How Hillary Clinton's ‘deplorables’ can save America...from people like her.

Donald Trump supporters staged a rally on Monday, Sept. 12, 2016 across the street from the Baltimore Convention Center, where Trump addressed a gathering at the National Guard Association of the United States conference. (Kenneth K. Lam/Baltimore Sun/TNS)

The mainstream media and establishment institutions focused on propaganda will tell you that there are hundreds or thousands of dangerous cultural enclaves and ideologies out there that you should fear.  They will tell tales of rage and suspicion between the rich and the poor, haves and have-nots, whites and blacks, gays and straights, academics and working class, believers and atheists, Republicans and Democrats, Eastern nations and Western nations, etc.  The establishment relies on these divisions as a rationale for the homogenization of cultures — they argue that if we erase borders and sovereignty while enforcing multiculturalism and wealth redistribution, then these groups will have no reason to fight anymore and a Utopian fever orgy will be our inevitable reward.  Yes, it sounds quite magical.

That said, I don’t hold any claims against any of these groups per se, as long as they respect my inherent and individual freedoms.  If they are determined to impose their ideology on me through force, that is another matter entirely.

This is the only paradigm that actually matters in the end.  All other paradigms are a means for the powers that be to pit the masses against each other.  When you look at the world in this way, it is easier to let go of all the “sacred cows” and learned biases that blind us to the truth.

I don’t affiliate with Republicans, but I am happy to support a Republican that proves he or she has no interest in dictating my principles or my future.  Same with a Democrat. Same with any black or white or brown person. Same with any gay or straight person.  I really don’t care; stay out of my way and I’ll stay out of yours. Get in my way, however, and I will step on you.  If you’re bigger than me, I’ll dislocate your kneecaps and then step on you.  There is no despot so big that they are immune to the heel of a strategically placed boot.

This, I would say, is a defining principle behind those of us who make up the so-called “alt-right;” the people Hillary Clinton recently referred to as “the deplorables.” When describing this subculture of “miscreants” I often use the title of the “liberty movement.” We are defined and unified by our desire for a society based on the integral love of freedom and a fervent opposition to collectivism and totalitarianism.  For this, we are called “deplorable.”  But let’s extrapolate on that a little…

In our era, certain organizations have adopted a hard-line love affair with collectivism, and most of these groups today are allied with the far Left (socialist) side of the political spectrum.  This includes “neo-conservatives” who have never been conservative and, just like the socialists, have only ever pursued policies of bigger and more intrusive political and cultural bureaucracy.  Therefore, the paradigm of left vs. right now becomes tangible, because it is the left that seeks control, and the true right that wants to be left alone.

It’s interesting to me that the left, once considered the bastion citadel of rebellion against the machine, is now willingly diving head-first into the intestinal apparatus of the system to be mulched for fuel for the very same beast.  It just goes to show you how easily these fraudulent paradigms can change and how easily groups can be co-opted when they are oblivious to their own weaknesses.

If you really want to know who we “deplorables” are it’s rather simple — we are the ones who refuse to participate in the operation of the machine.  We are the cogs who refuse to cooperate.  We will not grease the gears.  We will not stoke the furnace.  We will stop the whole damn thing in it’s tracks, because, for the sake of future generations, we must.

This is why we are hated by socialists, cultural Marxists and the general inbred animal farm of the progressive zeitgeist.  We suggest that, in fact, not all steps forward are equal to “progress,” and not all progress is moral.  We maintain that what progressives call “progress” is actually classic and archaic barbarism wearing the silky lingerie of of humanitarianism.

To assert that some progress is immoral is a sure way to trigger the collectivist left.  They just can’t fathom that anyone sane would disagree with the grand schemes of multiculturalism and economic harmonization.  We must be crazy.  We must be violent and aberrant monsters.  We must be filled with hate and racism and misogyny.  We must be “dealt with.”

But here’s the deal…

The institutions and people so desperate to define the deplorables never actually ask us to define ourselves for the public record.  They don’t want to hear what we have to say about ourselves.  They prefer to construct straw men.  It’s much easier to set fire to us that way.

Oh sure, they’ll interview us once in a while, but an interview does not constitute an honest record of anything.  Just take a look at Bloomberg’s “interview” with Milo Yiannopoulos entitled The Pretty, Monstrous Face Of The Alt-Right in which they focus more on his salary, shopping habits and flamboyant homosexuality than his actual political or philosophical positions.  And, yet again, they call on the Southern Poverty Law Center, the cultural Marxist propaganda arm of the establishment, to give their take on who Yiannopoulos is.  Welcome to the club, Milo.

Even I have been approached in the past by mainstream outlets including the BBC and The Economist for such interviews.  In the case of the BBC, I told them I would be happy to participate as long as I could bring my own video equipment to record the entire exchange.  They agreed, then never called me back.  I just ignored requests from The Economist; they are the rotting left ventricle of the heart of darkness.

These people have no intention of letting us speak for ourselves.  They want to use us for ratings and then edit us into oblivion.

The media certainly won’t refer to us as “the liberty movement” or as freedom fighters or any other label that might find favor with the general public.  Instead, they call us “populists,” which is a term with a rather fascist flavor to it.  The truth is, the rhetoric of elitists in Europe and in the U.S. is that those against globalism and multiculturalism are legitimate fascists.  If average people only understood the totalitarian leanings of your run-of-the-mill globalist they might find this accusation hilariously ironic.

Alan Greenspan calls us “crazies” who will undermine the U.S. system.  Which is also ironic when you understand that it was Greenspan’s Federal Reserve that created the artificially low interest rate environment that initiated the derivatives bubble and credit crisis that has sealed America’s fiscal fate eight years later.  Greenspan even admitted back in 2013 that the Fed knew there was a debt bubble and “missed the timing” in dealing with it.  Yet, he blames us for America’s problems.

In the past these hucksters ignored us.  We were a burgeoning movement rallying around marginalized figures like Ron Paul back then. It was better for them to pretend we didn’t exist.

Now, we seem to be everywhere — busting up the EU with the Brexit referendum, overwhelming Merkel’s political power base in Germany, and pushing Donald Trump into what I have argued since the Brexit vote will be a sure entry into the White House.  Now, all the full attention of the establishment is on us.  Imagine that.

So, instead of listening to hypocrites and liars like those listed above, why not go to the source and ask a deplorable what we want.  I’ll be happy to explain our goals in my next article in this series on identifying the movement that seems to have dumbfounded the progressive left and globalist acolytes alike.

For now, I want to acknowledge that the rise of the deplorables does not necessarily ensure victory in the face of the elites.  As I have mentioned many times since before the success of the Brexit, it is possible that the elites are trying to give traditional conservative movements enough rope with which to hang ourselves.  That is to say, we are working to wrestle back control of a ship that is already sinking.  Let’s not kid ourselves that this fight will be anything other than long and painful.

Economically as well as socially, there is little chance of avoiding serious multiple crises over the course of the next few years.  It seems to me rather convenient that the catalysts for these crises are boiling over at a time of great awakening for the conservative guard and the liberty minded.  I do not think this is a coincidence.

This is why I repeatedly remind people that a Trump presidency might send a message, but it is not a solution.  Do no be surprised if a Trump victory is followed by a global deluge of financial instability — instability that will be blamed on us.

The narrative is already being set.  International financiers, central bankers and media personalities are consistently mentioning the great danger of the “populists.”  They say the deplorables are going to destroy the world.  This is nonsense, of course.  The world has already been destroyed by the banking elite and their cronies, but, the average person doesn’t really grasp this.  We have to educate them quickly because we are about to be targeted as scapegoats for one of the greatest engineered fiscal catastrophes of all time.

Every totalitarian action produces an equal and opposite reaction.  The progressive left has become so intoxicated with collectivist power and so abusive in their application of the government authority that they have chiseled from the public, that now, everyone hates them.  Many people want to see the deplorables win, if only to witness the wretched shrieking horror in the normally pretentious faces of social justice thugs.  If anyone is to blame for the rise of the deplorables, it is the very leftists and globalists who despise us.

__________

It is important to recognize that only foolish progressives actually take Clinton’s claims at face value. Clinton essentially seeks to characterize a large subset of conservatives as narrow minded when she mentions the “deplorables.” But, it is how she defines “narrow minded” that is the crux of the thing.

When people like her talk about “racists,” they are referring to conservatives who want a secure southern border. When they talk about “Islamaphobes,” they are referring to people who want to stop Islamic refugees from being bused into the country without being vetted. When they talk about sexists, they are usually referring to all males in general, because remember, social justice warriors (SJWs) claim that we are “subconsciously sexist,” even if we think we are fair to women. When they talk about homophobes, they are referring to Christian bakers who do not want to participate in services for gay weddings despite the fact that they should be perfectly free to refuse association with anyone at any time for any reason.

What Clinton and social justice lunatics are really referring to when they use these attacks is people who want to be free to think and do as they see fit as long as they are not violating the constitutional rights of others. No one in Hillary’s basket is actually narrow minded, but she and her cronies pigeonhole them as narrow minded anyway.

Clinton is not actually worried about real racists, or real sexists or real homophobes. What she and the establishment are worried about are true conservatives, because our principles are not built on hate; they are built on reason and truth. It’s easy to defeat a movement driven by hate; it’s next to impossible to defeat a movement driven by truth.

It is absolutely essential for liberty activists to understand that the goal of the establishment will be to redefine the core of our movement. If they can repaint us as hateful, then we can be beaten. If they can fool us into acting against our principles in the name of winning by any means, then once again, we can be beaten. If we are able to retain our principles and repel the propaganda, then we will never be beaten. Even the greatest war machines on Earth can be crushed by the force of a principled rebellion.

As my readers know well, I do not hold much optimism for America in the short term. Our economic status is dismal. In my article, “Brexit aftermath — here’s what happens next,” I warned that global markets would be experiencing a slow grinding decline into the U.S. elections. This is now occurring. It is my belief that international financiers and central banks will pull stimulus support from the global economy just before or just after the elections. I believe that the establishment will attempt to blame conservative movements for the fiscal crisis they created.

By extension, and as I have been predicting for many months, I believe that Donald Trump will be allowed into the White House. Whether Trump is aware of this dynamic or not, I do not know. The point is, our fight is just beginning, and it has nothing to do with a Trump presidency.

The U.S. cannot be saved from financial crisis; instability is a mathematical certainty. It is how we respond to this instability that will determine our success or failure. Here is what we “deplorables” must accomplish in the next decade if we are to rebuild America and defeat globalism.

Put an end to economic harmonization

Economic harmonization is nothing more than a globalist phrase meaning socialist redistribution of wealth. Globalists and progressives will assert that capitalism is the cause of all our ailments. They will say it leads to an unfair allocation of wealth into the coffers of a select few through the “natural” evolution of corporate power. In reality, most socialist nations work side by side with corporations, and even the existence of the legal corporate model was created by government interference in free markets. That is to say, there is nothing natural about corporations.

It was western governments that fabricated special legal protections for corporations including corporate personhood and limited liability. Without government protection, corporations could not exist at their current level of dominance. Therefore, bigger government and more government intervention in free markets will likely only serve to secure even greater empires for the corporate elite.

These empires can only be dismantled by removing government as a factor in free markets, and allowing true competition in business to return instead of corporate favoritism. As a part of this shift, the middle class must be allowed to thrive through innovation and production. Taxation designed to redistribute wealth only seems to harm burgeoning entrepreneurs and stifles their ability to use good ideas to compete with larger businesses and their superior capital.

Economic harmonization will eventually result in equality — it will make everyone equally poor. Only a handful of elites will ever be able to pursue economic success within this kind of system.

The end of forced multiculturalism

We’re tired of Cloward-Piven strategies used by cultural Marxists to undermine western principles and heritage. The bottom line is, some cultures are completely incompatible and they should not be roommates. Are we racist for holding this view? No, we’re just being practical. One look at the scheisse-storm hitting Europe right now and only an idiot or a Leftist would argue that mass immigration of contrary cultures is a good idea.

Uncontrolled migrations of peoples from socialist nations into nations that desire free markets will only make the effort towards free markets impossible. Illegal immigration by people who only want taxpayer funded entitlements and that import their socialist ideals with them is counter to the health of a liberty-based model.

Harshly theocratic cultures also will not be able to integrate into a society that respects individual freedom. Social justice groups assume that religious freedom requires us to remain apathetic in the face of unchecked theocratic immigration. First, potential immigrants and illegal immigrants do not have legal rights under the U.S. Constitution. Religious freedom has nothing to do with immigration.

For example, fundamentalist Islamic culture does not mix with the traditional Western ideals of liberty and free market participation. Period.

Leftists are naively blind to the distinction. Globalists understand the problem full well and they intend to exploit it. Their goal is to import counter-ideologies en masse in order to annihilate the last vestiges of the West.

Why? Because this is about eliminating the last obstacle to total globalization. They seek to wash out conservative and classical liberal thinking to make way for a collectivist system that outlaws sovereign philosophies as “barbaric.” It is not exactly an “ethnic cleansing;” more like an ideological cleansing of true conservativism.

We aren’t going to allow that.

This is why many in the liberty movement do in fact support a ban on all immigration into Western nations until the damage done by the multicultural cabal can be mitigated. Some may argue for a limited ban on the immigration of certain groups (including Muslims) and this is an issue where the “deplorables” diverge.

I personally don’t know how such a selective ban could be enforced without an insanely large, intrusive and expensive immigration bureaucracy designed to investigate and weed out millions of people not allowed under such a law. A simpler solution would be to freeze all immigration for a period of time (perhaps 10 years or more).

This would eliminate the need for the U.S. Citizenship And Immigration Services (USCIS). The $3.2 billion allocated to that entity could be spent better securing U.S. borders.

Frankly, there is nothing wrong with denying citizenship to immigrants for a period of time. The extreme left acts as if open immigration into our country is some kind of human right. It’s not.

A less inclusive Republican party

It is perfectly healthy to be discriminating against ideologies and people that are destructive to inherent freedoms. I remember after Barack Obama took office for a second term that the common argument by Democratic and Republican elites alike was that it was “time for the Republican Party to be more inclusive if they ever wanted to win the White House again.” What that really means in translation is, it was time for the Republican Party to move completely away from conservative values and be more like the Left.

In reality, the Republican Party needs to stop accommodating socialist and globalist ideals and be more selective in who its friends are, and who its leaders are. Either that, or the party needs to go the way of smallpox and die so that more honest political organizations can take its place.

The eradication of language policing

We “deplorables” have seen political correctness and social justice fear mongering turn our society into a simpering cesspool of terrified effeminate spineless men, deluded miserable vitriolic women who think they are men, and the rest of us who are supposed to walk on eggshells whenever the PC police are around while being sure to use the “proper pronouns.” I think not.

I think instead, the deplorables are going to say whatever the hell we feel like saying. Why should we concern ourselves with the irrational feelings of others? Why should we censor ourselves just to satisfy the ignorant notion that language shapes environment? Language is irrelevant to our internal monologue. Changing the language is not going to change our souls. Thus, controlling it is pointless.

We’re not going to refer to anyone by a gender other than what their genetics dictate. We don’t care if you wear make-up and a wig and a tampon. If you were born with a Y chromosome, then you are a man. Your personal freedoms do not include the right to force others to recognize you as a woman, a “trans,” a diva, a porpoise, etc. Your feelings do not matter. We are no longer going to participate in your gender role-play fantasies.

Some of us may at times even make race related jokes and have fun at the expense of other groups. We might argue that women actually don’t make very good Ghostbusters or that movies pontificating about slavery are becoming extraordinarily boring. We will probably refer to illegal immigrants as illegal immigrants and stare at beautiful women like we have x-ray vision.

Understand, there is nothing you can do to stop us, so you might as well spend your time doing something more constructive, like dropping out of gender studies and enrolling in a real college course.

No more recognition of victim group status

For decades now it has become trendy for anyone besides white heterosexual males to blame all their failures on white heterosexual males. With all the gnashing of teeth over “white male privilege,” we might forget that the only groups with privileges under the law are victim groups. So much government preference is being given to these groups that almost everyone is now clamoring to categorize themselves as a victim in some sense.

The “transgender” movement is the culmination of this insanity; primarily because there is no such thing as a transgender person except the extremely rare occasion when someone is born with both male and female genitalia. Gender is biological, it is not fluid. You cannot argue with nature about your gender. Laws that govern gender issues should follow biological standards, not hollow psychological standards.

Today, anyone can simply say they are a victim group by virtue of what amounts to a mental illness. It is time to stop treating this mental illness as a civil rights issue. In turn, it is also time to stop government from designating privileges to groups based on arbitrary victimhood. Everyone today has equal rights under the law. Everything else should be based on merit. If you fail, then it is your own fault. To foster the notion in our society that the evil white man is to blame for all the inadequacies of every loser in the world is to do more harm to those losers than good. Instead, let them take responsibility for their failings so that they might actually strive to do better.

Limited government

There are only a few reasonable purposes behind government — to defend the inborn liberties of the populace, to repel foreign invaders and to secure a sound monetary framework. That’s about it. But while we deplorables see these as limited powers and responsibilities, socialists and globalists see these as excuses for an infinitely expanding government behemoth.

For example, you can build a functioning military based on the militia model, in which every able-bodied citizen rises to the defense of their community and nation in the event of attack. This would be a cost-effective and less intrusive model.

Or, you can build a massive standing army with hundreds of bases around the world and a police state here at home, all funded by an unsustainable fiat money and debt system. This would be the big government model, which socialists argue is what government should do to fulfill its role.

Government can also be used to force associations in the name of protecting the rights of others. A Christian taxpayer might be forced to fund entities they oppose, like Planned Parenthood (which receives around $500 million in tax dollars per year). This is the problem with open-ended nanny government; the individual freedom to associate is violated in the name of protecting the victim status of others.

This comes from a “fluid interpretation” of the Constitution and the role of government that allows expansion to be rationalized. To put an end to this would require we “deplorables” to assert a literal and limited interpretation.

True free markets

The establishment has spent the better part of the past 30 years trying to convince the world that globalism is a natural extension of the free market. It’s not. The fact is is that globalism is a system thrust upon the people, not an organic evolution of economics.

True free market philosophy would dictate that if a model is destroying the wealth standards of a society, that society would naturally abandon it. If a model is elevating corporations, which are a product of government charter and are artificially supported by taxpayer dollars, then this is not conducive to real competition. If a model is allowing those same government chartered corporations to export jobs while destroying any chance for smaller competitors to fill the void through unfair taxation and other laws, then this creates economic instability. Without government intervention, globalism would not exist, because no society with a free market would naturally seek to destroy itself.

The “deplorables” want the end of all welfare, including corporate welfare and the concept of the “too big to fail” company. We want the end of government intervention in business and special favors for corporate elites. We also want the end of central banking and fiat debt based currency. It’s funny, but the mainstream media constantly accuses us of seeking an unfair world, but we are actually the only group of people working for a level playing field.

This concept terrifies progressives and corporate elites alike because without a socialist welfare system and special treatment for victim groups and companies, all success would then rely on merit. This means, they would have to work harder than most, or be smarter than most or be more naturally gifted than most in order to be more prosperous than most. Take a look at the millennials permeating the halls of universities today — those that espouse socialist ideals –and you will find yourself struggling to identify a single person with exceptional merit or work ethic.

Take a look at all the banks and corporate monstrosities that should have collapsed eight years ago due to terrible business practices. Under a free market, they would be failures, and rightly so.

As mentioned in my first article on the “deplorables,” these changes– which represent a redress of grievances over decades of American corruption –will not take place without years of struggle and sacrifice. Again, this is not about a Trump presidency or any other future election. This is about action on the part of regular men and women, average conservatives, everyday. This is about self sufficiency, localized economies, the return of individual producers, the refusal to comply with social justice-based laws and legislation, the return of community-based security rather than reliance on state and federal security, local efforts for border security, the punishment of criminal financial institutions, etc.; all of which will probably come at the cost of a fight with the establishment.

While you are welcome to vote for whatever candidate you please, remember that central leadership is not the solution. Self leadership is the solution. We do not need a hero on a white horse. The future is in our hands. Only by the efforts of millions of liberty champions in large and small ways can America return to prosperity, and to freedom.

SUBSCRIBE TO ALT-MARKET

Print this post

Do you like this post?

Add your reaction to this article