The premise of the Terminator films is that Skynet, an artificial intelligence, became self-aware and destroyed large segments of humanity once it realized it was capable of doing so. Following in the footsteps of their fictional counterparts, so too has the Left become self-aware about the degree of power they possess in our society. There was once a time in American society where it would be considered the height of folly to “take a side” in the political arena for a brand, celebrity, or company.
Those days are over.
The greatest gift Donald Trump has given us is that in the wake of his completely unexpected victory, the left went entirely overboard, exposing themselves in all facets of our lives. What used to be subtle propaganda became outright advocacy from the media, companies, universities, and celebrities. After losing an election they should have won, the left went berserk in a fashion that would make slasher icon Jason Voorhees jealous. All of a sudden the subtle biases became roaring tempests; light protesting became full on street warfare from the likes of ANTIFA. Monolithic companies went from a left-wing tilt to full-on destruction of free speech and de-platforming. What then, was the penalty for all of these people, companies, and brands taking a side on defeating Trump, demonizing the opposition, and advancing socialism?
It cost them all nothing.
We have reached a tipping point in American society where the left realized that they have sufficient power, funding, and structural capability to no longer need conservatives. Even more than that, they KNOW it, which is the important part, having discovered this as a result of watching their own not go down in a ball of fire for their advocacy. There was a time when companies and to some degree celebrities feared entering the political arena because they didn’t want to invalidate vast swaths of the country. If you were running a business, you didn’t want to risk losing conservatives as customers, or as Michael Jordan is thought to have said, “Republicans buy sneakers too.” Those days are now over, as evidenced by virtually every company from Nike to AirBNB, from Google to Uber going ridiculously far left and not only not being penalized; but rewarded for it. Make absolutely no mistake: Every one of these companies has done a cost-benefit analysis and determined that it was worth the move to jump into progressive advocacy.
How did this happen?
First, the left is far more organized than the right is when it comes to boycotts. It is incredibly rare, despite the occasional Nike burning or Keurig smashing, for the right to sustain a boycott for any length of time. Moreover, the right doesn’t LIKE to boycott. Sean Hannity discouraged people from boycotting Keurig, and most conservatives see it as a “free market” issue, which they are largely in favor of, even if it works against them consistently. Contrast that with the left, which not only boycotts but revels in it; treating it as the battleground for their very own Battle of Thermopylae. Leftists disseminate massive spreadsheets with every single conservative host, and a list of every advertiser, which they pressure daily. Any company that does not sufficiently supplicate to the left finds themselves brigaded by the thousands with calls, tweets, and protests. Every so often, the leftists gain a scalp in the process, which only serves to fuel their near-psychotic pursuit. For the side that is supposedly anti-war, they are waging it daily in an incredibly effective manner, supported by both Big Tech and the media.
Secondly, there is an entire infrastructure built to support leftist policies and advocacy. In addition to being essentially a social club in which excommunication results in lost jobs, the left has found a way to institutionalize advocacy. They give one another awards nearly every day, promote and fund even competing interests, and possess nearly unlimited funding, which results in a sort of circular feeding effect. In hypocrisy that would make Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez jealous, they criticize rich Republicans, while acting utterly oblivious to their own Tom Steyer and George Soros type characters. Another of the more interesting advocacy techniques is how left-leaning journalists promote other journalists from COMPETING companies. When Maggie Haberman writes a New York Times article slamming Trump, every media personality from every channel supports the article. Try to imagine Microsoft promoting the new Apple MacBook, and you have the equivalent because opposing Trump has become more important than beating competitors, which has to be a first in the annals of American business.
Third and finally, you have the complete and utter domination of culture via entertainment. Not only are they able to sustain multiple concurrent shows with identical frameworks across numerous channels, but they can get entire propaganda pieces greenlit for mainstream television. Nowhere is this more blatantly obvious in the 15 or so nearly identical late night/comedian shows all over every network, that share almost identical structures and joke formats. Everyone from Seth Meyers to Jimmy Kimmel, to Samantha Bee and the 20 other clones all retain enough audience to justify their existence, except for Michelle Wolff, who was sufficiently terrible to get canned from a network desperate to compete in this new anti-Trump, pro-socialism space. They manage to get shows approved whose entire point is advancing left-wing propaganda and viewpoints while shutting out any vestige of conservative thought from mainstream culture. In addition, another key point is that even if a show is produced with a left wing bias and produces poor ratings, to them, it is completely worth taking the hit to advance their propaganda and fight Trump.
In other words, having said all of this, conservatives should be worried, because the left now wields sufficient power to exclude conservatives completely, and not care about the repercussions in the least. In the same way that Trump showed us just how abhorrent the left has become, so too did he show them that they can live without us. As long as the right is willing to sit back and not organize effective boycotts, instead relying on the free market, the left will continue to dominate the culture and business for the foreseeable future.
If you enjoyed this article on Americana Prime, please share it and follow me on social media:
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeVPGyFM27xjnbFnC0q7\_UQ?
Get my book, Forging the Iron Mind: [https://amzn.to/2uxRvCs]
You may have noticed during the recent funeral for John McCain the outpouring of support from all quarters. Virtually everyone came together lamenting the loss of an American icon. With few exceptions, for once, nearly the entire country was united in saying goodbye to John McCain. Even the ultra hard left, the group that celebrated the death of Antonin Scalia with a fervor usually reserved for the return of pumpkin spice lattes, seemed actually to be sentimental over the loss of McCain. The weekend of his funeral, many hard left activists shared videos and pictures of the McCain moments that they said illustrated “decency, civility, and values,” such as his interactions with voters soothing their fears over what kind of president Barack Obama would be, and how great of a guy he was during the 2008 Presidential Campaign. Interestingly, it was during the 2008 campaign that the left relentlessly savaged McCain as being a neocon warmonger, war criminal, and too old to run. He was held responsible for all of Bush’s failings and given no quarter in a vicious campaign. It was in these reflections that I realized why the far left is so tolerant toward establishment conservatives:
The left loves conservatives that gracefully lose to them, and these conservatives love the platforms that the left allows them to have.
Flashback to the 2008 and 2012 campaigns for a moment, and reflect on the sheer number of attack vectors both McCain and Romney had on Barack Obama. Let’s look back for a moment and see how many attacks they could have used, and didn’t, or only minimally:
1. Jeremiah Wright (the g-ddamn America guy)
2. Bill Ayers (Terrorist)
3. Frank Davis (Communist)
4. George Soros (Open Borders)
5. Multiple Socialist Associations
6. Louis Farrakhan
I do realize a few of those did come up, but only tangentially from outside PACs or someone like Sean Hannity. McCain himself made none of them a serious issue for any length of time, and instead tried to make the election about experience and policy. Now, try to imagine for a moment what would have happened had Donald Trump run that 2008 campaign. There is zero chance he would have let any of that slide, and in fact, would have made them all significant issues. To this day, many believe McCain could have beaten Obama had he been willing to use the full playbook, but instead he elected to take the “high road” and lose. As progressives lovingly reflect on McCain, realize that it’s only because he was precisely the type of conservative they love:
One they can defeat in a national election.
The left adores conservatives that “stand on principle” and don’t use the full suite of tools to win. There’s actually a name for this, one I wrote about in my book:
The Scrub is a concept I first heard about from Street Fighter World Champion David Sirlin in his book Play to Win, that he mostly applied to competitive gaming. In summary, the Scrub is a player that has invented a fictional set of arbitrary rules that the game doesn’t recognize. In other words, someone takes a game with a defined set of rules, and imposes their mental constructs over top of the existing game, creating a ruleset in their mind that doesn’t actually exist, thus hindering their ability to win. They impose these artificial rules on themselves, then wonder why they lose to opponents that have no such limitations. The left has had no compunction whatsoever to colluding with the media and foreign governments, playing identity politics, weaponizing courts and higher education, and now they want to tell us how terrible Trump’s tactics are, and how conservatives need to go back to playing McCain/Romney style politics. In other words, the left plays to win, and up until Trump, Republicans never reciprocated.
Establishment Conservatives are Scrubs of the political variety, and the left knows it and loves them for it. They love a “conservative” that will go on television and decry President Trump for being too mean in a tweet, or doing something that they deem “unpresidential.” Understand that when a left-winger tells you that they want to bring back civility and decency, what they really mean is that they don’t want to deal with Republicans that play hardball that is willing to use every tool to win. Donald Trump scares them because they know he plays to win, that he will use any and all methods to defeat them, unlike conservatives of previous years. The cold truth of the matter is that Trump knows how to win, as evidenced not only by the general election but by the manner in which he destroyed 16 of the establishment’s finest in the primary.
Also, the left knows that there is a benefit to having controlled opposition; you want the other side to feel heard, even if they can’t actually beat you or stop anything you want to do. Make no mistake; the left doesn’t mind having a few self-identified “conservatives” around, as long as it’s the Bill Kristol, Jennifer Rubin, or Jonah Goldberg variety. They want nothing more than to have an opposition that will sit around in think tanks quoting William F. Buckley or Friedrich Hayek all day rather than waging war on them with every tool imaginable. This is why virtually every “conservative” on CNN or MSNBC is of this variety; they want to project a sense of unity between the parties on opposition to Trump, even though the conservatives they use in no way represent the vast majority of Republicans any longer. There is a reason that left-wingers are desperate to deplatform Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson, and Sean Hannity, yet have no problem with George Will, Bill Kristol, or Jonah Goldberg. They know what I know: that the latter group’s brand of “principled” conservatism cannot possibly beat them in a national election. Regardless of what one thinks of Alex Jones, watching progressives and conservatives pop champagne corks over his deplatforming should tell you that they viewed his threat level as extremely high.
If you are a conservative, and your platform isn’t being threatened, then that says a lot about what progressives think of you. If they aren’t trying to shut you down, then that only means one thing: they don’t consider you a threat. Either you are too small to bother with such as myself, or they know you aren’t tilting the scales back to the right. If you are the type of conservative that loves to stand on principle then lament how you lost and didn't actually conserve anything, congratulations, you too can be in the good graces of the left. Enjoy your time there, I'm sure you'll get along fine as their glorified pet.
If you enjoyed this article on Americana Prime, please share it and follow me on social media:
YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeVPGyFM27xjnbFnC0q7\_UQ?
Get my book, Forging the Iron Mind: [https://amzn.to/2uxRvCs]
Empathy and benevolence are getting this country into a lot of trouble.
How can that be possible? How can benevolence, or being well-meaning and kind, be detrimental in any way? What about empathy? The ability to put oneself in another’s place to feel their pain? Shouldn’t we all strive to help our fellow man or woman in any way that we possibly can?
No, we should not.
Let me explain.
I started to notice a few things about the progressive left some time ago. Every position they take on every issue seems predicated on unlimited benevolence or altruism. The progressive women, in particular, seem completely and utterly driven to obliterate the word no from their vocabulary as it relates to giving things away.
Unlimited immigration? YES.
Healthcare for all? YES.
Free College? YES.
Spend unlimited money on climate change? YES.
Let your children change genders? YES.
Universal Basic Income? YES.
Redistribute money from the rich? YES.
Send men into the women’s bathrooms? YES.
Watching the progressive platform evolve into some unlimited charity case, I then came to a realization sometime later:
Someone has to be the bad guy.
Let me be clear: I want to help as many people as we can, within reason. We should all be more empathetic and benevolent to one another. However, the line has to be drawn somewhere. If we allow these far left ideologues to get their way, it will ultimately destroy the country. The country cannot sustain a welfare state and play philanthropist for the entire planet while having unlimited immigration, to say nothing of undermining fundamental American rights. It is almost as if they are children that are playing fantastical games that the adults have to break up once in a while. The left believes they can create a socialist utopia, just like Star Trek, if only those evil Republicans would go along. It struck me that this meant that for Republicans to be the adults in the room, they were going to have to be the bad guys. Sometimes I feel like I’m pacifying a daycare full of children when talking to a leftist, or preventing a child from eating 10 pounds of candy.
“No, you can’t just allow the entirety of the planet come here.”
“No, you can’t take all my money and give it to someone else.”
“No, you can’t take my guns.”
“No, you can’t ship all our jobs and money overseas.”
“No, you can’t take away my free speech.”
And so on and so forth, right down the line, with every single issue. We saw it this week in the gun control argument in the wake of the Parkland Springs massacre. The left spent the week screaming into the face of every Republican that supports the Second Amendment that they are child killers. As Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch were shouted down in the CNN town hall, I thought to myself that the left really would strike down the second amendment in a heartbeat if they could. For the Republicans to preserve an American right, they are going to have to be the bad guys in this argument. In other words, the left has created an “Empathy Trap” for which most Republicans have no answer. Liberals understand that feelings beat facts, and can switch you out of your logic frame by getting you to feel empathy. They will cry in your face and call you a murderer and expect you to cave. Ann Coulter called out the left for using victims in the wake of Parkland, saying “you can’t send out weeping victims to make your argument.”
Yes, you can. That’s the entire point.
The left has made empathy their primary weapon. Because they are advocating for empathetic positions, they feel they are in the right and we are evil. However, they lose all moral authority when they resort to censorship and violence to make their points. Empathy and benevolence are attributes we should all want. Especially in what was built to be a Christian nation, the desire to help as many as possible has led Americans to spend billions overseas on aid and allowed Western Society to have the most progressive values on human rights anywhere in the world. To preserve American values in the face of the progressive assault, the left has been able to twist every issue into an empathy game, that very few Republicans can handle. For all of the ridicule Donald Trump got during the campaign that likened him to a five-year-old, he has been the adult in the room as it relates to policy. He was one of the first Republicans who was willing to beat the Empathy Trapand be the bad guy on specific issues, and not back down. The central appeal of Donald Trump to a lot of people was his complete unwillingness to back down in the face of a withering assault by the left. If he thought he was right on an issue, he never backed down, and yet somehow most Republicans still lack that ability even after Trump showed them how it was done. Take health care: Even the threat of repealing Obamacare caused the left to pile sick and disabled people in the office and town halls of every dissenting congressional member.
Sometimes, to preserve everything you’ve built, you have no choice but to be the bad guy. You don’t just invite every vagrant into your home. You don’t drain your family’s bank account to pay for some kid you don’t know to go to college. Progressives understand these things on a personal level, but somehow find it deplorable to apply the same standards to the country. They then bring a pathological level of altruism that says anything goes in regards to the country, that they would never apply to their own family. C. Daniel Batson proposed the Empathy-Altruism Theory. It states that if someone feels empathy towards another person, they will help them, regardless of what they can gain from it. He missed one thing in his assertion: they do obtain something from it. When they perform an act of altruism, or even perceived altruism such as virtue signaling proclamations on Twitter, the reward circuitry in the brain fires, thus they get addicted to the dopamine hit that thinking of oneself as a righteous person brings, becoming actual altruism addicts. The age of social media has magnified this effect tenfold. Keep in mind, social media is addictive in and of itself and becomes doubly so when you have an audience praising you for your altruism every day.
Meanwhile, the rest of us look at the civilization our forefathers built for us and just sigh. The principles that created the entirety of Western civilization, and especially America are under assault, at every level. Every single right we have is being undermined by the progressive left, all in the name of empathy and benevolence. In my article The God of the Left, I wrote that their altruism will get us all killed, and it seems they are determined to make it happen.
Time to be the bad guy again.
“The definition of strong leadership is not about making decisions that are popular. Making popular decisions is easy, you don’t need to be a leader to do that. The definition of strong leadership is to make decisions that are unpopular, but are nevertheless sound.”
If you enjoyed this article on Americana Prime, please follow me on social media:
Subscribe to my YouTube Channel: Link
Watch me on Periscope as well!
“Therefore the clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy's will to be imposed on him.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
“Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.”
― Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals
One of the big differences between the old guard of the Republican Party and the new breed of Trumpism conservatives, is the difference in tactics they are willing to use. Trump supporters such as myself have been watching the country gravitate left for some time, and have watched as “principled conservatives” ceded ground to the hard left over and over. We watched as the left used every dirty trick in the book to get any prominent conservative commentator fired. They attack advertisers of conservative commentators like Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson, much like the mass of pitchfork and torch wielding townspeople attacked Frankenstein’s monster. They demand, at the slightest hint of controversy, the firing every commentator or activist that opposes them. We watched as they stacked the courts with activist judges, clearly distorting rule of law in the pursuit of their progressive agenda, such as we see in the multitude of cases in the 9th circuit.
I remember when conservatives made fun of Barack Obama for being a “community organizer”. The idea that a community organizer was even a thing was laughable. Even now, after he was President for 8 years, stacked the courts, and moved this country ever closer to socialism, I still hear the occasional republican laugh at how we elected a community organizer to the Presidency. Even as they flood town halls and official’s offices with protestors, destroy advertising bases of their opposition, and organize to dominate local elections, Republicans scoff at the community organizer. Barack Obama got a lot done on the ground as a community organizer, and what he did is nothing compared to what modern progressives do. In the social media era, progressives are able to amplify MILLIONS at a time to pressure advertisers, elected officials, and companies in general. Not only that, they will actively dox Trump supporters, in an effort to get them fired. I’ve seen this mob rule play out on social media many times over.
The left for a very long time has been operating on a “no mercy” type of policy. They hold conservatives to the letter of the law, while conservatives tried to operate in good faith and let things slide on their side for decades. Even now, I find it astounding that republicans still don’t understand the scale of the fight they are in, and still cede ground that the left never would. This past week we had 3 examples:
1. Joy Reid’s homophobic comments.
2. Sam Seder’s Rape joke.
3. Jeff Flake donating to Doug Jones in Alabama.
The first two still have a job. That alone should tell you we are operating on an entirely different level. Can anyone say with a straight face that Sean Hannity would still have a job if he did either of those two things? The reality is, conservatives operate in good faith most of the time, unless something is really egregious, such as Kathy Griffin’s decapitation stunt. Here’s the reality: Joy Reid is one of the most effective progressive commentators in the world. I’ve watched her, and she is extremely tough. She is essentially the equivalent of Sean Hannity on the left. The right had an opportunity to destroy what amounts to a top general on the opposing side, and they let it slide. Not only did they let it slide, but a number of conservatives defended her. Same thing with Sam Seder. Sam isn’t as high profile as Joy Reid, but he was an easy out, and yet even people like Greg Gutfeld on Fox came to his aid, calling for him to be spared. Do you think for one minute that any Progressive would come to Hannity’s aid if he told a rape joke? Hannity even worked to defuse the advertiser boycott of Keurig that a leftist riot mob dropped on him. As you read this, there are leftists mass tweeting every single one of Hannity’s sponsors trying to shut him up.
Then we have perennial Trump hater Jeff Flake, who is donating to a democrat so he can virtue signal about how he puts the country ahead of party. You know what isn’t putting the country ahead? Electing a socialist that will vote against every value you have. Flake is one of the types that you typically find on the left, an altruism junkie who needs a hit of dopamine from virtue signaling every two minutes about how great of a person he is, and how his conservative principles are unshakable, yet he’s willing to put a pro-abortion, anti 1A and 2A liberal in a Senate seat. That’s some set of values Jeff Flake has there. Mitt Romney did the same, coming out against Roy Moore. Mitt was totally silent on every single Democrat with ADMITTED harassment, but allegations against Moore were enough to get him to riled up.
The Art of War: MAGA Edition says thus:
If they want to play dirty, then get right in the gutter with them. If they ever display acts of good faith, match them. Until then, anything is permissible.
That’s the difference between Trumpism and regular conservatism. We learn from the master. Trump doesn’t tolerate people trying to get over on him, and he puts them on blast immediately. Over the weekend two Fake News stories came out, one on Trump email and another on crowd size. Both were disproven, and Trump went full steam after them. These are mistakes that Bush or any regular conservative would have let slide. But not Trump. He knows that the media perpetuating these false narratives to millions of people undermine his agenda, so he goes after them with no mercy. Until the left is willing to operate under good faith, I’d advise republicans do the same. I would personally prefer to operate in good faith and not try to get people fired over jokes, or some interpretation of something they wrote 3 years ago, or an accidental mis-reporting. I would prefer we operate in a civil manner, and elevate the level of discourse. This is about one thing: holding the left to the same standard they hold us to, and so far, the left has not only been unwilling, but has doubled down.
If you enjoyed this article on Americana Prime, please follow me on Twitter and Instagram: @Americana_Prime, and subscribe to my YouTube channel! Watch me on Periscope as well!
I, like most everyone, watched General John Kelly’s riveting and emotionally charged appearance at the White House podium a few days ago. Speaking for myself, I found it to be an emotional plea to hold things sacred, especially as it relates to the heroes that give their life for this country. The dialogue this past week has been terrible, and our civility has been degraded to such a degree that I can barely comprehend it. And yet, somehow it continues to get worse. Just when you think that it can’t possibly get any worse, that we can’t become even more divided, we get this type of thing:
I would recommend reading this New Yorker article, as toxic as it is, just so you can understand the level of vitriol that’s held for this administration. The writer actually compared General Kelly’s speech to the Soviet Union under a Communist regime which is borderline insanity. She then proceeds to actually make the argument that dead American soldiers aren’t the best of us, they are just ordinary Americans, and we totally shouldn’t rank Americans based on whether or not they died for the country. The author, Masha Gessen, actually lived in Russia for 20 years, and is a journalist and far better educated on a myriad of topics than I. So who am I to attack her perspective? I’m just a miscellaneous guy who hasn’t done a fraction of what she’s done, nor am I a fraction of the writer. Well guess what, if she can attack a 4 Star Marine General, who also lost a son for this country, then I can go in on her. This isn’t her first go at the Trump administration. Back in July, she wrote a massive essay on comparing Trump to Hitler called The Reichstag Fire Next Time, which is just an advanced version of your average “Trump is Hitler” tweet. The entire premise of the article suggests that President Trump is going to false flag a terrorist attack to consolidate power, as it’s suspected the Nazis did in the Reichstag fire. At the very least if not false flagging a terrorist attack, then using one to increase his power.
Over the course of multiple articles she tries to tie Trump to Putin, Trump to Hitler, or Trump to any number of autocrats. The only tie I see is Gessen to Trump Derangement Syndrome. The entire basis of all of these attacks on the Trump administration is that he said Putin was a smart guy once. She, as a gay person who lived in Russia, rightfully hates Putin. To draw the connecting line between Putin and Trump because he said something fairly nice about him once requires some serious mental gymnastics, and a lot of confirmation bias. Gessen is a prime example of how no one is immune to confirmation bias, no matter how “smart” they are. The thing people never understood about Trump not criticizing Putin, was that Trump was trying to set the table for future deals by not trash talking a world leader on TV. I always found it hilarious how Obama or Clinton would go on TV and trash talk world leaders then expect them to deal in good faith on something. That’s not how it works. If I am coming to your place of business to make a deal with you, and you see me on TV trashing you before, how likely are you going to be to make a deal with me?
Now back to John Kelly and the “military coup”. In the wake of his speech, which was clearly from the heart and trying to restore some civility, we got gems like this:
And this winner from when he became Chief of Staff:
John Kelly was right. Nothing is sacred anymore. The left is in full warfare mode, with no quarter given. You served the country and even lost a son? Well you’re still a fascist collaborator. Despite the fact that not one “fascistic” policy has been enacted, it doesn’t matter. General John Kelly is pretty close to being of unimpeachable character, and yet he’s attacked as though he’s robbing a bank. This is a man who is literally doing a job he doesn’t even need, and could easily have retired at any point. After losing his son, it would have been easy for him to retreat into solitude, and become disaffected and separated from the world. Instead, he doubled down. He threw himself into his DHS job, and took on what might be the most difficult job ever, Chief of Staff for Donald Trump. Instead of retreating and falling prey to despair, he leveled up, not only for himself, but for the country. For his heroic and inspirational actions, he is now the recipient of the vitriol usually reserved for one man: his boss.
Now, this modern day American icon has the privilege of being called a fascist and collaborator by people who haven’t given a fraction of what he has to this country. Unlike what Gessen says, there are different rankings for American citizens. John Kelly and the soldiers who gave their lives for us have done and given more to this country than me, and likely most people reading this. We have equality in this country, which means no one should be better or get any special treatment, but we are only able to have equality because of those who came before. Whether it be John Kelly and other military heroes, or Martin Luther King Jr. and civil rights icons, there are those that merit special treatment, because they earned it. They built this country into what we have today, and this attempt to minimize their exceptional individuality is exactly the tactic the left loves.
Think of this: how often do you see the left lionize individuals? It’s really not often. They sort of do it with Barack Obama, but that’s about it. It’s not often that the left holds up an individual as an example. Even Martin Luther King Jr. is derided by some on the left as having been too soft. In my God of the Left article, I stated that in the absence of God, their god becomes altruism and the earth. The same applies to individual heroes. The common good is all that matters, and lionizing individuals undermines their “everyone is the same” mantra. They don’t want to acknowledge that some people are better than others, or that some gave more than others. Equality of outcome while being considered a good person is all that matters.
So to the left who have been undermining John Kelly all week I say this:
General John Kelly is better than you. The service members that died for our country are better than you. The civil rights icons are better than you.
And everyone knows it.
If you enjoyed this article, please follow me on Twitter and Instagram, and subscribe to my YouTube channel! Watch me on Periscope as well!
Left Wing Violence
I live in a rural area. Previously when I went to work I would drive through my little rural town on the way to a bigger city. During the election, as I drove through my little town I saw Trump signs everywhere. People had them on their small businesses, in their yards, on their houses, basically everywhere. As I neared my place of business, I started to notice a dearth of Trump signs. In addition, it was very rare to see a Trump sticker on a car, just once in a blue moon. I also never, ever see a Make America Great Again red hat outside my little town. One might think that it’s because there are fewer Trump supporters in a bigger city, and I’m sure there’s some truth to that. There’s another reason though, that I figured out very early in the campaign, and remains true now:
Displaying any support for Trump is guaranteeing violence and vandalism.
It wasn’t long into his candidacy that the reports started rolling in. Vandalism, assault, and intimidation were starting to become regular occurrences. The only reason I knew this is because of the community online, because the mainstream media certainly weren’t covering it, except Fox once in awhile. I learned very quickly not to reveal that I harbored even the slightest hint that I wanted Trump to win, except around the closest conservative friends and family. I actually had to vet people and ask some leading questions to find out if I could actually bring up anything election related, and it usually didn’t pan out, and it still doesn’t. The left has become so oppressive that you are basically asking for trouble if you show any support for the President.
People often wonder why we don’t care about polls. The reason is that besides the fact that they considerably oversample Democrats, is that we don’t tell anyone we don’t know that we are Trump supporters. The modern polling system is overwhelming biased toward Democrats. Feel free to test this assertion, look up the modeling of polls these days. Most use at least a +12 Democrat sample, while under sampling Independents and Republicans. This is exactly why I wasn’t surprised that he won. We all knew the polls were fake, and the so-called “Hidden Trump Voter” was absolutely a real thing, because none of us talked about it for fear of violence.
The modern left, for all their high talk of “tolerance” and everyone getting along, has become extremely violent. Seeing the old man get dragged out of his car and beaten down, or the mentally ill kid being tortured, or the women getting pepper sprayed, put us in a position to not reveal that we support the President. More than violence, the left has become deranged to a point where they will literally fake hate crimes. I started hearing about this several moths ago, and just assumed it was a one off, that no one could be this deranged on a large scale. I was more wrong than I thought possible. Virtually every single hate crime you’ve seen since the election, covered breathlessly and blamed on Trump supporters, is a product of radical left wing violence. Don’t believe me? Think I’m a conspiracy theorist? Have a look at this:
Read the dozens of “hate crimes” and you see how deranged the left has gotten. Listen, I’m sure there are some real ones, and I certainly believe we should stamp them out, but we are dealing with a level of mass delusion that borders on psychosis at a level not seen before. We are seeing incidents of assaults and fake hate crimes virtually daily now. Recently we’ve seen stabbings, the Steve Scalise shooting, as well as Jeremy Christian murdering two people.
Ah Jeremy Christian. This was the white man that insulted two Muslim women, talking about “This is America” and “Get out of our country” who then murdered two people that tried to intervene. The rhetoric, before and after the murder, clearly intended to link Trump supporters with violence and hate. We found out later, though his Facebook account, that not only was he a Bernie Sanders supporter, just like James Hodgkinson, the shooter of Steve Scalise, but that he was running what’s called a “psy-op” or a psychological operation.
Don’t know what a psy-op is? Here’s the definition: military actions designed to influence the perceptions and attitudes of individuals, groups, and governments. In essence, Jeremy Christian was insane enough in his ideology to actually murder two people, and try to frame Trump supporters and right wingers. The psy-op started with him going to a Trump rally doing Nazi salutes, which resulted in Trump supporters kicking him out. He took every opportunity to get on camera and spew hate filled rhetoric. Also, despite him clearly referencing what he was doing and his Sanders supporting Facebook chat logs, the media articles have spun his actions as “murky”. They say “We really don’t know what his motivations were, he was mentally ill”, or “He’s a known White Supremacist”. What we are experiencing is mass delusion of the highest order. The media, democrats, and Clinton campaign have convinced their side that we are experiencing the second coming of Hitler, thus providing the moral imperative to do what’s necessary to stop him. You see, when you have someone convinced that “literally Hitler” is rising to power, you give the moral authority to stop him. Rachel Maddow, Bernie Sanders, Chris Matthews, Chris Hayes, Bill Maher, and others have referenced fascism and Hitler so many times now I’ve lost count.
In addition, Bernie Sanders, with whom a lot of these far left people affiliate, literally calls what he’s doing a “revolution”. Revolution is a term that is clear demagoguery, which is usually attributed to Trump. However, notice the difference in language. Sanders uses “revolution” as a descriptor, and Trump uses “movement” as his. Which of those terms is more likely to provoke violence? You see, when you are having a setback, as Sanders did, in your revolution, you have to double down and fight harder. Violence and a sort of guerrilla warfare become your tools. Christian and Hodgkinson both are Sanders supporters, lured in by his “revolution”, and when they didn’t get it, you see the result. For some, it’s not just enough to be violent, you have to frame the other side as well. I have yet to see Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton disavow any of the attacks their supporters perpetrate, yet Donald Trump has disavowed any done in his name.
Take this mosque attack recently. No one was injured in a bombing of a mosque. This is why some have been so slow to call this a hate crime. After seeing the huge numbers of fake psy-op hate crimes, we are reluctant to believe this one is real. There’s literally been swatstikas painted on mosques over the last few months, faked by members of the left and then caught. How deranged do you have to be to vandalize your own places to frame Trump supporters? My contention is this: Why would Trump supporters do any of this? We have zero motive, because we got what we wanted. Trump is in office. We got the Supreme Court. Anything we do is going to be blamed on him, so why would any of us do it? None of us want him to look bad, which is exactly the point of a psy-op.
During the Berkeley riots, a Trump supporter was smashed in the head with a bike lock, cracking his head wide open. It turns out, the perpetrator was a BERKELEY PROFESSOR, Eric Clanton. That’s right, progressive delusion is so deep, that even professors now are engaging in this sort of activity. In addition, the only reason we found out, was the internet community that essentially deconstructed photos and videos of the event and found him out. He’s going to trial tomorrow. He was affiliated with ANTIFA, or the “Anti Fascists”. ANTIFA is a group that regularly assaults peaceful people, and has become, in my mind, a domestic terrorist organization. They’ve learned to hide weapons, use explosives, and mask themselves to avoid capture.
Then we have the media and tech apparatus complicity. I’m going to show you how they manipulate public perception very easily. Here’s the sequence of events, repeated over and over:
1. Hate crime happens that clearly is meant to implicate Trump supporters.
2. Every news outlet runs article about it.
3. Gets 10,000+ tweets and retweets, spreading like fire.
4. A few days later, it’s found that it was a false flag, or a non Trump supporter.
5. Media may issue retraction, but retraction gets 50 retweets instead of the original’s 10,000+.
6. Google doesn’t show the retraction.
7. Left wing sites compile massive list of “hate crimes”.
8. Google is happy to show those lists.
9. Public perception is that Trump supporters are violent.
10. Rinse and repeat.
Trump supporters are routinely called fascists and Nazis. The only fascist behavior I see going on is on the left. They are quite literally willing to do anything, and one of the ANTIFA groups is actually called “By Any Means Necessary.” Fascism is an offshoot of Marxism, not any right wing ideas. To find the fascism, look to who is resorting to violence to get their ideology in place.
Look to see who believes in total state control, and enforcing it via violence.
There you will find the fascists, and it’s not on our side.
If you enjoyed reading this, please Like, share, tweet, and subscribe to my YouTube channel! Watch Americana Daily on Periscope!
We’ve heard the word “collusion” more times in the past few months than in probably our entire lives combined. The central idea pushed by Democrats is that Donald Trump and/or his campaign colluded with Russia to subvert our election. This is a topic that has overwhelmingly dominated media coverage since the election. Numerous media outlets have spent entire days at a time peddling this theory, with ZERO evidence. There is not one shred of evidence that Donald Trump “colluded” with Russia. I read an entire article accompanied with a massive infographic on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia in the Washington Post a month or two ago. The “connections” they attributed to Trump? The Miss Universe Pageant, and what they called “murky” relationships in business.
I want you to do a little experiment. Google the phrase “Donald Trump murky ties.” What you will find is article after article, page after page using exactly the same language. Now ask yourself, how does every single media outlet have an article using exactly the same language? Murky is not exactly a daily use type of word. Let’s take a look at the word murky. Here’s the dictionary definition:
“dark and gloomy, especially due to thick mist.”
“not fully explained or understood, especially with concealed dishonesty or immorality.”
“dark and dirty; not clear.”
This word is clearly meant to imply something dark and nefarious. In addition, it’s a word that is unique, not a word you hear every day so it sticks in your mind. It’s also extremely vague, allowing the reader to insert their own confirmation bias fueled attributes. If you already believe Donald Trump is a criminal of some sort, but you have no evidence for it, what would be a perfect word to use that clearly conveys dishonesty? Murky is really hard to beat for a vague, sort of nefarious sounding word. So how did virtually every single media outlet manage to come to the same EXACT same wording?
Let’s try this again. Google the phrase “Donald Trump chaos.” This one will bring even more hits. You can go back months and months, all the way through the campaign and find literally hundreds of articles, usually in the title of the article. Chaos is another vague word that conveys negative disorder.
Now for the last one, though we could keep going for some time, Google the phrase “Donald Trump dark.” Again, hundreds of articles. “Dark” is another vague word you hear in relation to Trump. What do all three of these words have in common? Murky, Chaos, and Dark. All negative. All vague. They also share one big quality: They allow the reader to insert their own visions into the word of what they already believe about Donald Trump, playing on the reader’s confirmation bias. Again, how does every media outlet come to the exact same word usage and conclusion within hours of each other, and sometimes simultaneously?
The Answer: The Real Collusion story is the Mainstream Media with the Democrats and the DNC.
During the election, thousands of pages of emails were released by Wikileaks. In these pages we found the real collusion scandal: The Media is completely owned by Democrats and the DNC. I’m actually surprised this wasn’t that big of a deal to more people. So what did they reveal?
1. Journalists outright vetting questions for Hillary through the campaign.
2. Debate questions being leaked to Hillary early, in some cases word for word.
3. Coordinated messaging using specific words, i.e. “Murky”
4. Journalists sending stories to the campaign before publishing.
5. The DNC actively suppressing negative stories.
6. The DNC colluding to assure Bernie Sanders was beaten by Hillary.
7. Dinners with dozens of “friendly” reporters.
8. Vetting questions for opposition. i.e. Asking the DNC what questions should be asked of Trump and Cruz.
For those that wonder why conservatives watch Fox, listen to talk radio, and generally hate the mainstream media, that is why. Every single talking point, on every single media outlet, is run by the Democrats. Those words like murky are not an accident. They are fed to the media by professional persuasion social psychologists such as Robert Cialdini and others. Cialdini is the author of multiple best selling books on persuasion technique and the foremost expert in the field, and has consulted with the DNC in the past. So make no mistake, even the words that are used are specifically engineered to be negative to Republicans and specifically, Donald Trump.
This is not something that is hard to find. Virtually every network, even Fox, uses pundits for analysis. If you watch the news at all, you can watch them, in real time, coordinate messages and even specific wording. If you watch Fox, there are several liberal pundits, Jessica Tarlov, Richard Fowler, Juan Williams, etc. They all use the same talking points, literally down to the word. It’s even more obvious on non-Fox channels. Watch CNN, and it’s comical how close all the pundits seem to be on messaging.
In addition, there’s an element of “presumptive negativity.” Even the way the question or topic is framed to any Republican assumes guilt or negativity, especially to Donald Trump. Any sense of editorial control or fairness is out the window for most outlets. This is why we see the Harvard statistic that CNN had 93% negative Trump coverage. Even Fox, which is derided as the conservative bubble channel, had 53% negative coverage. So in reality, the “conservative” channel was actually pretty close to fair. None of the others were below 80% negativity.
One thing I’ve come to realize over the last few years is that virtually everything the Democrats accuse the Republicans of, is probably something they do themselves. Look at the Russian/Trump collusion story. There are endless stories of legitimate, hard collusion between Hillary Clinton and foreign governments. Not murky, but definitive. Here’s a small sample:
1. 25 Million donation from Saudi Arabia.
2. Ukranian collusion for Trump opposition research.
3. The British “dossier” on Donald Trump.
4. Numerous foreign donations to Clinton Foundation while Hillary was Secretary of State.
5. Uranium One deal.
That is just for starters. In addition, if you want to know how significant the media bias is, google any of the above listed items, and see how many media outlets openly defend Clinton on all of them. They don’t argue whether it was done or not, but that it’s somehow not a problem. Yet Trump, with zero hard evidence, has been smeared as in collusion with Russia for months. The irony of it all, is that I don’t believe the media outlets even believes they are biased. I think liberalism is so ingrained from the top down in these companies, that they actually believe they are being fair.
There’s even a further element to it. I believe that the media thinks that progressive liberalism is the future. Fox is always positioned by liberals as the “channel for old people.” Suggesting that, even though Fox crushes them all in ratings, the old people are going to die soon, and the Fox viewership will decline. This is why the media became abusively biased right around the time President Obama was elected. There has always been a slight liberal lean, but it became patently obvious during the Obama years. I believe that the media executives felt they needed to play a long game, believing that the Fox viewership was just old people. They were willing to take a loss in ratings currently, to secure the viewers that they believed were the future.
What they didn’t count on, was Donald Trump and new media. Trump, and his supporters, used social media to effectively bypass the major media outlets. Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are where the new information war is waged. In addition, talk radio is massive. Rush, Levin, Crowder, and dozens of others can pull millions a week in listeners. No longer is the American public a slave to a propaganda media. A new war is being waged, and they aren’t in control of it. We have dozens of sources to get news and opinion, and the Fake News doesn’t have control any longer. CNN ratings are being beaten by reruns of cartoons on Nickelodeon, and online streaming shows get millions of views.
There’s also a contest of sorts to see who can be the most virulently anti-Trump channel to court the progressives that hate Trump no matter what. Anderson Cooper, Stephen Colbert, Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher, John Oliver and others are competing with one another to see who can be the King of Trump Hate. Whoever can perform the most mental gymnastics to tie Trump to virtually anything regardless of evidence will be the winner. This also serves to inundate social media and search results with hundreds of negative Trump articles. Google has been shown to manipulate search results as well. So if you Google virtually anything about Trump, it’s relentlessly negative. You often have to go pages deep into Google to find the truth of a matter.
Fortunately, despite the pervasiveness of the progressive assault and their complicity with virtually every media and tech outlet, there are plenty of ways for us to bypass them, and they can’t stand it. This is why the Trump base love his tweets so much. No media spin, just straight from his brain to your screen. We are seeing a level of transparency that’s unprecedented, and the media is in panic mode.
We hold the cards now, and they can’t stand that their propaganda campaign isn’t working.
Thanks for reading. If you enjoyed this article, please share, tweet, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram.
Steve Jobs was one of the greatest sales people of all time. His persuasion technique and ability to get people to buy into his ideas was so good, it had a name: The Reality Distortion Field. He was a man capable of convincing people they just saw the second coming of Christ, in a technology product. He was capable of making impossible deals happen, on the strength of his persuasion and will alone. As a salesperson myself in a previous life, I know some of these techniques well.
There’s another aspect to it. The Bubble. In Steve’s case, it applied to Apple. He wanted you inside that Apple Bubble. He wanted you invested in their ecosystem, services, and products. So much so that not only were you happy in the Apple Bubble, but you couldn’t imagine being out of it, and would evangelize to others about how awesome the Bubble was.
What we have now, is a Liberal Distortion Field and Bubble.
In today’s modern world we have all the technology available to make our lives easier. Not only that, but we can customize most of this technology to suit our personal interests. It is possible for me to customize all of my technology to only ever see what I like. I am perfectly able to go through the news app on my iPhone and add Fox News, Breitbart or any conservative source I like. Conversely, I can add MSNBC, CNN, and Vox if I want liberal information all day. On my television, I can only watch the news shows that reinforce my own beliefs, if I am so inclined.
So, there is most definitely a conservative, and a liberal Bubble.
There is one massive difference though: You start in the Liberal Bubble.
Let me explain. The education system is overwhelmingly Progressive liberal. Especially in Higher Education, progressive professors outnumber conservatives 10 to 1. In the 60s, liberals knew if they really wanted to propagate their ideology, they had to indoctrinate the kids. So, it became a major focus to dominate the education arena, and they pursued this dominance with a relentless fervor. They got liberal, tenured professors and took over school boards. They got into teaching fields, and took over Teacher’s unions. They altered curriculums and changed what was taught.
This is why liberals want Common Core so badly. They have to control education and what’s fed into the brains of kids. They do not want independent, strong, beautiful, free thinking individuals. They want indoctrination. They have largely succeeded. Civics, Bible class, Shop, Home Economics, Penmanship, and to a large degree Physical Education have all but been eliminated. American History has been altered to focus on our sins, not our triumphs and the millions of lives we’ve saved. Colleges now have Gender Studies degrees, and an overwhelming amount of hyper-Progressive professors. Graduate Degrees keep students in school even longer, to further solidify the ideology. Now they are even trying to normalize that little kids as young as 4 can pick their gender, and actively promote Transgenderism.
Then there’s Hollywood and the Music industry. Celebrities are overwhelmingly Liberal. Why? Because they don't have to worry about the economy, jobs, corruption, or national security any longer. That leaves them with social issues and climate change. Katy Perry has over 100 Million followers on Twitter, Lady Gaga another 70 Million, and children idolize celebrity.
So what you have now is your child going to grade school, then off to college, all the while listening to Katy Perry and her ilk cry about Climate Change. How do you think it turns out? I dare you to try to find a conservative, especially female, under the age of 24.
Then there’s another element: Technology. I already established you can create your own Bubble via technology. There is however, one massive difference in the Conservative vs. Liberal Bubble:
The Liberal Bubble is the default position.
Check your Google, Apple, and Microsoft news feeds. Overwhelmingly liberal sources. Twitter, FaceBook, and YouTube routinely censor conservative voices. CNN is on in every airport and gym in the country. The MASSIVE difference with the conservative bubble is that you have to GO OUT OF YOUR WAY to get into it.
Accordingly, is it any wonder that millennials are overwhelmingly Progressive? If conservatives truly want to keep winning, then this has to be addressed. In an upcoming post, I’ll identify some ways Conservatives can crack the liberal bubble. To a large degree, I’m not sure conservatives understand how significant this issue is. They know education is liberal and so are celebrities, but don’t understand the scope of the problem or how to combat it.
I’m here to deliver a message to Conservatives and the right:
There was a Culture War. And you lost, in devastating fashion. However, I believe we are in a new Culture War. Conservatives, powered by the new right, have finally won a lot of elections, and have a lot of people in power. There’s a new national pride and populism sweeping from the wings of Donald Trump. The left is more rabid than ever, so if conservatives want to keep winning, then they have to go on offense and attack the liberal bubble.
Thanks for reading. If you enjoyed this article, please share, tweet, and follow me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram.
My mind atrophies. I used be a voracious reader, but I have allowed modern culture to usurp my desire for new knowledge. Twitter, Facebook, mass media, and games have eroded my desire for new and challenging ideas. I have succumbed, mentally in some part, to the modern world. So now, I feel incumbent to challenge myself further than ever before. To that end, I have decided to read, challenge, and apply the ideas to myself. I could not decide where to start, so I grabbed a gift from an old friend, long since gone, dusty, and unread.
The Anti-Christ by Friedrich Nietzsche
I’ve never explored the depths of philosophy. Nietzsche is a legend of course, one who is referenced often. I don’t feel remotely even capable of offering up a thorough analysis of one of the most searing indictments of Christianity ever written. As I read, immediately one thing became crystal clear:
Every single case he lays out against Old Christianity, in the most devastating of fashion, can be explicitly applied to the Modern Progressive. As this realization came upon me, the fury of his words took on new meaning. I’ve believed, for some time, that modern progressivism is a cult. I believe they have replaced the Christian God, which they hold in contempt, with their own religion. A religion based around fanatical levels of devotion usually reserved for inquisitions. Once this premise is understood, the acts they perpetrate, the violence, riots, assaults, and public shaming, come into focus.
The modern Progressive views themselves as evolved. They view the rest, as not only barbaric, but evil. Nietzsche states: “The process of evolution does not necessarily mean elevation, enhancement, or strengthening.” He lays out the case that just because we evolve, does not inherently mean we get better.
The next aphorism was particularly chilling: “I call an animal, a species, an individual corrupt, when it loses its instincts, when it chooses, when it prefers, what is injurious to it…whenever the will to power fails there is disaster.” Here we see, laid bare, the modern progressive. Virtually every policy they advocate for, is against the individual’s self interest, and even injurious to the individual. Whether the topic be immigration, national security, economic, trade deals, they are perfectly willing to sacrifice the individual for what they view as the common good.
The next aphorism deconstructs another of the modern progressive ideologies: Pity is virtuous. As we see, the modern progressive loves nothing more than to “virtue-signal” about how pious and righteous they are. “Pity stands in opposition to all the tonic passions that augment the energy the feeling of aliveness: it is the depressant…suffering is made contagious by pity.” Through this we see the victim culture and constant virtue signaling. The need to feel pious. To show that they are better than you, more evolved.
The next passage: “They regard “beautiful feelings” as arguments…conviction the criterion of truth.” This perfectly encapsulates our current safe space culture, and groupthink mentality: feelings trump everything. “When a man feels he has divine mission…it is only natural that he should stand beyond all standards of judgment…He feels he is sanctified by his mission, that he is of a higher order.” This also explains the relentless fervor by which the modern progressive, such as ANTIFA, is perfectly willing to do whatever is necessary, even violence, as we saw in the shooting of Steve Scalise, and the assaults on Trump supporters. When one feels they are serving a higher order, anything is justified.
His writings even deconstruct them physically “Whenever the will to power declines, there is an accompanying decline physiologically….of course they do not call themselves ‘weak’ but ‘Good’. “It persuades that it is possible to carry a perfect soul in a cadaver of a body.” Or even better: “Everything that is well-constituted, proud, gallant, and above all, beautiful, gives offense to it’s ears and eyes.” This of course, lends itself to the modern “self love” and “body positive” movements. They are degraded physically, but stand on the fact that they are good and virtuous in a feeble attempt to convince themselves of worthiness.
“The instinctive hatred of reality: The consequence of an extreme susceptibility to pain and irritation…so great that it senses all resistance, as unbearable anguish…regards joy as only possible when it is no longer necessary to offer resistance to anyone, or anything.” This aphorism is so condemning of the current safe space, offense based culture. The desire to remove, by any means necessary, anything that could be considered injurious to it, any idea that challenges their ideology.
“Such a doctrine cannot contradict. It doesn't know that other doctrines exist, or can exist, and is wholly incapable of imagining anything opposed to it.” Or even better, “Doubt is thus a sin from the start.” This is why conservatives always try to call out double standards, and it never works. They don’t imagine that any other doctrine or idea is even worthy of existence. You are evil incarnate, and they are good, thus your ideas and critiques don't matter.
“Morality is the best of all devices to lead mankind by the nose!…They assume the grand air of men struggling for virtue” This explains why the Progressives always go to play the race, or xenophobia card. They believe they have the moral high ground, and thus expect to lead you around by the nose at the invocation that you lack morality.
“What was a lie in the father, becomes conviction in the son.” And here we see one of many insights into why the modern progressive wants, so desperately, to control education. Above all else, they cannot allow “evil” to propagate in our schools. And by evil, I mean any independent thought, devoid of their weakness. They do not want educated, strong, beautiful, free thinkers.
In closing, I cannot do justice to the fury that Nietzsche brings. I cannot even begin to throughly analyze and deconstruct his genius. He is a reminder to keep an open mind, as he was staunchly opposed to nationalism as well. I believe the modern right are not hard line nationalists. They want to see results for the American people and keep our sovereignty, but are open to new ideas to make things better. However, what I can do is steal his final line, and appropriate it.
“With this I come to a conclusion and pronounce my judgment. I condemn Progressivism. I bring against the Progressive church the most terrible of all accusations that an accuser has ever had in his mouth. It is, to me, the greatest of all imaginable corruptions. The Progressive Church has left nothing untouched by it’s depravity. It has turned every value into worthlessness, and every truth into a lie.”