Another new book is out about the Culture War and the manipulation of the meaning of words, speech, language, infiltration of all the major institutions of our culture, and other tactics by the far-left past and present to undermine and subvert the nation’s culture and in the process achieve its political objective to overthrow the constitutional republic form of government in the USA and replace it with a socialist totalitarian government: “Who Was Karl Marx?: The Men, the Motives and the Menace Behind Today’s Rampaging American Left” by James Simpson
I just finished reading this book. It is a well researched , well written, easy to read book about the cast of characters in history (and those in the present generation too) who are orchestrating the great movement to undermine our culture and common sense in the USA in an effort to overthrow our constitutional republic and replace it eventually with a socialist/communist dictatorial central government far beyond and more controlling than what we are experiencing already, which at present is the worst I’ve seen it our nation in my life time.
I knew many of the names but not all of them. As you read this book you will see exactly who put forward that particular strategy being used in which circumstances to destroy our culture and country.
The end-goal of the people, past and present, profiled in this book is the complete destruction of America as we have known it. What we are seeing happening is not an accident. We are seeing the end-game of a plan of action that has taken generations to finalize. And permanently finalizing the plan as quickly as possible before too many people wake up and fight back is the Biden, Obama, and Harris agenda.
The book also provides strategies one can use to fight back against this rapidly metastasizing threat to our culture and everything we held dear about our country.
As they say, know thy enemy and his play book. And this book tells us who they were and who their modern disciples of today still are, and their plans, strategies, and modus operandi.
I highly recommend everyone reading this review to read this book. And after you have read it, recommend it to others too. I certainly will.
What we are experiencing has a name. It is derived from its communist, linguist, founder Antonio Gramsci— “Gramscian Gradualism” or “Gramscism”.
What has happened with the redefining of the “natural born Citizen” term in the U.S. Constitution is one prime example of what the linguist and communist Antonio Gramsci suggested in his “Prison Notebooks” writings as the way to undermine the western democracies and their constitutions, i.e., over time redefine the meaning of words and language to help achieve one’s political objective, enabled by long-term infiltration by far-left permanent influencers of the cultural institutions of a nation (and eventual hegemony over them) such as the academia, entertainment industry, churches, court systems, main-stream major media, and other major institutions of the targeted western democracy.
In the prime example of the term “natural born Citizen” the Gramscian Gradualists in both major political parties have abrogated a national security term in the presidential eligibility clause of Article II Section 1 Clause in our U.S. Constitution, and have redefined it (with the help of useful idiots in the Republican Party thinking only on their own political ambitions or political party ambitions) to mean anyone “born a Citizen” even if that Citizen is born with dual-Citizenship and allegiances to a foreign nation, as opposed to what the founders and framers intended, i.e., the “natural born Citizen” requirement was to be a “strong check” against foreign influence on those who would be allowed to serve as Commander-in-Chief of our military forces once the founding generation was gone. The founders and framers considered and rejected the requirement to be only “born a Citizen” to serve as a future President and Commander-in-Chief of our military and instead made the requirement to be a “natural born Citizen“. Read more about that here.
By allowing persons born with foreign influence on them from birth, and bringing said foreign influenced culture of theirs into the highest elected offices of our nation, the President and Commander-in-Chief of our military, we have seen what we get. See the cases of Barack Obama (born a British Subject) as President and CinC, and the Vice Presidency and the current the case of Kamala Harris (born a Citizen of Jamaica). Both did not and do not have allegiance solely and only to America because they also hold allegiance since birth to a foreign country. Both consider themselves to be citizens of the world, and not solely and only to the USA. Both would rather see America and its world power brought down and not built up.
We have been dealing with the far-left slow-roll gradualism strategy of Antonio Gramsci to bring down the western democracies including the USA for a long time. Key institutions have been infiltrated and controlled by the far-left organic intellectuals and permanent persuaders, as Gramsci called them, under the Marxist plan which Gramscian gradualists call “The Long March Through the Institutions.”
They’ve been at it for generations, encouraged by other radical leaders and writers such as Rudolph Dutschke and Saul Alinsky, for the last 100 years and are at the apex of their hegemony in the institutions and thus control virtually all of our national institutions. If Trump had not won the election they would have come forward and out of the woodwork and totally taken over under Clinton and moved the nation at a quicker pace to a Socialist one, which status to the Communists is a temporary state, and just one more step towards Communism, which end state they believe is a Utopian form of government. They must be stopped now. We need to learn more about the enemy within and their tactics, projects, and strategy. Know thy enemy! Read what Jeff Carlson summarized. I’ve read lengthy works about Gramsci and what Jeff Carlson summarized about Gramsci is excellent. See: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2020/10/13/gramsci-alinsky-the-left-by-jeff-carlson/
The article excerpted and linked to above by Jeff Carlson is spot-on about Gramsci and a good summary of Gramsci’s long-term political agenda to bring socialism and communism to the western democratic nations. Modern “Progressives” believe in and use his tactics and strategy all the time. And they know what they are “progressing” towards … Socialism … and then in the very long-term Communism.
Learn what Jeff Carlson is sharing in his article and spread it to your friends and associates and anyone and everyone who needs to learn that what we see is happening in our country, and the co-opting and destruction of our institutions and changing the meaning of words in our language, is not an accident. Gramsci was educated as a linguist. He advocated the manipulation of language to further political goals. What we are experiencing is the result of the Gramscian long-term plan all along. We are just the generation at the end point of his long-march strategy in which we see it coming to full fruition and a head.
What we are feeling and seeing now, that we know something is wrong in our country, we can all now understand that it has has a name “Gramscism”. It’s “progress” must be stopped before it is too late. Control of the the House and Senate must be taken away in 2022 from the Democratic Socialist Party lead by Pelosi and her ilk. President Donald Trump must be re-elected in 2024. They tried to cripple him in his first term at every step. Now he knows what he’s up against. He will be the only one with enough power, authority, and courage to take them on if he gets a second term. Give him the opportunity to save our constitutional republic. Take back the House and Senate in 2022. Re-elect Donald Trump 2024.
Norman Thomas stated that what we now see happening in plain sight, would first happen gradually, and in the end people would wonder how it happened: “The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” ~ Norman Thomas ~ Source: http://libertytree.ca/quotes/Norman.Thomas.Quote.FFB1
First We Had Obots (Obama Online Bots & Trolls). Then We Had CruzBots (Ted Cruz Supporters Tried It Too ), But Were Not As Good At It As the Far Left. Now We Have the Far Left Hbots (Harris Online Bots & Trolls). But They All Use the Same Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation and Gas Lighting to Change the Meaning of Language to Push Their Agenda — Especially to Change the Meaning of Words and Terms in Our U.S. Constitution.
Twenty-Five rules of Obot & Hbot online disinformation specialists — aka “Gas Lighting” and in more erudite propaganda-pushing marketing circles, more euphemistically known as “Perception Management”.
Source: Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist) by H. Michael Sweeney — http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues. 2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the ‘How dare you!’ gambit. 3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact. 4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues. 5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’ ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues. 6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning — simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint. 7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive. 8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources. 9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect. 10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source. 11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just isn’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues. 12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues. 13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic
which forbears any actual material fact. 14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10. 15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place. 16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue. 17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues. 18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’ 19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance. 20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed
with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications. 21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body which is in your pocket. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim. 22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively. 23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes. 24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health. 25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinformation players/teams by one or more of seven distinct posting traits: 1. Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input … ; 2. Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach … ; 3. Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions … ; 4. Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams … ; 5. Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ [and are quick to label anyone opposed to their view as a conspiracy nut and other put-down names] … ; 6. Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin — an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance … ; and 7. Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. Click here for the full review and discussion of these frequently used disinformation traits of the far left, and the new 8th one, commonly used by Obot [and now Hbot] operative quick response teams: http://www.whale.to/b/sweeney.html
# # # #
Also see “Gas Lighting“, another disinformation term to describe the orchestrated confusion of reality to confuse the target … which in Obama’s and the far left’s case is the American electorate … all enabled by a cowardly and complicit U.S. Congress and an enabling and complicit main stream media:
Of Neologisms, End-Around Runs and Gorillas: The Congressional Research Service 2016 Report (CRS Report) on Presidential Eligibility | by Joseph DeMaio | @ The Post & Email
” … The Deceptions Begin With The Title: The title of the January 11, 2016 CRS Report is “Qualifications for President and the ‘Natural Born’ Citizenship Eligibility Requirement.” To begin with, the terms “qualifications” and “eligibility” are not synonyms. One can be eminently “qualified” for a job, and yet still be “ineligible.” … “
Read the entire four chapter/part article [Part 1- “NOT WHAT THE FOUNDERS INTENDED”, Part 2 – “DANGEROUS NONSENSE”, Part 3 – “A FALSE IMPRESSION” , Part 4 (final)-“NONSENSE ELEVATED TO AN ART FORM” ] about the latest in the series of duplicitous, disinformation CRS Memos/Reports (2009-2016) about presidential eligibility put out by Atty Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress to aid the members of Congress deceptively answer constituent questions in their continuing efforts to continue the cover-up of their allowing abrogation of the presidential eligibility clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution, provide major media talking points to aid the deception, and to confuse the American Electorate.
This masterful new article in the series written by Joseph DeMaio about the CRS’s multi-paper, multi-year deceptions on the presidential eligibility clause is a must read. He clearly and factually exposes and debunks Maskell’s latest deceptive techniques, significant omissions, and flawed historical and legal arguments in the CRS Report (CRSR) which Maskell prepared at the behest of the political party controlled establishment leadership of the Congress to help enable politically attractive but constitutionally ineligible candidates to run for President and CINC (or VP) and, hopefully to the posers, to get away with it.
>Cruz and Rubio were Citizens at Birth of a Foreign Country (Ted of 2 Foreign Countries) – Both NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States
Get PDF Copy of Ted Cruz Foreign Citizenship Facts Petition Here — Get PDF Copy of Marco Rubio Foreign Citizenship Facts Petition Here – Neither is constitutionally eligible to serve as President and Commander in Chief or Vice President!
A Simple Euler Logic Diagram Shows Logical Relationship of “natural born Citizens” to Other Type “Citizens” of the United States. Only a “natural born Citizen” Can Constitutionally be the President and Commander in Chief or the Vice-President. Click on Image For More Information.