Prophecy Nov. 25 : The Divided Resistance
One thing that I have noticed is how unified the Nazi forces of reaction are as compared to how bitterly divided the forces of the resistance are, which has always been true. One lament you always here is that the bad forces triumph, while the good forces go down to defeat after defeat, and there are some pretty obvious reasons for that, in that the bad forces remain united. United we stand, divided we fall, which is why they always stand and you always fall, as you always have, and as you will once again, and again and again, until people learn.
Problem : A divided Nazi Resistance Movement
1. Lack of unity. While the right wing is able to put aside any differences and unite to push one item on the agenda after another, such a thing never happens on the side of the resistance, since as everyone is quite certain, their own ideas are the right ones and even when they see a good idea, they dump it into the dumpster to pursue some other damn thing, since apparently it is hard to break such old and well entrenched habits.
2. Lack of a populist agenda, coupled at times with an disdain for the populace. Even though people do not like the agenda of the resistance, the resistance continues to promote it, while being critical of the general population for various flaws they have which cause them to behave like that. 3. Dogmatic adherence to failed tactics, which have been discredited already by the historical process. Such dogmatism then leads to those endless feuds, while the house burns to the ground due to a lack of fire fighting, since so much time and energy is spent fighting over dogma, and even failed tactics must be pursued to the bitter end, into one failure after another, for reasons of a type of zealous faith. It would seem that for 'the left' or 'the resistance' such zealous adherence to dogmatic ideology has rushed in to fill the void that was once filled by a certain type of religious zealotry in the past, which such people would find insulting, since they disdain religion, but it would appear to me as an observer that the process is remarkably similar, just as the churches were killing each other over the doctrine of the Eucharist (was it literally the body and the blood, or was it merely a symbolic reminder - churches have split into about 40,000 different factions over such squabbles, and the process on the 'left' or the 'resistance' is similar, and thus they are about as effective in changing the world from evil to good as churches were, since a house divided against itself cannot stand, but will most certainly fall - here the advantage is with the Nazis, who do not have that problem, and never have, which is why they are consistently victorious, and always have been, thus destroying so much of the world and spreading so much misery while facing no real resistance, as we can see today).
4.Even when elements of a populist agenda are pushed to front, it is presented without being placed into any coherent over all frame work, and thus we find that a single issue is presented without context, and thus since there is no real hope of achieving this isolated goal, the program then becomes reduced to a sort of bitch or a rant, once again often combined with a disdain for the populace. Since there is no hope of ever achieving this one isolated goal, given that it is just one small part of a much bigger problem, no one is inspired for change by what seems like some to be a bitch or a rant, which then makes the bitchy even bitchier, increasing the disdain for the populace, which then keeps that process moving in an unvirtuous vicious circle.
5. A love of theory and doctrine more than a love of people and human life. Such a position is more than likely born of anger and frustration, which then congeals into a kind of arrogant contempt for the populace for having been snared and trapped, which then leads to an assumption of intellectual superiority, which then leads to a stubborn adherence to theory or dogma, on the grounds that the problem with the world lies in the lack of intellect of the defective populace.
6. A deeply disturbing lack of focus and a shot gun approach, as compared to the unified program of the Nazi reactionaries, and their ability to unite again and again and focus on pushing specific items on the agenda. This shot gun approach is caused by two factors that I can see - first the lack of an overall defining objective, as evidenced by both the constant back biting and infighting and the stubborn dogmatism, as well as the arrogant belief that the problem with the population is lack of intellect, which validates a shot gun approach, since if they were given some intelligence on one issue at a time, that should fix what is wrong with them.
7. An arrogant contempt for certain deeply held beliefs of others in the population, in particular the still wide spread belief in 'God' (while at the same time rejecting religion) which is characteristic of a majority of the population, and which is often mentioned with dismay and contemptuous disdain by 'the left' or 'the resistance' as being something terribly unfortunate, and just one more piece of evidence for the intellectual deficiencies of the population, which of course makes dogmatic tutoring even more important. These 'leftist' of 'resistors' are those who are the very ones who are presuming to inspire a mass movement, even though they share very little in common with the masses they propose to mobilize.
8. The history of 'the left' or 'the resistance' is a history of one failure and one defeat after another. When they fail again, as they always have, they then blame the population, or some set of circumstances, and never seem to be able to criticize themselves, since there always seems to be someone else to blame.
9. And I think that perhaps the biggest problem of all, which lies at the root of all the problems listed above, is the lack of adherence to a strong moral center, which would then provide both the unity and the focus required. Just as the right is unified by their immorality, the resistance must be unified by their adherence to common morality, and they are not, thus leading to lack of focus, adherence to dogma, lack of unity, and so many other problems listed above. As an example of what I mean, you can consider the fact that the love of money is the root of all evil. It is wrong, for example, for a small percentage of the population to control the majority of the wealth in the world's poorest nations, while surrounded by a sea of poverty and squallor. It is also wrong to use death squads and massacres to keep this great suffering sea of humanity from storming the vaults. Now the right is united around one central goal, and that is to protect the vaults, loving money therefore and hating humanity, as their agenda so clearly reveals. However, given how the left rejects even the most common and elementary moral principles, we find such things as 'progressive movements', a type of compromise with evil, we find the doctrine of protesting outside the Politburo to wring concessions, and other such failed strategies. We find endless bad analysis, which while true, have no context, and therefore sound more like bitching rants than anything else. One is left to search in vain for any defining central core to match the defining central core of the right wing, which is to protect the vaults and keep the rich safe and secure by crushing the poor. This lack of morality on the part of the resistance is the central defining problem, as I see it, and the results are plain to see.
SolutionNow there are two solutions that I am proposing. My first solution will be to simply marginalize the 'left' and do an end run around them and make my appeal directly to the populace. There is one distinct advantage that I have that would allow me to accomplish this unexpected feat, and that is that I can pluck that one string that never gets plucked, and thus resonate deeply on some level with people, given some time, thus shocking and surprising the left and the resistance. In particular I will be plucking that one 'God' string, and given its wide spread popularity, I anticipate certain results for having done so in the way I have done so, and will continue to do so in the future. As for those who are saying, 'Where is his God of deliverance' or 'No God will save him' and other such things, I will respond to this criticism in two ways. First, I will point out to you that you have this problem with missing what is right in front of your eyes and not hearing what is said right into your ears. The second point that I will make is that what we have here is what I will refer to as a 'window of opportunity', which will not remain open forever, but during whatever time it does remain open, I plan to pluck strings and play chords, since that is what one is called upon to do at such a time as this.
It is also worth noting briefly here that I also anticipate being able to do some real damage to the Religious Right, and split that movement down the middle, which is a very effective form of Nazi resistance, since the Religious Right forms the political base of the Nazis, from which they then do that task of theirs of spreading their ideology out into the general population. The Religious Right then can be seen as functioning as a force which storms the beaches of Normandy, and from this beach the further assaults on the continent can be launched. The Religious Right is the political manifestation of Nazism, since both of these ideologies rely on using utter TERROR to create a kind of Stockholm syndrome, whereby the victim of a terrorists begins to identify with and appease the terrorist, the end result being a kind of psychologically shell shocked zombie sheep who does the goose step down to the SportsPalast to do the big 'Seig Heil'. At the same time as the Religious Right uses an extreme form of superstitious terrorism to create this instrument of social control for powerful elites (the function of religion throughout the ages, when religion was a form of terrorism designed for just this purpose) the Religious Right is also able to falsely tap into that wide spread longing for God, using it for a twisted and devious purpose, but nevertheless they are tapping into something. Which is what makes me more than a match for them over the long haul. This is not to say that the Religious Right will not exist in some form, but rather they will have trouble appealing to the longing for God, and will have to hold onto those evil people, consumed by greed, who support the agenda of social control which the religious right represents, thus protecting their own privileges and any wealth or power or position they might have, and who also support such things as the attack on the Iraq for the purposes of pillaging the O-I-L of Iraq and thus saving themselves and their own privileges by destroying others to sustain their own faltering economy.
As well, I am a populist, therefore it is required that I be a populist, and touch the popular strings and play the popular notes by the articulating clearly the popular mood, and unfortunately this requires me to roast the traditional left and the 'resistance' since this feeling is quite common and thus populist as well, since most people, who do not respond even after all this years, will shake their heads in agreement with me as I roast the left, since that is also how they feel about things.
Now having said that, I would like to soften my remarks a little by saying just how much a debt of gratitude I owe to 'the left' and 'the resistance', motley horde that it is, for you people do good work, and even when you are loading shot guns and shooting all over the place, such invaluable information I have found to be indispensable, in particular when it is plucked out of the morass and placed into proper context. For that reason I will continue to listen to you, even if I do not follow you, but rather attempt to do an end run around you, because in spite of all your faults there is much good to be found here. So don't get me wrong...
A populist critique of certain types of 'leftism'The following critiques are by no means complete, since, as is the case with churches, 'leftism' or 'resistance' is composed of innumerable feuding factions, and so I intend to mention only a few that have come to my particular attention in recent days.
Anarcho-primitivismThis type of anarchism advocates a complete rejection of civilization, technology, and government, and a return to a type of primitivism in the ancient tribal structures that preceded the formation of the state, several thousand years ago.
There are two types of critique one can make of this movement. One is that back in the past, human life was short and brutal, so that we find, for example, during the Roman Empire, that the average life expectancy was about 25 years. On the other hand we can see that there is reason to critique technology, in that we find that after years of unnatural overcrowding and industrial methods used to raise chickens, with the overuse of antiobiotics and antivirals required to keep them alive in such packed conditions (this packing required if some bookkeeper is going to get the maximum return per chicken for every square foot of chicken house) we see the rise of a particular lethal form of bird flu, and with some mutations, the possibility exists for a global killer flu pandemic among human beings. Similarly hospitals have been breeding super bugs, and such super bugs have also been found in air samples outside of industrial hog barns and cattle facilities, having been bred using the same money driven methodologies. So there is a reason to be critical of the uses of technology, and the harm it causes, but the question remains whether or not the problem lies in technology itself or lies within the dog eat dog, so called 'freedom of the market' known as capitalism, which holds only private property to be sacred, which means that those with the money have all the power, with the results we see all over the world in so many different ways. The second critique of Anarcho-primitivism is that it is not and nor will it ever be a populist movement. It will always be marginal, and as is characteristic of such marginal movements, it can also become contemptuous and arrogant of the rest of the human race, while becoming dogmatic about its own ideology, once again displaying that curious sort of religiousity that seems to be a void that will be filled with something, even when people reject religion on intellectual grounds.
Violent AnarchismViolent anarchists believe in doing such things as burning down the House of Congress and so on, or perhaps smashing windows at Starbucks. Once again this is a marginal ideology not a populist ideology, and is typical for those on the margins, violent anarchists are contemptuous of other people, and do not seem to be able to do constructive self criticism, descending into dogmatism instead. Such violence is born of frustration, since this is not a populist ideology, leading to anger not just towards buildings but towards other people in general. This is based on a flawed understanding of the situation and their rage at other people for their weakness displayed when confronted by powerful forces, which leads them to angrily denounce others for pacifism while they commit acts of pointless violence, which then fuel the power of the state, while at the same time alienating the populace. Like all acts of terrorism, this behavior is the conduct of the powerless who are filled with anger at oppression, and lacking a good idea, and refusing at the same time to do nothing at all, resort to acts of terrorism, which as we have seen, are then ruthlessly exploited by the powerful and used as an excuse for even greater oppression.
The way to resist violent anarchy is to burn down the House of Congress in such a way as to have it stay burned to the ground. After all, if you light a torch with a match and burn down the House of Congress, after the Reichstag Fire, it will be rebuilt, and as history shows, will be rebuilt stronger and more powerful than ever before, as in the end all that happened was that some property was damaged. However, as I have suggested, being a populist, one should begin the construction of an alternative voting system, and campaign for PEOPLE POWER, rather than Politburo Power, this would in the end burn down the House of Congress in a way that would actually work over the long term. There would be no point in reforming the Politburo voting system, since you will still have the damn Politburo to deal with. You cannot have People Power and elitism at the same time, and this means that if people want people power they will need to adapt their structures to facilitate people power rather than elite power, as is the case now.
Vanguard LeftismAccording to classical Marxism, the state with wither away, in the end leaving us with the ultimate expression social equality, in that no more elites will exist. However before that, it would be required to establish a socialist beach head in the elite structures. With a little luck, no bad apples will be found in the barrel, and this elite will do what is right and look out for the interests of the populace, who once again transferred their power to an elite group, with confident trust and sure assurance that they would not once again get screwed over by Stalinism or something like that. This we can be sure will happen if, by magic, no bad apples appear in the elitist barrel.
Since the end product of this Marxism is supposed to be the abolition of elitism and the establishment of people power, one must wonder why we must go through the preliminary stages of socialist elitism, with all the dangers inherent in such an idea, as the endless failures of the previous century have so vividly demonstrated to the satisfaction of most people, who refuse to rally around this socialist concept, for that very reason. Once again we see some of that factional feuding stubborn adherence to dogma, with a lack of self criticism, while blaming someone else (typically Stalin, which is hardly an adequate response, since that exposes the flaw in the argument).
With that having been said, despite that one terrible flaw, which is responsibility for the complete failure of such socialist to resonate with the population, these people do some very good work, and have a great understanding of the general situation, and I will continue to place a very high value on their work, even while I attempt to do an end run around them with a truly populist agenda.
add a comment on this article
add a comment on this article