Comment: I disagree. The label “fascist” is wrong but then, the label is really irrelevant. What is relevant is the process and this process can most accurately be described as a “communist revolution”. What we are witnessing these days meets three most important goals of a communist revolution:
- Dictatorial rule and totalitarian political system that take away from people their freedom and right to self-determination;
- Central, manual control over the economy;
- Removal of religion from public domain.
To these three goals, leaders of today’s revolution added removal of the sense of nationalism and destruction of national cultures. Why? Because this revolution aims at creating and controlling “One World”. In this comment, I will omit the parallel depopulation agenda.
Leo Trotsky, on his deathbed, expressed hope that the Fourth Communist International would win and finally establish control over the western world. I don’t know much about the Fourth Communist International but the Fifth Communist International is close to achieving this goal. We are not seeing a typical Bolshevik revolution, though. This we would recognize immediately. We are seeing a modified revolution, one that uses division, fear, self-preservation and survival instinct as its driving forces. It is taking place globally, “as we speak”. Terror may come later; we have to anticipate it and be prepared. It really does not matter what we call it or what it calls itself. “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is a duck”. In politics, intentions don’t count, results do.
Another difference is the source of soldiers and social groups that this revolution is trying to “enlist” and “liberate”. All revolutions need to liberate something or somebody. That is the very essence of revolutions. For this purpose, Bolsheviks used the working class, the proletariat. This is no longer possible for three reasons:
- Proletariat and its organizations have been decimated and destroyed as a result of outsourcing and offshoring of our real economies;
- Proletariat has long ago lost interest in communism, as evidenced by the “Solidarity” movement in Poland (1980s) and other similar movements around the world. Those who experienced communism in practice had become disillusioned. They cannot be used as a shield and force justifying and enabling the seizure of power by communist elites;
- Modern members of working class would make unreliable allies. They dream of climbing the social ladder and becoming petty bourgeois. As soon as they achieve the middle class status, they become enemies of the revolution. Communists cannot and will not trust them.
What we are seeing instead is a recruitment and mobilization of a surrogate, substitute proletariat. This “new proletariat” – the feminists, the LGBT+, and the visible minorities – are being led to the streets in order to deepen divisions and create conflicts. (Examples: the anarchists, the Yellow Vests, the Black Umbrellas, the Pride Parades, the Antifa, the BLM, and the list goes on.) All you have to do is convince them that they are being opressed and discriminated against by the leading groups in the society or by the “system”. Protests and riots are then easy to organize, especially when they are handsomly financed by wealthy sponsors. We are witnessing this revolution on new battlefields of culture, education, health, general turmoil and consciousness. Major weapons used by proponents of this strategy are lies, fake news, fear mongering, and confusion.
Unfortunately, the “new proletariat” does not realize how communist revolutions work. Once the “liberation” is achieved, groups awaiting liberation are no longer allowed or tolerated. This would introduce a cognitive dissonance to the revolution. Such groups and individuals will be quickly passed through a meat grinder. It is always the case. After every successful revolution, new political leaders always eliminate the real cadres that fought the battles and brought them to power.
The above “conspiracy theory” has been originally discovered and shared with us by Stanisław Michalkiewicz, a Polish politician, historian and author. You can see him talking about it in THIS VIDEO.
- A real conversation about family policy in Canada – it looks like Freeland and “the State” have introduced another goal of the communist revolution: the state’s take over of the upbringing of our children. In my lifetime, this was a Stalin’s idea. In 1930s, Hitlerjugend was formed along the same philosophy. All totalitarian governments show similar tendencies. On the other hand, didn’t we just consider responding to the shrinking real economy with 4-day or even 3-day work week? Wouldn’t it be better for the economy if men made enough money to support their fanilies and women had a choice – to work and make a “career” or to stay home and take care of the family? I know some young women who would gladly choose the second option. This, however, would interfere with another goal of the revolution – the destruction of a traditional family model as the “fundamental unit of society”. Families, just like religions, preserve traditional cultural values. This would limit the power and control of the leaders of the revolution. Point of view and my opinion, as always.
- Canada can look to European countries in addressing birth rate crisis, says think tank – “Our first step needs to be to stop pushing the myth that women always want to have fewer kids or to prevent pregnancy, /…/ We should find ways to address the things that stop women from having the children they want. /…/ Young Canadians need to hear messages of empowerment and competence in parenting rather than more warnings about the expense or difficulty of parenting.”