-34ab-11eb-9431-a3e24704f86a.htm S287
grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-presses-doj-fbifor-details-
on-response-to-ongoing-anti-government-activity S288 Payne, page 91
S289 grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-presses-doj-fbifor-
details-on-response-to-ongoing-anti-government-activity S290
azquotes.com
S291 brainyquote.com/quotes/rahm_emanuel_409199
S292 Hayek, Friedrich. "Law, Legislation and Liberty, Volume 3" 1979;
aei.org/carpe-diem/quotation-of-the-day-on-emergencies/ S293 Gellately,
page 43
S294 mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1239/sedition-act-of-1918 S295
Gellately, page 299
S296 nytimes.com/2021/09/23/world/australia/Covid-
lockdownsfreedom.html
S297 republicworld.com/world-news/china/twitter-suspends-account-
ofchinese-virologist-who-claimed-coronavirus.html
S298 rollingstone.com, July 18, 2021
S299 politico.com/news/2021/05/26/facebook-ban-Covid 19-manmade-
491053
S300 wionews.com, June 19, 2022
S301 cnn.com/2021/05/27/media/Covid 19-origins-lab-
leakmedia/index.html
S302 wsj.com/articles/biden-and-twitter-censorship-alex-berenson-
covidvaccines-white-house-social-media-11660335186
S303 webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-Covid-deaths-study
S304 foxnews.com/media/johns-hopkins-university-study-
lockdownsmedia-blackout
S305 mass.gov/info-details/Covid 19-state-of-emergency
S306 nj.gov/governor/news/news/562020/20201116e.shtml S307
governor.ohio.gov/media/news-and-media/health-order-limit-
massgathering-11162020
S308 pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/27/most-states-have-religiousS308
pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/27/most-states-have-religious
covidexemptions_01/
S309 britannica.com/event/Gitlow-v-New-York
S310 New York State Department of Health. December 27, 2021 S311
openvaers.com/Covid 19-data downloaded February 16, 2022 S312
foxnews.com/politics/army-announces-cuts-expected-force-sizechallenges-
recruiting
S313 mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/quotes
S314 libquotes.com/george-washington/quote/lbo5s0i
S315 inspiringquotes.us/author/3513-benito-mussolini
S316 azquotes.com
S317 "On New Democracy" (January 1940), Selected Works, Vol. II, p.
marx-ists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/quotes.htm

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

 Jon worked as a freelance writer/editor, senior writer, manager, and vice
president at several large corporations. He is a licensed mental health
counselor with a small independent practice and has extensive experience
working with disabled and Trans people. His real-world experience includes
over twenty years of active and reserve duty in the US Navy, including
several years of sea duty on a guided missile destroyer. He retired with the
rank of commander. Jon studied Greek, Roman, medieval European,
Russian, and Arab history at the infamously progressive Sarah Lawrence
College. Later, he earned an MBA at the University of Connecticut and a
master’s degree in counseling at Argosy University. His hobbies include
mountain biking, travel, and reading about history, politics, and
comparative religion.