Tuesday, May 4, 2021

New Evidence to be Submitted Regarding Election Fraud in Antrim Michigan

A quick article about the ongoing investigations in Antrim County Michigan. By Believe it!


Attorney Matthew DePerno and his team have discovered and proven that Dominion machines can be programmed to give out false results from scanned ballots. It's as simple as switching out chips sets and instituting an SQL code to make the tabulation program match the printed tape. Chips could then be replaced to allow the machines to count normally.

The Board of Canvassers would have simply compared the tape to the tabulation program's result, and boom, "certification".

This information will be entered into evidence in a court of law. So the fraud-protecting democrats have no basis to claim that this is false information from partisan individuals. They will submit this to the court under penalty of perjury.

The video in the following link shows what are clearly Trump votes being tabulated for Biden, even as the senatorial race stays unchanged.



https://rumble.com/vgi031-antrim-county-plaintiffs-to-introduce-new-evidence-on-voting-systems.html

This should open up new audits into other Michigan counties, as they also used Dominion.

It SHOULD, but will it?

Believe it!

Trump gets around social media ban with new site that can be shared on Facebook, Twitter

 

Article by Steven Nelson on The New York Post

 

Trump gets around social media ban with new site that can be shared on Facebook, Twitter

Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday debuted a new webpage that allows him to circumvent the Facebook and Twitter bans on his accounts.

The site, donaldjtrump.com/desk, launched with a video declaring itself a “beacon of freedom” and “a place to speak freely and safely” four months after Twitter purged the 45th president and Facebook suspended him indefinitely. 

At least for now, both Facebook and Twitter allow links to the site.

The launch comes as Facebook and Instagram prepare to announce a decision Wednesday on whether to allow Trump to return to the platforms.

The promotional video for the new Trump page associates Democrats with social media censorship and includes audio of President Biden’s White House adviser Susan Rice saying last year that Trump and his Senate allies belong “to the trash heap of history.”

Trump was permanently booted from his preferred social media platform, Twitter, and also was locked out by Facebook and Instagram after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. The new Trump site contains some of his recent statements that were distributed in email blasts.

At the time he was de-platformed, Trump had more than 88 million Twitter followers and used the service as his go-to forum to break news or announce positions on policy and staffing. He has more than 35 million Facebook followers and more than 24 million Instagram followers.

Trump, who prided himself on being the “Ernest Hemingway of 140 characters,” was replaced by a commander in chief who does not tweet on his own, and therefore draws few eyeballs to the social network.

The new Trump site has a sign-up list for people to enter their phone numbers and email addresses to receive alerts when Trump posts a new message.

The site does not currently allow users to post comments or otherwise interact with the content, except for to share it on other platforms. It also does not appear to use advertisers, though it has a link to donate to Trump’s Save America PAC.

It’s unclear if the new Trump website will be a permanent or temporary workaround to reach his supporters.

Trump says he is considering running for president again in 2024, creating a dilemma for social media companies who already faced allegations of political bias in the 2020 election when they censored The Post’s reporting on documents from a Hunter Biden laptop that appeared to link Joe Biden to his son’s business dealings in China and Ukraine.

Twitter claimed it permanently banned Trump “due to the risk of further incitement of violence” after the Capitol riot. House Democrats impeached Trump for a second time for allegedly inciting the storming of the Capitol, but he was acquitted in the Senate when only seven Republicans voted to find him guilty.

As president, Trump unsuccessfully tried to force Congress to repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which grants social media companies immunity for most third-party content. 

Trump allies in Congress are still pushing for legal reforms. Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) last week introduced a bill that seeks to stop censorship by companies like Facebook and Twitter by declaring the platforms “common carriers,” a term also used for companies like railroads that must transport goods without discrimination.

https://nypost.com/2021/05/04/trump-debuts-new-page-to-replace-his-deleted-twitter-account/ 



Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage


A Racist Harassment Claim Against Police, Then the Body-Cam Footage Got Released



Being a police officer is never an easy job, and that’s especially true when you consider the kind of daily abuse they take.

A prime example of that happened in Los Angeles recently, and it also shows just how important body cams are. An African-American woman launched into a racist attack against a LA Sheriff’s deputy. Afterward, she filed a complaint claiming she had been harassed.

Then the body-cam footage got released.

And, this woman has “a history of making false claims.”

As the video shows, the woman was completely on the wrong, attacking the Hispanic officer in a vicious manner.

Later it was also revealed this woman is a professor in the area, having worked at several different schools. She also has a history of filing false complaints. Her name is currently being withheld, but it’s just a matter of time before it comes out. The way she throws around the word “murderer” and implies that the deputy is attempting to hurt her and her son is reminiscent of the white woman in Central Park last year who called police in hysterics, claiming that a black man was attempting to attack her.

Thankfully, this officer had invested in his own body cam as LASD doesn’t provide them universally yet. This situation could have gone completely sideways without the proof the woman was in the wrong.

Would you want to be an officer in this environment? I know I wouldn’t want to be. This should remind everyone that while police aren’t perfect, they do a tough job and deserve our thanks.


The Democrat Party’s Stasi

The Biden Justice Department is 
the shield and the sword”
—the motto of East Germany’s Stasi—
for the Democratic Party, 
protecting its own corrupt ranks 
while terrorizing any and all detractors.



While reading emails in his bedroom last Wednesday morning, Paul Hueper heard a loud commotion inside his house. Still clad in pajamas, the Alaska business owner ran to his dining room to see what was happening.

Hueper found himself face-to-face with several armed FBI agents, guns drawn, barking orders to him and his wife, Marilyn. The agents had kicked down the front door of their home in Homer, Alaska where they also operate a day spa and inn.

The pair were quickly handcuffed along with a few houseguests, including a teenager. Paul and Marilyn, who had attended Donald Trump’s speech in Washington, D.C. on January 6 and then walked to the Capitol, were interrogated for at least three hours by federal investigators.

“They said they had a search warrant but didn’t present it to us . . . they said it had something to do with the January 6 riot . . . as they called it,” Hueper told a local radio station after the April 28 raid. “They put us in different rooms to make sure we were telling the same story. They treated us like criminals.”

Marilyn was told she was a suspect in the case of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s “stolen” laptop; a few hours into the inquisition, an agent finally showed Marilyn a photo of someone inside the Capitol on January 6 who looked like her. She told agents it wasn’t her and insisted the image had been photoshopped.

The whole incident was somewhat amusing to the Huepers. “We laughed a lot of the time because it was so ridiculous,” Marilyn said. “I could hear Paul laughing in the other room.”

But it was far from a laughing matter. One investigator warned Marilyn that if she didn’t give the answers they were looking for, she could face perjury and obstruction of justice charges. Although it was clear neither Hueper had the “stolen” laptop or were inside the building on January 6, the FBI ransacked their home then confiscated computers and cell phones. (The FBI also took the Huepers’ copy of the Declaration of Independence; considering one judge recently cited a January 6 defendant’s text about the “spirit of 1776” as evidence of wrongdoing, perhaps the government will present the founding document in court to show the Huepers are a danger to society.)

Paul Hueper, without an attorney present, allowed agents to retrieve photos from his cell phone. (Please do not try this at home, folks.) “I’ve got nothing to hide,” he said.

Unfortunately for the Huepers, the presumption of innocence, due process, and equal treatment under the law do not apply to Americans on the political Right, particularly supporters of Donald Trump. The story was described as a case of mistaken identity—but the FBI knew exactly what it was doing.

There was no mistake.

It’s very likely investigators are scouring the Huepers’ devices for proof they trespassed near the Capitol—several protesters who never entered the building nonetheless face charges for remaining in a restricted area outside the building—and prosecutors are working up similar charges to file against the Huepers in addition to the feds’ favorite “obstruction of an official proceeding” charge, a felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

And since the Huepers spoke publicly about what happened to them, retribution by the government is undoubtedly imminent.

Joe Biden’s Justice Department now operates as the unapologetic enforcer of the Democratic Party’s will, a modern-day Stasi unleashing a campaign of terror against the ruling party’s perceived enemies. Americans who dare to deny the legitimacy of the U.S. president—an activity considered political haute couture from 2016 until 2021—aren’t just dismissed as misguided conspiracy theorists but rounded up across the country to face criminal trials conducted not by a jury of their peers but by Democratic Party-ruled tribunals located in Washington, D.C..

It only took the U.S. Justice Department four short years between ambushing a top Trump national security advisor in the White House to ambushing small-town Alaska spa owners and Iraq War veterans inside their own homes. At least way back in 2017, Democratic Party henchmen disguised as federal prosecutors tried to conceal the targeting of a decorated Army lieutenant general who was on Barack Obama’s hit list.

Now, Biden’s Justice Department flaunts its plans in a public display of “shock and awe” as one top prosecutor boasted, empowered no less—and once again—by the craven political leadership of the Republican Party.

In a near-unanimous vote on April 20, the U.S. Senate confirmed Lisa Monaco as Biden’s deputy attorney general. (Only two Republicans, Senators Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, voted no.) The golden stamp of approval was a green light for Monaco—an Obama confidante, key Russian collusion hoax perpetrator, and former chief of staff to ex-FBI Director Robert Mueller—to accelerate the agency’s manhunt for Trump allies, both the powerful and the unknown.

Monaco reportedly authorized the search of Rudy Giuliani’s home. (The raids against the Huepers and Giuliani occurred on the same day last week.) The Justice Department previously refused to execute such an unprecedented warrant against one of the president’s closest advisors and lead impeachment attorney. After Merrick Garland was installed as attorney general, thanks to the help of 20 Republican senators and despite public promises he would run a politically neutral Justice Department, Garland lifted the official objection.

Garland and Monaco, with full cooperation by FBI Director Christopher Wray, a man Trump should have fired several times over, have pledged to make the investigation into January 6 the department’s top priority. Roughly 400 people have been arrested so far; dozens have been transported to a Washington, D.C. jail and languish in solitary confinement without being convicted of a single crime. Trials are repeatedly delayed as prosecutors and judges conceal evidence from defense lawyers.

Biden’s Justice Department promises to arrest at least 100 more Americans before the “shock and awe” phase of the campaign is done.

The FBI’s Twitter account frequently posts photos of its “most wanted” list. It is not full of serial murderers or child pornographers or suspected international terrorists, but average Americans who traveled to the nation’s capital on January 6 to support their president. Last Friday, the world’s most powerful law enforcement agency posted a photo of a woman clad in Trump gear committing no obvious crime and asked people to help identify her. (The tweet went viral and was justifiably ratioed into hell.) She looked about as menacing as the typical suburban Target shopper.

But the message was clear: if you were in or near the Capitol on January 6—even if you did not break the law—the FBI can and will ruin you in a single tweet.

With zero pushback from Republican leaders, Biden’s Justice Department continues to build its arsenal against the Right. The FBI is looking for new ways to circumvent laws prohibiting the agency from directly spying on American citizens. (Biden’s top intelligence chiefs already have violated their statutory boundaries but perhaps the White House wants to make the crusade look more official lest it agitate long-dormant civil libertarians or, God forbid, any lawmakers.)

The FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are planning to collaborate with private providers to surveil so-called “domestic violent extremists,” code for Trump supporters. “By partnering with research firms who have more visibility in this space, the DHS could produce information that would likely be beneficial to both it and the FBI, which can’t monitor U.S. citizens in this way without first getting a warrant or having the pretext of an ongoing investigation,” CNN reported on Monday. “The CIA and [National Security Agency] are also limited on collecting intelligence domestically. The [DHS] is coordinating with the National Security Council and FBI as part of the effort.”

Meanwhile, Hunter Biden’s criminality is rewarded with book deals and university speaking gigs; Antifa rioters in Portland are let off the hook and violent demonstrators who ransacked Washington, D.C. during Trump’s 2017 inauguration are getting hefty cash settlements and clean records.

The Biden Justice Department is “the shield and the sword”—the motto of East Germany’s Stasi—for the Democratic Party, protecting its own corrupt ranks while terrorizing any and all detractors. Unfortunately, there are no liberators in sight.


We’re Not the Crazy Ones


Article by Rob Jenkins in The American Thinker


We’re Not the Crazy Ones

Long gone are the days when “politics as usual” meant Democrats and Republicans quibbling over policy preferences. Today’s divide is more existential than political, between two sides -- left versus right, progressives versus conservatives, statists versus classical liberals, however you want to phrase it -- who see the world in fundamentally different terms, almost as if they live in two separate realities. 

Okay, never mind the “almost.” 

Since a good pocket definition of “insanity” is “out of touch with reality,” each side thus thinks the other is literally insane. You can see this play out daily on social media, as both sides shake their heads in stunned disbelief at the other’s inexplicable antics, which to them seem “crazy.” In this context, that’s not merely a pejorative.    

Given this state of affairs, how can conservatives be sure we’re not the crazy ones? How can we know our version of reality is correct, reflecting the world as it really is? 

That’s a legitimate question. We conservatives tend to be naturally reflective and introspective, recognizing a moral and intellectual obligation to be honest with ourselves and avoid self-delusion. Moreover, about half the country is now arrayed against us, including the corporate media, Hollywood, the sports world, legions of bureaucrats, and even many of our own (former) friends and family members. Under such constant bombardment from the left, it’s natural to occasionally question ourselves. Are they right? Are we insane?

The short answer is: No, we’re not. They are. 

Let’s start with the “postmodern” left’s repudiation, several decades ago, of the entire concept of absolute truth. That, of course, is illogical on its very face, because even if the only thing that’s true is that nothing is true, then there is still such a thing as truth. But apparently, they can’t see that. Nor are they self-aware enough to recognize the irony in insisting that their beliefs are true and ours are false when they refuse to accept the basic premise. It’s really quite rich to be accused of lying by people who don’t even believe in truth.  

The idea that reality is malleable goes back at least two centuries (and probably more). Yet for the left, it is a thing ever shiny and new, cropping up again and again in our public discourse, couched in the latest buzz-phrases. Consider, for example, the Smithsonian Institution’s recent declaration that objectivity, rationality, and “linear thinking” (i.e., logic) are tools of “white supremacy.”  

Basically, here’s how the argument between left and right has been going for most of my lifetime:  

Right: Your assertion is illogical and contra-factual. 

Left: No, it isn’t. 

Right: Yes, it is. (Supports position with facts and logic.) 

Left: Well, facts and logic are racist.  

Right: *Sigh*  

How do we even debate people like that? The answer is, we don’t. We have to defeat them politically.  

But I digress. Beyond the fact that they don’t believe in truth (so how can their arguments be true?), there are a number of other clear indicators that they are actually the crazy ones, the ones whose perception is divorced from reality. Recent examples include their science-denying insistence on wearing masks outdoors, masking the already vaccinated, masking young children, and mandating lockdowns in an attempt to mitigate a pandemic; calls to defund the police, which would be catastrophic if successful; and the Green New Deal (ditto).   

But the best and most definitive example is “transgenderism,” which I put in quotation marks because it’s not actually a thing. The word itself is meaningless. If by “gender,” we mean “sex,” and by “trans” we mean change, then by any rational standard this is incoherent nonsense. It is literally impossible for a human being to change their sex -- of which, contrary to the left’s reality-defying narrative, there are only two, male and female. No matter what drugs they take or how much self-mutilation they undergo, an individual will still have either an X and a Y chromosome or two Xs.  

Sure, that individual can live as whatever gender they wish, which for the most part isn’t particularly disruptive to society. What do I care if some guy wants to pretend to be a woman? That’s his business. (Unless maybe he plans to run for governor of our largest state -- but that’s another column.)  

But when the left asserts as “truth” obvious falsehoods, such as “a man can have a uterus” and “some women have penises,” and especially when they demand that the rest of us embrace those untruths by using “the appropriate (read: inaccurate) pronouns” -- well, now we have a problem. For those of us in the right -- excuse me, on the right -- belief in objective reality is central to our rational world view. Rejecting reality, we understand, is the road to societal madness. 

The bottom line is this: We conservatives may not be right about every single issue -- but the other side thinks men can have babies. Case closed.  

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/05/were_not_the_crazy_ones_.html 

 





Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage


Chinese Leader Xi Jinping Lays Out Plan to Control the Global Internet: Leaked Documents



Chinese leader Xi Jinping personally directed the communist regime to focus its efforts to control the global internet, displacing the influential role of the United States, according to internal government documents recently obtained by The Epoch Times.

In a January 2017 speech, Xi said the “power to control the internet” had become the “new focal point of [China’s] national strategic contest,” and singled out the United States as a “rival force” standing in the way of the regime’s ambitions.

The ultimate goal was for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to control all content on the global internet, so the regime could wield what Xi described as “discourse power” over communications and discussions on the world stage.

Xi articulated a vision of “using technology to rule the internet” to achieve total control over every part of the online ecosystem—over applications, content, quality, capital, and manpower.

His remarks were made at the fourth leadership meeting of the regime’s top internet regulator, the Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission, in Beijing on Jan. 4, 2017, and detailed in internal documents issued by the Liaoning Provincial Government in China’s southeast.

The statements confirm efforts made by Beijing in the past few years to promote its own authoritarian version of the internet as a model for the world.

In another speech given in April 2016, detailed in an internal document by the Anshan City Government in Liaoning Province, Xi confidently proclaimed that in the “struggle” to control the internet, the CCP has transformed from playing “passive defense” to playing both “attack and defense” at the same time.

Having successfully built the world’s most sprawling and sophisticated online censorship and surveillance apparatus, known as the Great Firewall, the CCP under Xi is turning outwards, championing a Chinese internet whose values run counter to the open model advocated by the West. Rather than prioritizing the free flow of information, the CCP’s system centers on giving the state the ability to censor, spy on, and control internet data.

Countering the US

The Chinese leader acknowledged the regime lagged behind its rival the United States—the dominant player in this field—in key areas such as technology, investments, and talent.

To realize its ambitions, Xi emphasized the need to “manage internet relations with the United States,” while “making preparations for fighting a hard war” with the country in this area.

American companies should be used by the regime to reach its goal, Xi said, without elaborating on how this would be done.

He also directed the regime to increase its cooperation with Europe, developing countries, and member states of Beijing’s “Belt and Road Initiative,” to form a “strategic counterbalance” against the United States.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive infrastructure investment project launched by Beijing to connect Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East through a network of rail, sea, and road linkages. The plan has been criticized by the United States and other Western countries as a conduit for Beijing to increase its political and commercial interests in member states while saddling developing countries with heavy debt burdens.

The BRI has also pushed countries to sign up to “digital silk road” projects—those involving information and communications technology infrastructure. At least 16 countries have signed memoranda of understanding with the regime to work in this area.

Three-pronged Strategy

Xi ordered the regime to focus on three “critical” areas in its pursuit of controlling the global internet.

First, Beijing needs to be able to “set the rules” governing the international system. Second, it should install CCP surrogates in important positions in global internet organizations. Third, the regime should gain control over the infrastructure that underlies the internet, such as root servers, Xi said.

Domain Name System (DNS) root servers are key to internet communications around the world. It directs users to websites they intend to visit. There are more than 1,300 root servers in the world, about 20 of which are located in China while the United States has about 10 times that, according to the website root-servers.org.

If the Chinese regime were to gain control over more root servers, they could then redirect traffic to wherever they want, Gary Miliefsky, cybersecurity expert and publisher of Cyber Defense Magazine, told The Epoch Times. For example, if a user wants to go to a news article about a topic deemed sensitive by Beijing, then the regime’s DNS server could route the user to a fake page saying the article is no longer online.

“The minute you control the root, you can spoof or fake anything,” he said. “You can control what people see, what people don’t see.”

In recent years, the regime has made headway in advancing Xi’s strategy.

In 2019, Chinese telecom giant Huawei first proposed the idea for an entirely new internet, called New IP (internet protocol), to replace the half-century-old infrastructure underpinning the web. New IP is touted to be faster, more efficient, flexible, and secure than the current internet, and will be built by the Chinese.

While New IP may indeed bring about an improved global network, Miliefsky said, “the price for that is freedom.”

“There’s going to be no free speech. And there’s going to be eavesdropping in real-time, all the time, on everyone,” he said. “Everyone who joins it is going to be eavesdropped by a single government.”

The proposal was made at a September 2019 meeting held at the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), a U.N. agency responsible for setting standards for computing and communications issues that is currently headed by Chinese national Zhao Houlin. New IP is set to be formally debated at the ITU World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly to be held in March 2022.

Miliefsky said the plan is unlikely to gain widespread support among countries, but may be adopted by like-minded authoritarian states such as North Korea, and later by countries that signed onto BRI and are struggling to repay its loans to China.

This would accelerate a bifurcation of the internet, what analysts such as former Google CEO Eric Schmidt have dubbed the “splinternet,” Miliefsky said. “The communist net and the rest of the world.”

The Epoch Times has reached out to Huawei for comment.

Importing Talent

According to the document, Xi ordered the CCP regime to set up “three ecosystems”—technology, industry, and policy—to develop core internet technologies.

Having skilled workers was key to this plan, with Xi directing that talent should be hired from around the globe. This would be done through Chinese companies, Xi prescribed.

He told Chinese firms to “proactively” invite foreign “high-end talents,” and to set up research centers overseas and hire leading ethnic Chinese and foreign specialists to work for them.

Meanwhile, Xi asked the regime to set up a professional training system in China, which can systematically develop a highly skilled workforce in the long run.

He also directed officials in each level of government to guide Chinese companies to develop their business plans to align with the regime’s strategic goals, and encourage capable enterprises to take the lead in developing innovations in core technologies.

Enterprises were to be educated in having “national awareness and safeguarding national interests,” Xi said. Only then should the regime support and encourage their expansion.

Because talent and critical technology are concentrated overseas, the Chinese leader also ordered authorities to support the development of a group of multinational internet companies that can have global influence.

Turning the Internet Red

Xi, in his 2016 speech, described all online content as falling into three categories: “red zone, black zone, and gray zone.”

“Red zone” content refers to discourse aligned with the CCP’s propaganda requirements, while “black zone” material falls foul of these rules. “Gray zone” content lies in the middle.

“We must consolidate and expand the red zone and expand its influence in society,” Xi said in a leaked speechin August 2013. “We must bravely enter into the black zone [and fight hard] to gradually get it to change its color. We must launch large-scale actions targeting the gray zone to accelerate its conversion to the red zone and prevent it from turning into the black zone.”

Inside China, the CCP has a stranglehold on online content and discussion through the Great Firewall, a massive internet censorship apparatus that blockades foreign websites and censors content deemed unacceptable to the party. It also hires a massive online troll army, dubbed the “50-cent army,” to manipulate online discussion. A recent report found that the CCP engages 2 million paid internet commentators and draws on a network of 20 million part-time volunteers to carry out online trolling.

Freedom House, in its 2020 annual internet freedom report, labeled China as the world’s worst abuser of online freedom for the sixth straight year. Chinese citizens have been arrested for using software to circumvent the Great Firewall and punished for posting comments online unfavorable to the Chinese regime. In a now-notorious incident during the early stages of the pandemic, whistleblower doctor Li Wenliang was reprimanded by police for “rumor-mongering” after warning colleagues in a social media chat group about a SARS-like virus in Wuhan City.

In the 2017 remarks, Xi told the regime to develop a larger group of “red” online influencers to shape users’ perceptions of the CCP. He also called for an expansion of the 50 cent army to operate both inside and outside of China’s internet.

Since the pandemic, the CCP has sharply escalated its efforts to influence online opinion overseas. Using large networks of troll accounts on Twitter and Facebook, the regime has been able to propagate and amplify propaganda and disinformation on topics such as the pandemic, racial tensions in the United States, and the regime’s oppression of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang.


Soviet Tyranny Warmed Over Is Still Tyranny

 

Article by E.M. Cadwaladr in The American Thinker


Soviet Tyranny Warmed Over Is Still Tyranny

A colleague recommended I read Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago, a long and deep look into the abyss of Soviet communist oppression in the first half of the 20th century.  In her opinion, "everyone should read this book."  I must agree — the world would probably be a better place if the book was required reading in universities, especially in the West.  It should also be taught in high schools, at least in excerpts.  Sadly, in the age of the tweet, Solzhenitsyn's 700-odd agonized pages are probably doomed to general neglect.  More's the pity.

Mark Twain said long ago: "The past does not repeat itself, but it rhymes."  The Gulag Archipelago, though intended by its author as a forlorn memoir to the hundreds he saw ground up by the Soviet state, is also the most powerful of warnings.  Communism is still with us.  Its central themes have never been extinguished.  Its salespeople are still out on the street.  The seductive lies of dead ideologues have never lost their power to persuade.  They have changed a little, adapted to new cultures, new eras, and new technologies — but in the end, the Devil's siren song still rhymes.

One hardly knows where to begin.  Let's start with the political usefulness of the common criminals — people Solzhenitsyn summarizes as "thieves."  In Soviet prisons and labor camps, the truly antisocial elements were made the jailers of the rest.  They could torture, rape, and sometimes kill their fellow prisoners with near impunity.  "Thieves" were officially designated as a victim group, a people wronged by capitalist oppression.  They were not to blame for their own actions.  They were, in the terminology of communism, "socially friendly elements."  The people whom the state didn't like, on the other hand, the people who had lingering ideas of individual rights and freedoms, or who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, were the peoples' enemies — the socially undesirable.

This exaltation of the criminal classes was not merely a feature of the penal system, but permeated the judicial system as well.  Sentences for property crimes and violent crimes tended to be light.  When ideology dictates that bad is good and good is bad, the results are predictable.  Crime, fear, and suffering flourish.

When we see the knee-jerk movement to "end mass incarceration," to "abolish the police," and then watch as the mob terrorizes and loots city after city — we can only assume that the current revolution is progressing nicely.  The left has begun to release the pent up power it has long been nurturing in our prisons, leavening it with a hefty dose of race-hatred to increase its ferocity and garnishing it with a dollop of class envy for the sake of old-time Marxist nostalgia.  You cannot say the Marxist narrative hasn't kept up with the times, but the core doctrine remains unaltered: thou shalt terrify and cow the populace with such sociopathic operatives as come to hand.  Nor is such doctrine in any way unique to Soviet communism.  Other socialists have played variations of this tune.  The Fascists had their black shirts and the Nazis had their brown shirts in the early stages of their development.  We now have BLM.  A thug is a thug is a thug.  His color is irrelevant.  By any other name, a fist is a fist, and a burning bottle of gasoline smells as sweet.

The Russians had their Chekists — their secret police in black leather coats.  We now have their embryonic equivalents — the jumped up little upper-class brats of Antifa, somewhere on the evolutionary spectrum between Maoist Red Guards and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.  No, they're not official government agents yet — but they are, in many cases, the children of the political class.  Imagine what they will do when they grow up and sign on with DHS and the FBI.  Just wait until they have badges, Glocks, and Gucci leather coats.  The only thing between these monsters and self-righteous murders are the normal police they are trying to abolish and the courts that are already afraid of them.

No, nothing is very new on the left end of the political spectrum.  Only the decorative details have changed for this new season.  Only the fixation on the black criminal element — as though they were the rightful representative of the black population as a whole.  Only the creation of new groups of victims popped out of newly invented gender identities like so many rabbits out of so many flamboyant little hats.  It is only the names of the nobly indignant victims that have changed — from proletarians and peasants to people of color and transsexuals.  It is only the names of their oppressors that have been revised — from capitalists, kulaks, and Christians to capitalists, conservatives, and Christians.  Such alliteration isn't rhyme — but it does come close.

Do I exaggerate?  True, we don't have any Gulags full of political undesirables in America at this time.  Perhaps we never will.  Perhaps technology has made such primitive methods quite unnecessary.  Maybe people will simply be cut off from their banks, their jobs, and all other connections to society and left to starve on the streets.  Maybe it will happen algorithmically, when one's social credit score falls a little too low.  Maybe we won't be starved in labor camps — but neatly deleted from existence by Google.  My point is not that there will inevitably be a Soviet-style penal system, but that we now have an abundance of people who want to establish some kind of system that will accomplish the same ends.  Those ends are the destruction of freedom, security, and ultimately people.

Although we do not have proper Gulags yet, we do have a few political prisoners in all but name. Remember Nakoula Basseley Nakoula — the filmmaker scapegoated for inciting the Benghazi attacks?  There was a person imprisoned for no better reason than to create an expedient narrative for Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration.  Remember Roger Stone?  An aging gadfly arrested by a large and heavily armed contingent of federal agents — while CNN filmed?  Do you imagine that the arrest and its coverage were intended for any other purpose than sending a message to potential allies of Donald Trump?  Was Stone a menace to public safety that required that much force?  I see that Rudy Giuliani is on the hook now.  We become accustomed to such political retributions at our peril.

Another interesting feature of the Soviet system was that the Gulags pretty quickly started eating their creators.  The Bolsheviks who ran the revolution were, for the most part, rounded up and consumed by it.  Ideologies that deny the value of individuals spare no one.  Here, too, we see the beginnings of a modern parallel.  Is it possible to be woke enough?  If the standard of unpardonable injustice is a single word written or spoken out of line at any point in one's past, then all will be consumed eventually.  An ideology that embraces denunciation as a sacred rite unleashes a mechanism of destruction with a life of its own.  Today's leftists have begun to cannibalize one another even before defeating all of us.

In short, the grandest and most chilling similarity between Solzhenitsyn's Soviet Union and today's America is this: the needs of the political narrative reign supreme.  Facts have been dethroned.  In our old republic, policies were usually the result of compromises.  They balanced, however imperfectly, the natural interests of a competing real persons.  In a totalitarian state, the collective populace is simply forced into the mold required by the needs of the ideology itself.  The idea justifies both means and ends.  What happens to the individual matters — and in fact is worth mentioning — only if it happens to advance the progress of the narrative.  Truth, as the postmodernists have openly told us, is what authorities say it is.  In such a world, you and I are nothing at all.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/05/soviet_tyranny_warmed_over_is_still_tyranny.html






Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage