Some of the Dystopian Tyranny You Can Expect if the Marxists Win

We already know the federal government colluded with Big Tech to censor Americans who dared question the origins of COVID and the efficacy of the clot-shot and even shut down the New York Post for breaking the Hunter Biden laptop story. We've seen pro-lifers have their doors kicked in by FBI SWAT teams. This will get even worse if We the People don't raise our voices.

Your environmental, social, and governance (ESG) score will light up like Hunter's crackpipe if you tweet that "a man in a dress isn't a woman," and your digital currency card will be denied when you try to buy toilet paper.

FACT-O-RAMA! A woman I know, now 81, who moved from Poland to the U.S. in 1974 told me Stalin would stop sending toilet paper to Poland when he was angry at the nation for not falling in line.

Your three-bedroom home will be deemed an extravagance now that your kids have moved out and may be confiscated and handed over to a large family from Sudan. After all, building more housing than necessary is a threat to "climate change." Besides, you'll be comfy-cozy in your federally approved living pod.

Check out this Canadian commie prag stating that "you don't have an absolute right to own private property in Canada." Stop saying "It can't happen here."

Unless you have a herd of cattle, your Sunday steaks will be replaced with a tempting cricket salad.

Enough of my bloviating. Watch this video by the World Economic Forum (WEF), which is nothing more than a group of wealthy, unelected jackpuddings who are "predicting" that by 2030 you will be a serf. Your enslavement includes such greatest hits as:we will own nothing and be happy
we will stop eating meat
the U.S. will not be a superpower because "a handful of countries will dominate"
a billion people will be displaced -- to the West -- otherwise, somehow, the clouds will suffer

FACT-O-RAMA! The mass migration to the West began decades ago. Do you see how far along the WEF plan has come along? Are you waking up yet? If you are reading this, Im sure you are. Now let's work on our "normie" friends and relatives.

According to KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov, the first step we see after the fall of liberty won't affect true Americans. Antifa and knuckleheads like the professors who are now waving Hamas flags will be the first to be purged. That "BLM" shirt your lavender-haired, non-binary sibling-in-law wears won't protect zher from prison, or even a firing squad. It will actually push zhim to the front of the line.

Bezmenov put it this way:

Details of the Amish Farmer Story Prove the FDA and USDA Should Be Dissolved Completely

The story about the Amish farmer who had his cattle seized by the authoritarian Biden-Harris regime has been circulating through its various stages for weeks. Like many people, I heard the basic details and was infuriated by it all. But a deeper dive into it by James Corbett really opened my eyes.

This isn’t just a taste of food tyranny. This should be the lead story for evidence that the FDA, USDA, and all federal government agencies involved in food tyranny must be dissolved completely. They’re not here to protect us. They’re only here to protect the globalist agenda.



Here’s a report from Twitter user Inversionism:

The USDA and FDA should be considered terrorist organizations for what they do continually to small farmers and businesses.

Similar to the Rawesome raid, these farmers were doing what’s called a cow share, where people in the community all pay up front and invest in a cow for milk or meat. This has been done by numerous farms all across the country as a means to avoid using meat processors and big business to just to get clean, properly raised, healthy food, without all the extra fees and government bullshit attached. It’s the perfect business model that supports local farmers and cuts out the criminal corporations and captured government orgs.

As expected, the USDA and FDA can’t have any of that happening because they are too busy allowing heavy metals, pesticides, plastics, and forever chemicals in your food, or rubber stamping toxic COVID vaccines for your 6 month old child, so they went to this farm and took all his meat in fridges and freezers, took it to the dump, and threw it all away with a court injunction because he refused to listen to their unconstitutional dictates.

This is the same food he fed his family with, but they didn’t care. Thousands and thousands of dollars of nutrient dense quality animal foods, all thrown away.

The FDA and USDA both need to be completely dissolved. They don’t protect public health. They destroy it.

Infuriating.

There was a time not too long ago when many if not most of the people who worked for the USDA or FDA did so because they had good jobs that were designed to protect Americans. But like so many agencies, departments, and bureaus within our federal government, the mission has morphed into one dedicated to tyranny. Perhaps many of the government employees are unaware. A whole lot of them have been indoctrinated into the “greater good” mentality that allows otherwise lucid people to unhinge themselves from the realities of their situation. Then, there are those who know some of what they do is wrong but they’re just following orders.

Like the IRS and FBI, both the FDA and USDA should be revamped or scrapped altogether. The only reason I even offer revamping as a possibility is because there are far too many Americans who flinch when they hear people like me calling to disband entire government agencies. Therefore, a top-down overhaul is weak but may be the...

In England, only leftist-approved speech is free

The British Isles bestowed blessings and curses on the world. On the one side, Britain was the Western world’s foremost colonialist nation. However, on the other side, unlike Islam, the other foremost colonialist nation, England brought economic prosperity and the idea of liberty to the nations it colonized. In America, at least, chief amongst those ideas was free speech. However, in England itself, free speech is dead. Only those with government-approved ideas may speak aloud there—and one of those ideas seems to be “kill the Jews.”

At the end of the 17th century, when James II fled England following the Glorious Revolution, Parliament created the 1689 Bill of Rights. One stated that “the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament.” By the mid-18th century, Englishmen, including those in the North American colonies, felt their right to speech extended beyond Parliament’s four walls. A hallmark of a free people is the right to speak their minds without government retribution.

So, in 1791, the newly created nation of America, which looked to England for its ideas about individual liberty, enshrined free speech in the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Recently, in America, the left has relentlessly worked to silence speech with which it disagrees. However, it keeps being stymied by that pesky First Amendment.

England, however, has no right to free speech. That’s because when American colonists started speaking out against Parliament, the solons in England declared that the Bill of Rights applied only to the monarch, not the rest of the government.

Since 2000, we’ve seen England clamp down on speech with which it disagrees. This happens with both conservative and leftist governments. That’s because—and this is important—outside of America, they have no notion of individual liberty versus government tyranny. Instead, parties represent different types of government tyranny. In England, no matter which tyranny they represent, all government leaders are university graduates, which means they all share certain values (the same American graduates share).

One value is fealty to the pro-LGBTQ+ agenda. That’s why anyone who dares to offend LGBTQ+ sensibilities will be arrested:

Another value is that abortion is sacred. That’s why anyone who dares offend pro-abortion sensibilities, even by praying silently or standing peacefully, will be arrested:

However, what will not get you arrested in England is loudly calling for Jewish genocide. That is fine:

The reality is that England foolishly invited into her country people whose values are completely antithetical to Enlightenment notions of liberty. They’re afraid of them now because they’ve seen what they do to those who oppose them. And of course, Britain has disarmed her citizens, so they are defenseless, as the people at the rave for peace or in many of the invaded communities were.

Here in America, Biden has also lawlessly opened the border to aliens who hate...

"We Are Restricting Freedom... For The Common Good": Irish Green Party Calls For Limiting Free Speech

The Irish Green Party followed many on the left around the world, including our own Democratic Party, this week and came out for censorship and speech controls. Indeed, the party went full Orwellian as its chairwoman Pauline O’Reilly called for “restricting freedom” to protect it.

O’Reilly’s comments are part of the introduction of the Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022. We previously discussed this massive assault on free speech.

The legislation that would criminalize “incitement to violence or hatred against” people with “protected characteristics,” as well as “condoning, denying or grossly trivialising genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes against peace.”

Limiting free speech has become an article of faith for many on the left. I have written about my distress (as someone who grew up in a liberal, politically active Democratic family in Chicago) in watching the abandonment of free speech values by the party. Democratic leaders now uniformly call for censorship and speech regulations. President Biden even charged that companies who refused to censor opposing views on social media were “killing people.” Others have denounced free speech as “a white man’s obsession.”

The anti-free speech movement has become openly Orwellian in claiming to protect freedom by limiting freedom. It also employs using terms like disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation to obscure their effort to silence those with opposing views. Rather than use “censorship,” they refer to “content moderation.”

That effort was on full display this week in Ireland with this anti-free speech legislation.

Speaking before the Irish Senate (Seanad) this week, O’Reilly declared “when one thinks about it, all law and all legislation is about the restriction of freedom. This is exactly what we are doing here. We are restricting freedom but we are doing it for the common good.”

It is the same message of New York democrats calling for limiting speech as a way of protecting democracy. Indeed, former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich has declared free speech is “tyranny.”

O’Reilly assured citizens that giving up freedom was nothing new or threatening: “Throughout our Constitution one can see that while one has rights they are restricted for the common good. Everything needs to be balanced.”

What is particularly chilling is how low the threshold is for denying free speech, according to O’Reilly. It now appears that “deep discomfort” is enough:

“If a person’s views on other people’s identities make their lives unsafe and insecure, and cause them such deep discomfort that they cannot live in peace, our job as legislators is to restrict those freedoms for...

Top 3 Things Tucker Carlson Says The Regime Doesn’t Want You Talking About

If you want to know what really, really matters, to [the regime], and to you, and to the future of the country, consider the things that you are not allowed to say,” Tucker Carlson told his audience of young people during a Turning Point USA speech on the heels of his interviews with Republican primary candidates in Iowa.

These unsayable things, Carlson said, are easy to pinpoint because wrongthink seems to be the only “crime” that’s consistently and seriously penalized in contemporary America. Rapists and murderers go unprosecuted in American blue cities. “[B]urning down buildings, impoverishing people, starting totally counterproductive wars we can’t win that kill a lot of our citizens, [and] leaving the border open so 7 million people can walk across” are “never punished.”

So what are the three topics Carlson says have been deemed forbidden speech by the media, White House, and virtually every member of the American gentry class? “One of them’s the war in Ukraine, another’s Covid, and, of course, the third is Jan. 6.”

War in Ukraine

Every uniparty politician, corporate media outlet, and mega-corporation insists that if you don’t “hate” Russia and support America funneling billions of dollars to defend a nation ruled by a corrupt, oligarchical government, you must love Vladimir Putin and oppose “democracy.”

“It’s not a criminal act not to hate somebody,” Carlson said. He pointed out that the number of Americans murdered by Russians is in the “range” of “zero.” Meanwhile, more than 100,000 Americans die every year at the hands of Mexican cartels and the drugs they smuggle into our country. Yet the media and our government want us to be more preoccupied with a foreign war than the deaths of American citizens here at home.

Carlson explained that so far, America has utterly failed to be a leader in the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, encouraging the war instead of facilitating peace. “If you’re the leader, the last thing you do is sow more chaos,” Carlson said. Yet the White House “with the full participation of the Republican Party” has fueled and prolonged a bloody war — and you had better not question it.

“Foreign policy is the one big thing” that’s not subject to “voter control,” Carlson said. Americans have a right to weigh in on things like the war in Ukraine and tell the federal government: “This is my country and you’re doing this in my name, with my money, and potentially my children.”

Washington, however, doesn’t believe in “the public [signing] off on wars … and that’s exactly why they like it,” Carlson added. If you try to question Washington’s lucrative wars, you’re told to “shut up.” And you, “an American citizen who loves your country [and] whose ancestors fought to defend it,” are accused of disloyalty by people who don’t care about America at all.

Covid

During and following the years of Covid tyranny, Big Tech companies (often at the behest of the federal government) censored anyone, including doctors and sitting members of Congress, who discussed the numerous civil liberties violations, the highly plausible lab-leak theory, the devastation of lockdowns, failed vaccines, the inefficacy of cloth masks, and vaccine injuries.

“Every organization in American life … from your government, to the entire media, [and] in some cases, your church,” told Americans that if you want to be a “good person” you’ll follow the Covid rules, Carlson said. In the case of the Covid shots, you had to pipe down and take it — without really knowing what was in it or what the long-term outlook would be.

Now we know the staggering number of people who appear to be vaccine injured, as Carlson pointed out. Yet the powers that be continue to gaslight the public anytime someone tries to discuss adverse reactions to any of the Covid shots.

“This [was] a moral test, and if you want[ed] to pass, you obey[ed],” said Carlson, adding that those who stood against Covid authoritarianism were persecuted and labeled societal “outlaws.”

Jan. 6

Carlson recalled how shortly after Jan. 6, 2021, people began claiming the demonstration was a“racist insurrection.” At the time, Carlson pointed out it neither had anything to do with race nor involved “armed people try[ing] to overthrow the government,” but he was told, yet again, to “shut up.” He even found himself labeled a “racist insurrectionist.”

The people who protested on Jan. 6, were, in Carlson’s words, “grandmas with diabetes and a lot of debt.” Why were these everyday Americans so angry? Well, the American gentry class refused to allow the country to talk honestly about why a massive swath of the populace was so enraged that they took a “bus from Tennessee to go...

Targeted for Tyranny: We’re All Suspects Under the Government’s Precrime Program

We’re all being targeted now.

We’re all guilty until proven innocent now.

And thanks to the 24/7 surveillance being carried out by the government’s spy network of fusion centers, we are all now sitting ducks, just waiting to be tagged, flagged, targeted, monitored, manipulated, investigated, interrogated, heckled and generally harassed by agents of the American police state.

Although these precrime programs are popping up all across the country, in small towns and big cities, they are not making us any safer but they are endangering individual freedoms.

Nationwide, there are upwards of 123 real-time crime centers (a.k.a. fusion centers), which allow local police agencies to upload and share massive amounts of surveillance data and intelligence with state and federal agencies culled from surveillance cameras, facial recognition technology, gunshot sensors, social media monitoring, drones and body cameras, and artificial intelligence-driven predictive policing algorithms.

These data fusion centers, which effectively create an electronic prison—a digital police state—from which there is no escape, are being built in partnership with big tech companies such as Microsoft, Google and Amazon, which helped to fuel the rise of police militarization and domestic surveillance.

While these latest expansions of the surveillance state are part of the Biden Administration’s efforts to combat domestic extremism through the creation of a “precrime” crime prevention agency, they have long been a pivotal part of the government’s plans for total control and dominion.

Yet this crime prevention campaign is not so much about making America safer as it is about ensuring that the government has the wherewithal to muzzle anti-government discontent, penalize anyone expressing anti-government sentiments, and preemptively nip in the bud any attempts by the populace to challenge the government’s authority or question its propaganda.

As J.D. Tuccille writes for Reason, “[A]t a time when government officials rage against ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ that is often just disagreement with whatever opinions are currently popular among the political class, fusion centers frequently scrutinize peaceful dissenting speech.”

Indeed, while the Biden Administration was recently dealt a legal blow over its attempts to urge social media companies to do more to combat so-called dis- and mis-information, these fusion centers are the unacknowledged powerhouses behind the government’s campaign to censors and retaliate against those who vocalize their disagreement and discontent with government policies.

Already, the powers-that-be are mobilizing to ensure that fusion centers have the ability to monitor and lockdown sectors of a community at a moment’s notice.

For instance, a 42,000-square-foot behemoth of a fusion center in downtown Washington is reportedly designed to “better prepare law enforcement for the next public health emergency or Jan. 6-style attack.” According to an agency spokeswoman, “Screens covering the walls of the new facility will show surveillance cameras around the city as well as social media accounts that may be monitored for threatening speech.”

It’s like a scene straight out of Steven Spielberg’s dystopian film Minority Report, set in 2054, where police agencies harvest intelligence from widespread surveillance, behavior prediction technologies, data mining, precognitive technology, and neighborhood and family snitch programs in order to capture would-be criminals before they can do any damage.

Incredibly, as the various nascent technologies employed and shared by the government and corporations alike—facial recognition, iris scanners, massive databases, behavior prediction software, and so on—are incorporated into a complex, interwoven cyber network aimed at tracking our movements, predicting our thoughts and controlling our behavior, the dystopian visions of past writers is fast becoming...

Today Is Bastille Day....

 

A Day When People Rose Up Against The Callous Tyranny Of Their Government...

Bastille Day is a holiday celebrating the storming of the Bastille—a military fortress and prison—on July 14, 1789, in a violent uprising that helped usher in the French Revolution. Besides holding gunpowder and other supplies valuable to revolutionaries, the Bastille also symbolized the callous tyranny of the French monarchy, especially King Louis XVI and his queen, Marie Antoinette.

When I saw that it was Bastille Day, I have to admit, the first thing I thought of was this:

I think today is a good day for deep state actors to reflect on the consequences of their casual tyranny against our constitution and the American people... Do you want to be part of the solution? Become a whistle blower, it is not too late to become a Patriot.

Visage à trois #1533 - Independence From Tyranny Edition

Three Videos For Your Viewing Pleasure:

Three Additional Bonus Videos:

Videos That Are:

Videos That Are:

• Usually Short.
• Usually Timely.
• Usually Scraped, Gleaned And Pilfered From Social Media.

Visage à trois #280 - Shall Not Be Infringed Edition...

The Pharmacological Path to Soft-Core Totalitarianism

In my recent article on the destruction of medical ethics during the COVID era, I used a term that generated some unanticipated feedback. What exactly did I mean by “soft-core totalitarianism?” Was it a real concept, or just a turn of phrase?

It’s a concept all right, and I believe it aptly describes the sociopolitical – or is it sociopathological? – condition in which we find ourselves in the post-COVID world, both in the United States and throughout the other Western so-called liberal democracies. It certainly seems to describe the direction in which our collective culture is heading.

Let’s define soft-core totalitarianism as a political system, characterized by two features: First, there is centralized, autocratic control of the state by the executive branch of the government and its cronies (the totalitarianism part).
Second, by design, the offenses to civil liberties are applied subtly and gradually enough, the standard of living is kept high enough, and a sufficient menu of seductive distractions are intentionally provided, that most individuals either don’t object, or don’t even notice (the soft-core part).

Soft-core totalitarianism can be readily contrasted with its hard-core counterpart, recent examples of which would be the killing fields of Khmer Rouge-era Cambodia, or the enforced starvation conditions of contemporary North Korea.

As with soft-core pornography, this comparison favorably disposes soft-core totalitarianism to the more pliant and undiscerning among us, who might say, “Well, yes, I suppose it isn’t ideal, but at least it’s not that horrible hard-core stuff!”

Also like soft-core pornography, soft-core totalitarianism is designed to possess a titillating and seductive quality that opposes one’s better moral judgment. To the weak-willed and soft-headed, the statement “You’ll own nothing and be happy” holds a similar appeal to “All the classiest girls, ready to talk about your deepest fantasies, just a phone call away.”

Soft-core totalitarianism was predicted by past seers who tried to warn us about where Western Civilization was headed. The leavening of tyranny with the intentional supply of banal distractions, creature comforts, and legalized drugs pepper their descriptions. They repeatedly describe a kind of semi-anesthetized, semi-tolerable dystopia:

“Films, football, beer, and above all, gambling filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult.” ~ George Orwell

“There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel.” ~ often attributed to Aldous Huxley

And of course, the granddaddy of them all:

“Give them bread and circuses, and they will never revolt.” ~ Juvenal

Ring any bells? If not, consider the following, all of which occurred contemporaneously to the COVID-era lockdowns, school closures, travel restrictions, mask and vaccine mandates and other assorted assaults on our civil rights:

• Liquor stores were deemed essential from the beginning and remained open for business throughout the entire duration of the COVID lockdowns.
• No fewer than 17 US States legalized recreational marijuana use since the COVID lockdowns began in March 2020.
• 33 US states have opened legalized sports betting markets since the Supreme Court struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) in May 2018.
• Over $220 billion has been wagered in sportsbooks in the USA since then.
• The US Border Patrol seized over 15,000 pounds of fentanyl at the Mexican border in 2022 – three times as much as in 2020.
• 110,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in 2022.

Still skeptical? Let me put it another way. I am no Orwell or Huxley (and certainly no Juvenal), but please indulge me, Dear Reader, as I offer you my own soft-core totalitarian dystopian narrative:

Is Jury Nullification the Most Powerful Individual Tool to Neutralize Tyranny?

In light of the ongoing persecution of January 6 protesters as “insurgents,” it may be apropos to review what is arguably the most powerful tool that an individual has to combat unjust government overreach: jury nullification.

Via Fully Informed Jury Association:

Jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a Not Guilty verdict even though jurors believe beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant has broken the law. Because the Not Guilty verdict cannot be overturned, and because the jurors cannot be punished for their verdict, the law is said to be nullified in that particular case.

Jury nullification has been used throughout history, with varying degrees of success, to negate immoral government laws:

When these kinds of rejections of enforcement of laws stack up over time, the laws become unenforceable. We’ve seen this rejection of the Fugitive Slave Laws and alcohol prohibition, for example, undermine such laws’ enforcement. Eventually, it is no longer worth the time or hassle or embarrassment for government officials to try to enforce these laws. They may be further nullified in a sense either remaining on the books but not being enforced or being repealed altogether.

The Constitutional Double Jeopardy clause contained in the Fifth Amendment bars the government from re-trying a case in the event of an acquittal. Similarly, jurors are legally protected from retribution for using their rights to nullify laws they believe to be unjust.

The practice has its roots in the best traditions of Americana, as it was used to defang the British Crown in the time before the Revolution when it otherwise abused the colonists with impunity. “Nullification had its American origins in colonial juries which ignored British law to acquit dissidents. Along with civil disobedience, nullification may be seen as an integral feature of the birth of this nation,” J.B. Weinstein writes in the American Criminal Law Review.

Jury nullification is one of the only tools at an individual level that enables the individual to exercise his or her own moral judgment within the criminal justice system above and beyond the technical question of whether the letter of a law was broken or not.

The problem for proponents of jury nullification is that lawyers are generally barred from seeding the concept within the minds of juries during court proceedings. If jurors are going to discover the power they have, they’ll have to do it outside of the courtroom.

The reason, of course, that the ongoing theatrical prosecutions of MAGA “domestic terrorists” are located in jurisdictions like D.C., New York, and Fulton County, Ga. (right in the middle of inner-city Atlanta) are two-fold: the district attorneys are partisan Democrats who will prosecute whomever George Soros tells them to prosecute and, more relevant to this discussion, the jury pool is overwhelmingly partisan as...

How Ayn Rand Predicted Dylan Mulvaney

Most of her fans – and probably her detractors as well – know Ayn Rand primarily through her four great novels. She also wrote essays, philosophy books, screenplays, and Broadway dramas… but we remember her for her novels.

We fear that the dystopian world of Anthem will come true someday, but not soon. We fear that the totalitarian tyranny of We the Living is approaching, any day now. And we know full well that the mindless, vicious, destructive bureaucratic rule of Atlas Shrugged is in some ways upon us already.

But the shocker is realizing that her most specific, dead-on prediction, the one we never saw coming, was in The Fountainhead, and it is all around us today.

A few years ago, a confused teenaged actor, much like tens of thousands of other teenaged actors, was hoping for a career in the theatre, and meeting with the minor success so common in youth: a role in a local professional play, perhaps even a part in the chorus line of a musical’s touring company. Then in 2021, following the strange year known as “the pandemic,” this young person decided to become “trans,” and to report on his “transition” on the Chinese online platform TikTok.

Soon, Dylan Mulvaney was being represented by Creative Artists Agency – not for acting, dancing, or singing ability but for “being” a trans activist and online influencer. Soon, as he began wearing the hair, makeup, and wardrobe of a woman, he was getting promoted by the Trevor Project.

In the spring of 2023, an American public that had never heard of this young man was suddenly seeing him everywhere -- in dresses, hats and pearls -- in print ads, on television and online commercials, even on the packaging of America’s most popular brands.

Consider: how did people become spokesmen in the old days? A television or film actor or singer, already famous, would sign an endorsement deal. An Olympic or sports team star, already famous, would appear on a cereal box or television commercial. They were always famous first, and an advertising executive thought their image might be a good fit for their product.

There have also been unknown actors who directly became famous from a commercial, but that was always one specific, memorable commercial character in a very creative, well-written sketch. For such commercial appearances to strike gold and launch an actor’s broader endorsement career is rare indeed.

Dylan Mulvaney is a new case, and possibly a prototype for a new way: he is suddenly ubiquitous, simultaneously hired by Anheuser Busch and Kate Spade, Nike and Ulta Beauty, CeraVe and Crest, InstaCart and Haus Labs. What a client list for a fringe, unknown actor!

Note that key word: simultaneously. One producer, one manufacturer, one ad agency didn’t come up with an idea, launch it, see how it went, and then, on the strength of a year’s increased sales due to his ads, leverage that success into more and more bookings.

No. All these companies joined the bandwagon together, practically overnight, without waiting for any other campaign’s results.

These businesses were sold on this young man as a concept, before there was any data available to objectively demonstrate that it would be a good marketing decision for them.

This just doesn’t happen. This never happens. While I am not an expert in the history of advertising, Gentle Reader, I am certain that this has not happened before.

All of a sudden, this skinny young man in a dress, looking like a Halloween party Audrey Hepburn impersonator, is popping up everywhere, like the Gallant Gallstone… and for exactly the same reason.

Ayn Rand’s fans will remember a character in The Fountainhead named Ellsworth Toohey, a newspaper columnist who spent years and years planting Marxists in every industry and association, spreading them throughout the country as sleeper cells, ready to be activated on his word.

One day, perhaps to test his approach, perhaps to gauge his influence, Ellsworth Toohey puts out the word to his army of plants that they should advertise a book by poet Lois Cook, a talentless hack who has written about a sentient gallstone making its courageous path through a human body. It’s outrageous, of course, sheer theatre of the absurd, but his plan works, as the character of the Gallant Gallstone is suddenly ubiquitous, seemingly overnight.

Only then are the eyes of other characters opened, and they begin to realize how dangerous, how powerful, this Ellsworth Toohey character has become.

By the same token, we Americans have watched for years as corporations big and small have added new jobs, even new board roles, and signed on to new corporate commitments, seemingly as a harmless sop to one interest group or another, unthinkingly, much like a political machine that creates a no-show patronage job for some party boss’s kid.

Our companies have appointed a “Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Officer” or an “Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Vice President.” Stockholders were happy to do it because Blackrock and other huge funds advocate it… and if you make them happy, it’ll count toward your Corporate Equality Index (CEI). These giant pool investing houses will buy your stock and push up your perceived market value.

What they didn’t know, what they never dreamed, was that these useless officers weren’t just no-show placeholders to satisfy a demand for a bribe. They would have actual power. They would sit at every board meeting; they would run a department. They would have a vote on company decisions, big and small, just like all the other board members.

We have seen this influence in recent years, as large companies, both publicly traded and privately held, have written checks, often for millions and millions of company dollars each, to hostile organizations like BLM. And now they are at the heart of the movement to put Dylan Mulvaney in front of every American’s face.

There are many imputed laws in the business world. Parkinson’s Law, that work expands to fill the time allotted for its completion. The Peter Principle, that in any hierarchy, each employee will eventually rise to his level of incompetence. O’Sullivan’s Law, that any organization not explicitly founded to be conservative will eventually become left-wing.

And perhaps we now need a law that we should always have thought would go without saying: If you give someone a seat at the table, he will take full advantage of it.

We – our modern American society – have thought that we were showing tolerance, open-mindedness, liberality, when we threw the left a bone and invited people clearly hostile to the principles of Western Civilization and capitalism onto the management hierarchy and the boards of directors of our business community. They have taken this opportunity and used it to their movement’s best advantage, undermining the profitability of the very companies that pay their salaries.

They have gotten oil refiners to insanely commit to wean themselves away from oil; they have convinced energy utilities to shut down their most efficient, most productive nuclear power plants; they have convinced advertiser after advertiser to produce commercials that insult and offend their customers.

And now, in perhaps the ultimate of such suicidal campaigns, they have convinced a beer company to put a guy in a dress on the front of their beer cans. They have convinced a makeup company to make this man the face of their cosmetics. They have convinced an athletic apparel company to have a skinny, non-athletic man model their sports bras.

These brands are bleeding customers daily as a result. Whether these specific companies will ever learn their lesson or not may be beside the point. The most striking lesson for us today is the fact that it happened at all.

An association of political activists, international in scope, has proven itself to have the ability to plant destructive people in the business community’s corporate boards, and to force businesses to willingly sabotage their own sales, undermining their own shareholder value, by advancing a...

Tucker Carlson’s Ability To Break Through Calcified Conservatism With Fresh Ideas Is Indispensable

One of the most understated yet important aspects of Tucker Carlson’s tenure at Fox News was his unique ability to bridge a seemingly unbridgeable generational divide. Whether he was exploring more complicated topics via long-form documentaries, interviewing the world’s wealthiest man, or simply telling the Republican Party to get its act together, people of all ages tuned in. Grandparents and grandkids alike genuinely love him.

And perhaps this, in part, is why he was able to so easily mainstream the thoughts, theories, and brands of pseudonymous Twitter users who historically have been relegated to the dark corners of the internet with the rest of the weirdos. If a voice has utility, he gives it a platform; people trust him to discern who is worth listening to.

Tucker routinely used his platform to amplify people like Chaya Raichik (Libs of TikTok), which undeniably helped her gain traction and expose more people to the insanity of leftism. And to be sure, this was great, but people would likely be able to understand that sort of thing for themselves, even if they hadn’t encountered LibsofTikTok. We instinctively know when something is out of sync with the natural law and metaphysically disordered, as leftism inherently is.

Arguably some of his finest moments as a communicator were when he embraced the more esoteric, if you will, thoughts being grappled with in the nuanced essays of people like Peachy Keenan and translated them into modern English so the masses, who likely don’t have time to ponder these things on a regular basis, can also participate in the intellectual exercise.

Take, for instance, Tucker’s opening monologue from three weeks ago, in which he described the state of New York as existing in a state of anarcho-tyranny. He explained how this is a framework of “state-sponsored anarchy accompanied by political tyranny” and described how Alvin Bragg’s indictment of Donald Trump and general apathy toward crime embodies it. Anarcho-tyranny, being introduced into the lexicon of paleoconservatives several decades ago, is not a term many people would be familiar with despite being uncomfortably familiar with the concept. Nevertheless, Tucker brought them up to speed.

Or take an example from July 2021, when he read a tweet thread from Darryl Cooper (MartyrMade) providing great insight and clarity as to why conservatives remain skeptical about the outcome of the 2020 election and no longer have faith in institutions like the corporate media or national intelligence apparatus.

But he didn’t only highlight academics. Sometimes he highlighted skeptics for the sake of highlighting skepticism and to prove to us that the “experts” are idiots — as was the case in this past fall’s “The End of Men.” The documentary takes the food and health industries to task and explores the, frankly, dual existential crisis of plummeting male fertility and lack of nutritional sustenance. The documentary features a man by the name of “Raw Egg Nationalist” — a sworn enemy of soy globalism and an advocate for maximizing nutritional intake by slonking raw eggs — and another individual who goes by “Benjamin Braddock” and who believes the key to boosting testosterone is exposing his crotch to redlight.

Similar to how Rush Limbaugh mainstreamed...

FBI Whistleblower Claims FBI Is Now a 'Weaponized Apparatchik' of the Biden Administration

There’s a growing divide between the rank-and-file officers of the FBI and upper management, according to FBI agent-turned-whistleblower Steve Friend, and it’s those at the top who are pushing a political agenda…

“There are a lot of agents that sort of share that sentiment and just want to drive the mission forward. Unfortunately, there’s a big disconnect between the rank-and-file and the management class…

“I think there’s an argument to be made that the FBI has now just become a weaponized apparatchik of the presidential administration,” he added, holding that public trust in the agency has diminished largely as a result of the perception of political bias.”


As I have previously documented, it’s incontrovertibly true that the national security apparatus, including the FBI, is now politicized and weaponized against what the intelligence community terms “domestic extremists.”

This amorphic designation — “domestic extremist” — refers to the populist right, anti-establishment grassroots activists who oppose the silent coup that the Deep State has waged against the American people for several decades. It simply means opposition to the growing technocratic tyranny but, of course, is couched in post-9/11 language of “terrorism” and its alleged threat to “national security.”

Where Friend may be wrong is that the intelligence community does not ultimately serve the Biden administration. Biden is a disposable puppet who will be disposed of in due time when it becomes convenient. His current usefulness is his pliability and directability. He does not make decisions of consequence.

The true usurpers of power occupy the next level above even the elected portion of the executive branch — the proverbial “men behind the curtain,” which includes the likes of George Soros, Bill Gates, and their ilk. They operate across borders and are in the process of rendering the nation-state obsolete.

Let’s look, for example, at the curious case of current Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer invoking the Deep State to threaten the sitting president of the United States (Donald Trump at the time) into cooperating with the program.

Or, of course, one could point as well to the JFK assassination and the likely involvement of the CIA.

The picture this paints is of a national security state that answers not to any single president but to a higher authority. That “higher authority” is not “God,” as is usually the referent object in such a case, but to a shadowy cabal that, although comprised of mortals, is nonetheless beyond the control of...

Government Tyrants Play with Fire

The communist thugs controlling America's legal system have chosen to cross the Rubicon, it seems. President Trump says he will be arrested Tuesday now that New York City's corrupt, Soros-funded district attorney has cooked up some cockamamie criminal indictment against him involving Stormy Daniels — the same political pawn who was already ordered to pay the president 300,000 dollars in legal fees as restitution in a prior case.

If anyone needed further evidence that we reside under a post-constitutional Uniparty regime with utter disdain for the rule of law, add this to the long list of government crimes and usurpations committed against the American people.

No doubt the politicians and their State-controlled agents in the press will actually hail President Trump's arrest as shimmering validation that "no one is above the law." What poppycock! What glittery abuse of power. What abominable descent into tyranny!

If Bill and Hillary Clinton had ever been properly charged for their decades-long crime spree involving perjury, rape, investment swindling, real estate scams, stolen White House furniture, Chinese bribery, campaign finance violations, family foundation fraud, mishandling of classified secrets, conspiracy to defraud the United States with the Russia hoax, Epstein-linked prostitution and child-trafficking, or their uncanny proclivity for leaving a trail of dead associates in their wake, their rap sheets would stretch from here to the moon. Had Barack Obama ever had to properly answer for illicitly using the IRS, EPA, DOJ, FBI, and Intelligence Community to target, harass, and persecute his political opponents or account for his stunning success in using his political office to transition from one of America's poorest presidents to one of its wealthiest, he and his wife would not so absurdly yet flippantly claim that his presidency was aboveboard and "scandal-free." If there were not a two-tier "justice" system that exists only to protect Deep State friends and demolish Uniparty enemies, Joe Biden's notorious reputation over the last half-century as a bought-and-paid-for stooge of foreign governments and domestic crime syndicates — with a family of drug users and reprobates who profit solely from his politically-protected name — would have at least kept him far from the White House, if not serving time in prison.

Only Donald Trump — the man who donated his salary for serving the American people and who has lost a fortune parrying endless and spurious criminal, civil, and regulatory attacks — finds himself in legal jeopardy, with his life, liberty, and property all on the line.

Taking bribes from Chinese communists? No problem. Laundering money through Ukraine? No big deal. Fabricating an international conspiracy framing Donald Trump as a Russian spy? What's the harm? Selling America out to her enemies in Iran, China, and anywhere else politicians and their corporate patrons can make a buck? By all means! But sacrifice your security, reputation, and good fortune in order to run for office against the Uniparty's collective will and make America great again? Well, that, my friends, must be punished to the...

They Are Intolerant, Divisive, And Anti-Liberty — Call Them Leftists, Not Liberals

Freedom-loving Americans should not give leftists the power of being called ‘liberal.’ The term ‘leftist’ better describes their intolerance and desire to overthrow the established order.

Democrats have moved so far to the left in recent years that they should no longer be called “liberals,” unless the true liberals among them start to stand up to the leftists who have taken over. The term is misleading, giving the impression that Democrats support individual freedoms and accept people of different viewpoints, when increasingly they do not. The word “liberal” gives yet more power to those who seek to take more of our liberties.

Right-leaning publications often use the term “liberal” when “leftist” would be better. On the other hand, left-leaning newspapers such as The Washington Post and The New York Times like to use the word “liberal” to describe their own illiberal political views. It obfuscates how Democrats and their media allies have become more extreme, supporting censorship, authoritarianism, and racial division: Twitter staff who denied conservatives their right to free speech and eagerly complied with censorship demands from the federal government were described by the Post as milquetoast “liberal employees.” MSNBC says those pushing the tyranny of wokeness are just naughty-sounding “liberal rascals.”

To see how so-called liberals view themselves, we can look at The New York Times review earlier this year of Michael Walzer’s book “What Does It Mean to Be Liberal?” The book concludes the word is “an adjective, describing a state of mind common to people who think of themselves as liberals: ‘open-minded, generous and tolerant,’” according to the review.

It’s almost laughable. Does “tolerant” describe people who try to “cancel” those of different views, shouting them down, encircling their homes, and calling them disparaging names? Is it “open-minded” to try to force people to use so-called preferred pronouns as part of a transgender agenda? Or to block or hide conservatives’ social media accounts? Crisis pregnancy centers have been firebombed. A Christian cake artist in Colorado is still defending his right not to make a cake that celebrates transgenderism. Conservative scholars have even been physically attacked on college campuses. Last week, students at Stanford University disrupted a conservative judge’s speech with heckling.

It’s correct that the dictionary defines “liberal” as “open-minded” and “broad-minded.” But that’s hardly the right word for people who do not tolerate conservatives’ views on Covid-19 policies, abortion, climate change, transgenderism, and much else — this despite the fact there’s a growing consensus that state-mandated lockdowns don’t work, and that plying children with cross-sex hormones and cutting off their body parts is bad for their physical and mental health.

Walzer notes that so-called liberals don’t always manage to achieve their aspirations to be open-minded and tolerant. The Times’ article acknowledges, “That’s the idea, anyway, but we live in a world in which the illiberal right — and increasingly the left — no longer accept difference as legitimate.” But the conflation here is a lie; the right isn’t pushing for censorship or shouting down campus speakers. And it’s not just a few extremists within the ranks but the leadership of the Democrats who are condoning intimidation tactics and destruction of property — Vice President Kamala Harris and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer among them.

Democrats Headed Further Leftward

As the Times notes, the left is “increasingly” intolerant. Part of why “liberal” no longer works to describe Democrats is the party has moved leftward, as many have noted, including The Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan, comedian and commentator Bill Maher, and Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders in her State of the Union response.

Since at least 2020, Noonan wrote, Democrats “have aligned with or allowed themselves to be associated with … the identity politics-wokeness regime. (It’s amazing we still don’t have an agreed upon word or phrase that fully captures this program.)” That regime consists of transgenderism, climate alarmism, and so-called anti-racism. “The Democrats are the party of the left. Progressive pathologies morph into Democratic ideologies, tagging the party as radical. Why do the Democrats allow...