|
[SERVICE NOTICE: For the foreseeable future, I am going to publish one article per week, every Friday. There will still be a smattering of other quick posts, such as quotes, and links to interesting posts on other websites. But Friday will be the day for the real "thought pieces."]
In my post of 3/24/2025, I discussed Conquest’s Second Law of Politics, which states that any organization that is not explicitly right-wing, sooner or later becomes left-wing. Part of my analysis revolved around the question of high versus low culture, and the difficulty in maintaining the higher form, which is a bedrock of civilization. The entropic forces in society, always present, tend to drag us down to the level of low culture, which is one of the symptoms of Leftism. In the article below, first published on the original AWOL Civilization blog just after the 2008 presidential election, I examined this issue from a somewhat different perspective. * * * So it finally happened: a bonafide neo-Marxist has been elected President of the United States. He will have a sympathetic majority in both houses of Congress, along with a choir comprising the judiciary, the press, academia, the cultural “elite," and the most hardened enemies of America at home and abroad. This is not a macabre scene from a dystopian novel. It is our reality. In order to grasp the full significance of the catastrophe that has enveloped America—and indeed, Western civilization—we must cast our intellectual net far and wide, so that it encompasses the great thinkers of the past. They can guide and inspire us as we confront a phenomenon with which we, in America, have no experience. They can help us re-examine our approach to politics, the arts, education, and a host of other realms, a task that is part and parcel of salvaging and reinvigorating our culture. We can start by reconnecting with the thinkers of the ancient world. It is there, in the literary masterpieces of Athens and Rome and Jerusalem, that one finds clues to the riddles that present themselves to us. It is there that one sees how people prevailed in the face of upheavals that defy the imagination. In this spirit, I would like to present two ancient literary references that have been in the forefront of my mind in recent days. The first is from the Bible, the second is from the comic theater of Athens. In Genesis 25:29-33, a moving scene occurs between Esau and Jacob, the sons of Isaac. Esau sells his birthright to his brother Jacob for a bowl of pottage (a type of stew): “And Jacob cooked pottage, and Esau came from the field, and he was faint, and Esau said to Jacob, Give me to swallow, I pray thee, of that red pottage, for I am faint…And Jacob said, Sell me this day thy birthright. And Esau said, Behold, I am going to die, and what benefit is this birthright to me? And Jacob said, Swear to me this day, and he swore to him; and he sold his birthright…” The American people possess an impressive birthright: Living in a land of liberty, with all that is necessary to pursue their dreams. All the accoutrements are available: natural resources, a beautiful landscape, vast spaces, a noble history, brain power, and a deep tradition of opportunity. But we have sold our birthright for the slick visage of Barack Hussein Obama, our latter-day bowl of pottage. The moaning, self-proclaimed victims have thrown away their heritage. What good is it? they ask. “Behold, I am going to die," so just feed me and clothe me, and let me forget the rest. The second reference from the ancient world is The Frogs, a comedy by the great Athenian playwright Aristophanes (c. 450 – 388 BC). The play was written in 405 BC, as the Athenian empire stood on the brink of destruction. Dissension was rife in the city, and defeat at the hands of the Spartans was nigh (it occurred in 404). The plot is simple. Dionysus, patron of the drama, descends into Hades (the underworld) to find the greatest Greek playwright. The intent is to bring the champion back to the land of the living, to Athens, where he might be able to rescue the city’s decomposing culture. The selection process for best playwright boils down to a contest between Aeschylus and Euripides, in which each attempts to demonstrate that he is the greatest practitioner of the art of tragedy. Dionysus acts as moderator of the debate. Aeschylus (525 – 456 BC) represents the old world, with its fine manners, its gymnastics, its piety, and its honor. Euripides (484 – 406 BC), by contrast, is presented as the poet of decadence, sophistry, and philosophical relativism. Euripides accuses Aeschylus of using highfalutin language, of ignoring romantic love, and of being an elitist divorced from the taste and temperament of the people. Aeschylus, for his part, accuses Euripides of contributing in no small measure to the downfall of the city: “You have taught boasting and quibbling; the wrestling schools are deserted and the young fellows have submitted themselves to outrage, in order that they might learn to reel off idle chatter, and the sailors have dared to bandy words with their officers…Of what crimes is [Euripides] not the author? Has he not shown us procurers, women who get delivered in the temples, have traffic with their brothers, and say that life is not life? ‘Tis thanks to him that our city if full of scribes and buffoons, veritable apes, whose grimaces are incessantly deceiving the people…” Then there is the following exchange between Dionysus and Euripides, almost creepy in its applicability to our current predicament: DIONYSUS: And you, Euripides, prove yourself [fit] to sprinkle incense on the brazier. EURIPIDES: Thanks, but I sacrifice to other gods. DIONYSUS: To private gods of your own, which you have made after your own image? EURIPIDES: Why, certainly! DIONYSUS: Well then, invoke your gods. EURIPIDES: Oh! Ether, on which I feed, oh! Thou Volubility of Speech, oh! Craftiness, oh! Subtle Scent! Enable me to crush the arguments of my opponents. We learn that Aeschylus used only heroes and god-like figures in his plays, whereas Euripides invented every sort of vulgar character imaginable. Euripides explains that his intent was to “please the people." Moreover, he says, “I introduced our private life upon the stage, our common habits…I did not burst out into big noisy words to prevent their comprehension; nor did I terrify the audience by showing them Cycni and Memnons on chariots harnessed with steeds and jingling bells. Look at his disciples and look at mine. His are…all a-bristle with long beards, spears and trumpets, and grinning with sardonic and ferocious laughter, while my disciples are [the effeminate and loquacious] Clitophon and the graceful Theramenes.” Euripides democratized the theater. He catered to the popular desire to portray the vulgar, the seedy side of life. Often, his characters were beggars dressed in rags. Theater was now for everyone, and about everyone. It is tempting to speculate: How similar was the situation in the Athens of 405 BC, the year The Frogs was written, to the America of today? Could one not easily think of a contemporary Euripides, some best-selling author or popular screenwriter, succeeding handsomely here in our dumbed-down victimocracy, with its effeminate and sophistic king, crowned by the rampaging mob? Which great cultural figure would Dionysus bring back to help save us? We cry out for our Aeschylus—who would it be? [Quotes from The Frogs taken from Aristophanes, the Eleven Comedies, vol. 2, Immortal Classics republication of the 1912 London Athenian Society edition, pp. 227, 245-46, 235, 239-40.]
0 Comments
We have discussed in several posts one of the major challenges facing America at this late stage of its cultural meltdown: the seizure of power by rogue judges. This threatens to derail many of the reforms instituted by the Trump Administration, and to further tighten the stranglehold of the Left on our collective throat. The question I ask today: From what ideological septic tank percolates this audacious assault on the political system?
To begin with, let us note that this is nothing new, though admittedly the current surge is rather extreme. Degradation of judicial practice in the United States has a long and storied history. It received notoriety during the tenure of the Warren Court (1953-1969), i.e. the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren. That period overlapped the Civil Rights Era, and the Court (along with the rest of the federal judiciary) did its utmost to stretch the Bill of Rights to a degree that would have made the Founding Fathers spin in their graves. Earlier instances of creative interpretation still bore some relation, however shaky, to the actual wording of the Constitution. But in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Court gave itself the authority to extract from the Constitution whatever principles they desired. In the words of Justice William O. Douglas, “specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.” Penumbras and emanations, got it. Translation: We can invent any legal principle we want. The actual text of the Constitution became irrelevant; the door was opened to Leftist bullying under cover of supposed constitutional law. This brazen attack on the foundations of the American republic paved the way for the eventual complete disregard, by Leftist judges, of due process of law; nay, of the entire Anglo-Saxon legal tradition. Our current judicial insurrection is an outgrowth of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries’ seemingly inexorable march toward totalitarianism; more specifically, the expansion of the modern administrative state to monstrous proportions. This springs from a compulsion to control human behavior by means of central planning. If it can be achieved in the realms of health, economics, education, etc., then why not the political machinery itself? It is up to us, says the federal bench, to ensure that the federal government (and state and local, for that matter) dutifully obey the maxims of the Progressive canon. In this view of the world, everything is justiciable. There can be no sphere of life that remains outside the purview of the black-robed priesthood. Whether it be the laws passed by the legislature, the executive functions of the president, or the way a man interacts with a woman, they consider it their proper role to intervene, at any time and for any reason. A natural result of this infinite justiciability and destruction of the rule of law is the proliferation of lawyers, courts, and lawsuits. The legal system has become the arena for the settling of every imaginable type of dispute or moral controversy, across nearly all tiers of society. Normal human life, under these conditions, is gradually asphyxiated. To my knowledge, no individual or institution has ever slowed the progress of this bulldozer. And here we are. "People are sometimes confused about the apparent contradictions in that wider world: What do, say, open borders have to do with the trannification of the school system? Well, it's not difficult. What they have in common, throughout the West, is chaos: you get on the bus and a 'migrant' stabs you; you send your little girl off to school and she comes back a little boy; your boy gets picked for the rugby team and drops dead on the pitch; you could really use a break, but the airport is closed.
The easiest way to figure out the purpose of public policy is to look at the universal outcome: the abolition of even the possibility of normal life." — Mark Steyn There are three maxims, or "laws" of politics attributed to the British historian Robert Conquest. One of them is,
Any organization that is not explicitly right-wing, sooner or later becomes left-wing. We see it occurring time and again. Why is this so? The default state of mankind is entropy, decay, and chaos. If there is no force to guide society into a beneficial mold, and to maintain the required level of energy, then entropy takes over. Leftism is the ideological face of chaos; it provides the justification, putting lipstick on the pig. It is futile to search for logic or consistency in any substantive Leftist program. Their “platform” is merely whatever coat of paint is needed at that particular moment to enable the entropy to flourish. For example, when the working class can be used as a catalyst for chaos, it is seen as good; when the working class is an impetus to stability, it is condemned. One might be tempted to believe that the Left is clever and quick on its feet. They always seem to have us reeling from their attacks, like a boxer on the ropes. After we expend huge amounts of time and money to neutralize one of their insane campaigns, there is no time to catch our breath before multiple new salvos are launched. Are they really that clever? I don’t think so. The apparent cleverness is largely an optical illusion, because the Left always starts from an advantageous position. It is easier to be glib when you have the wind at your back. Society’s ingrained entropic tendencies provide a permanent fertile ground for the rapid growth of Leftism’s core characteristics: envy, parasitism, manipulation, projection, and decadence. This is analagous to the advantageous position of the petulant child vis-à-vis his parents and other adults. The parent invests an enormous amount of time and energy to turn the little savage into a respectable member of society, whereas the child can destroy the work of years by committing any number of simple acts that are fully within his power, and that can be accomplished in a matter of minutes. To be “right-wing” means to resist the torrent of entropy, the tantrums of the misbehaving child. It is the task of building and maintaining civilization, which requires that common sense and tradition be respected, and that high culture prevail. Otherwise, society cannot suppress the ideologies that correspond to envy, manipulation, parasitism, etc. Wherever high culture retreats, even to the slightest degree, Leftism automatically flows into the space, like a gaseous substance filling a vacuum. And thus, “any organization that is not explicitly right-wing, sooner or later becomes left-wing.” As more reports of waste, fraud, and abuse emerge from Elon Musk’s DOGE undertaking, I thought it would be an opportune time to offer some of my own personal experience in the matter.
After returning to the U.S. in 2006 from an extended stay abroad, I worked for a major defense contractor, and then a defense-related research institute of the Federal government. In both of these environments, waste, fraud, and abuse were in full swing. Let us start with the simplest aspect: basic incompetence. It was everywhere. Most of the people, from top to bottom, had no idea what they were doing. The majority of jobs were pure make-work. This was exacerbated by an inefficient, heavily bureaucratized organizational structure that suppressed any possible outbreaks of intelligence and creativity. Naturally, this state of affairs produced outcomes that were inexcusable, even by the low standards of FedGov. The problem was addressed by importing an endless stream of “experts,” many of whom were outside consultants living off fat contracts, providing zero value. They usually just added a new layer of procedure, clogging the system to an even greater extent. Speaking of systems, it seemed as though everybody and their grandmother was a “systems engineer.” In most cases, this turned out to be a pseudo-qualification, a special favorite of women and minorities. It was a way to identify as an “engineer” without knowing how to do engineering. They were very good at PowerPoint slides and Excel spreadsheets, which were excellent tools for “streamlining” (adding more bloat). Then there was the diversity grift. Its influence could be felt in every nook and cranny. Again, “experts” floating around. Incompetent minorities coddled and promoted. Constant drumbeating, seminars, emails, and thinly-veiled threats. At one “workshop,” after hearing about an hour’s worth of preaching from poster-children of the oppressed, myself and three hundred or so other attendees split up into little working groups. We were tasked with “brainstorming” ways to be more sensitive to the needs of the unqualified delicate little flowers injected into the ranks by the DEI tyrants. When it was my turn to pour forth the result of my brainstorm, I asserted that diversity is a racist, un-American institution, a violation of civil rights, and should be abolished. Later that day, one member of my little group, a feminized, twenty-something NPC type, ratted on me to the authorities. I was warned by management in no uncertain terms that if there was ever another similar outburst of heresy on my part, I would be shown the door. The amount of money wasted was off the charts. The budget back then at the FedGov research institute was around three billion dollars per annum; now it must be at least five. There may have been some real benefit to national defense hiding somewhere in that pile of manure, but I never encountered it. Some of the issues were not caused by the organization itself, but rather inherited from the broken society as a whole. Some of the old-timers were bravely hanging on, trying to stem the tide of idiocy and wokeness from the younger cohort. But it is a losing battle when your recruits are graduates of the American educational system, particularly the “elite” “institutions” of “higher” “learning.” The last straw for me was the response to the Scamdemic. As you can imagine, both management and employees were engaged in a frantic effort to outdo each other in worshiping the golden calf. Even DEI had to take a temporary back seat to the Chicken Littles proclaiming every five minutes the arrival of epidemiological Armageddon. I resigned my post at the moment when I expected a SWAT team any minute to bang down my door and force the poison needle into my arm. My only criticism of DOGE is that it doesn’t go far enough. In my post of 3/10/2025 on the Scamdemic, I wrote that “so far, [there have been] no investigations, no indictments, no fines, no prison.” Unfortunately, the same can be said of numerous crimes committed in other domains, all in the name of the government.
As far as I know, the steps taken by the Trump Administration to right the wrongs of the Biden regime have been exclusively remedial; that is, fix the damage and stop the bleeding. For example, pardons for the victims of malicious prosecutions; cutting off the flow of money; gutting the institutional bases of Leftist corruption; and closing the border. These are all excellent and necessary moves. But they are not sufficient. In his speech of March 14, President Trump declared that during the Biden regime, “a corrupt group of hacks and radicals within the ranks of the American government….weaponized the vast powers of our intelligence and law enforcement agencies to try and thwart the will of the American people….They spied on my campaign, launched one hoax and disinformation operation after another, broke the law on a colossal scale, persecuted my family, staff, and supporters, raided my home….” Well? What are you going to do about it? When it comes to this “corrupt group of hacks and radicals” responsible for the incalculable damage done to the nation in recent years, as well as those causing damage right now, the most severe personal punishments have been loss of employment and the revoking of security clearances. And I see nothing more severe on the horizon, despite the bluster, and the hoo-hah over the appointment of Kash Patel and Dan Bongino at the FBI. There is still no fear of consequences. Governors, mayors, and other state and local officials can publicly proclaim that they support and defend illegal aliens. This means that these officials are bragging to us that they are committing a felony crime. Has a single one of them been arrested? No; all we get is threats, heated rhetoric, withholding of funds, “lawsuits,” etc. The same dynamic applies to the mini coup d’état being rolled out by the judiciary. Numerous Leftist judges in the Federal courts, low-level apparatchiks of the Deep State, are taking over the policymaking functions of the Executive branch, casually nullifying the actions of the President. They do this because nothing is done to stop them; they have no fear of personal consequences. Some commentators have called this behavior “judicial overreach.” I would use much stronger language. The reaction of the Trump Administration: Dag nabbit, by gum, by golly, we’ll appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. That’ll show ‘em! Well, guess what? The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Deep State. Some observers have expressed shock that two “conservative” justices joined the Leftist clown-car contingent in ruling against the President. But I am not surprised in the least. We are not living in the 1950s, when one could debate the fine points of constitutional law over a glass of bourbon and a pipeful of Cavendish tobacco. If the tortured years of the Biden regime demonstrated anything, it’s that we have descended to the level of pure power relations. The Left peeled away any remaining veneer of civility and rule of law, and mobilized the full brunt of the law-enforcement apparatus to lower the boom on anyone standing in its way—from the president on down. Thousands of innocent people went to prison, or worse. The unwillingness of “our team” to use this same apparatus to suppress actual criminality could easily lead a wishy-washy Supreme Court justice (and others in the same situation of confronting the Deep State) to make the following calculation: The Deep State might return to full, formal power within a few years. And Trump could be neutralized even before then. If I rule against the Leftist Establishment, they will eat me for breakfast, and throw my carcass to the dogs. If I rule against Trump, nothing will happen to me, other than a few strongly-worded letters to the editor. Hmmm….whatever shall I do? The bottom line: The President must seize the power of the presidency. We need to see handcuffs and perp walks, immediately. There is no reason for further delay. And for goodness sake, stop obeying the illegal orders handed down by the black-robed priests of the Progressive cult. Perhaps Donald Trump is not the person who will take us into the Promised Land. He is our Moses, leading us out of Egypt, across the desert, to within view of our destination. Now we are waiting for our Joshua, a warrior who can raise the standard, and rally the troops to conquer the territory that is held by our latter-day Philistines, the Leftist Establishment. In my posts of 12/27/24 and 1/17/25, I examined the work of Friedrich Hayek, who with consummate skill helps us understand the ideological roots of the Left. Continuing in the same vein, below is my discussion of Karl Popper, whose work in this domain provides an excellent companion to Hayek. The post was first published in 2007, on the original AWOL Civilization blog.
* * * Every period has a handful of commentators that grasp the essence of their era. In our time, one of them must surely be Karl Popper (1902-1994). Well-known as a philosopher of science, his writings in the sociopolitical realm are some of the most extraordinary of the twentieth century. Probably the most widely read of these is The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945). Impressive as the book is, I believe that Popper’s greatest achievement in this area is The Poverty of Historicism (1957). In this work, he deconstructs one of the founding myths of modern totalitarianism, a conceptual idol that underlies the thought of Hegel, Marx, and Lenin: historicism. This is the belief that there is a predictable regularity to history, that its course is based on immutable laws. As Popper puts it: “The belief…that it is the task of the social sciences to lay bare the law of evolution of society in order to foretell its future might be perhaps described as the central historicist doctrine.” This myth enabled Hegel to concoct his “world-historical spirit," in which history is a “court of judgment" and “the exposition and the actualization of the universal spirit." This vague spirit has come to rule human affairs, as “the spirit in and for itself prepares and works its way towards the transition to its next and higher stage.” Popper shows that this sort of phony analysis is derived from a key error, that of mistaking trends for laws: “This, we may say, is the central mistake of historicism. Its ‘laws of development’ turn out to be absolute trends; trends which, like laws, do not depend on initial conditions, and which carry us irresistibly in a certain direction into the future. They are the basis of unconditional prophecies, as opposed to conditional scientific predictions.” Popper debunks the scientific pretenses of Comte, Hegel, Marx, and their disciples, who misapply the methods and lexicon of the natural sciences to social phenomena. It is one of the great essays on this subject, alongside Hayek’s Counter-Revolution of Science. To understand the ideological roots of the contemporary Left, Popper's masterpiece is a must-read. [Quotes from Popper taken from The Poverty of Historicism (1957), Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1960 edition, pp 105-6 and 128. Emphasis in original. Quotes from Hegel: Elements of the Philosophy of Right (1821), Cambridge University Press, 1991 edition, pp 372-3] "Socialism is the visionary younger brother of an almost decrepit despotism, whose heir it wants to be....It desires a wealth of executive power, as only despotism had it; indeed, it outdoes everything in the past by striving for the downright destruction of the individual, which it sees as an unjustified luxury of nature, and which it intends to improve into an expedient organ of the community....[Socialism] needs the most submissive subjugation of all citizens of the absolute state....It secretly prepares for reigns of terror, and drives the word 'justice' like a nail into the heads of the semieducated masses, to rob them completely of their reason (after this reason has already suffered a great deal from its semieducation) and to give them a good conscience for the evil game they are supposed to play."
— Friedrich Nietzsche For the last two and a half centuries, Europe has been plagued by the machinations of socialist and other collectivist movements. These destructive ideologies flare up periodically, causing dislocation, death, and widespread mayhem. To list some of the more notable examples: French Revolution; upheavals of 1848; Paris Commune; Russian Revolution; Nazi regime; and the Woke totalitarian monsters of the current era.
During most of this period, the United States managed to keep its head above water, and not succumb to the great temptation. Over the course of the twentieth century, however, and particularly in the twenty-first, a pernicious collectivist darkness spread itself over the North American land mass. One result of this phenomenon was an ideological convergence between the regimes in Washington, London, Brussels, Paris, and Berlin. In shockingly coordinated fashion, the “elites” imposed on their countries the mainstreaming of sexual deviancy; demoralization of the native population via importation of violent savages; erosion of the currency, causing rampant inflation; trampling of free expression; and finally, an attack on the biological integrity of the people via injections of poison directly into their bloodstream. A new dark age had truly descended on the West, in its entirety. This convergence enabled lockstep cooperation in yet another nightmarish project of destruction: the war in Ukraine. It was a NATO campaign, getting the band back together after the fiasco in Afghanistan. The war focused the wrath of the Left on the greatest sinner in Europe, the one major heterodox power standing in the way of the Woke state: Russia. The Muscovites had never been forgiven for their original sin, which was abandoning the socialist utopia of the USSR. Now they had the gall to beat up the Pussy Riot harridans, eject the NGOs, ban trans this-and-that, and proudly celebrate their national and religious heritage. All of these moves were unpardonable, and stood in need of severe punishment. But things didn’t go as planned. Russia, though suffering, emerged stronger than ever from the conflict. And now, America has abandoned the coalition of the Woke. Keir Starmer’s comrades in Washington, that miserable assortment of lunatics who ran the country into the ground prior to the inauguration, no longer control the money and munitions spigot. Now the deranged European leadership is engaging in one last attempt to escalate the Ukraine war into the final cataclysm, which this time will incinerate the continent. They would gladly drop all pretense to benevolence as they obliterate everyone and everything, including themselves, in an orgy of devastation that would make all previous wars look like a schoolyard brawl. This would accomplish their one overriding goal: end Western civilization, once and for all. Luckily, the material and financial means for success are absent. But don’t ever underestimate the Left. What they lack in practical tactical thinking, they make up in ruthlessness. The solution is for a segment of Europe’s ruling class to defect to the Trumpian revolution, and take the helm of their governments. If this cannot be achieved, we might see a different band getting back together: The USA and Russia joining forces, as they did in World War II, to expunge a malignant cancer from the heart of Europe. A possible scenario: roll the tanks into Brussels, and rip the Eurocrats from their desks like the Israelis clearing Hamas out of their tunnels. Perhaps we will be fortunate, and the madness can be stymied by cutting off the money; economic and diplomatic pressure; U.S. withdrawal from NATO; etc. But we can never be sure what will happen as long as the inmates are running the asylum. Drastic measures might one day be necessary to eliminate one of the greatest threats to peace the world has ever seen. Zelensky is not a politician, nor is he the leader of a country, in the usual sense of the term. His role is much different: He is a holy man, a prophet. He is the personification, the living symbol, the messianic incarnation of Peak Leftism in its gnostic twenty-first century form. And, as befits the current era, he is obnoxious, ruthless, vulgar, and kitsch. This is the man the Left has been fawning over these past ten years. It could not have been scripted any better.
If you threw Adam Schiff, Hunter Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Bolton, King Charles, and Klaus Schwab into a blender, ran it on high, stuck it in the freezer, and pulled it out a week later to thaw, out would pop Zelensky, already dressed in his cheesy imitation Che Guevara outfit. The prophet may have overplayed his hand at the White House, but in his mind, he is feathering his nest to prepare for the next stage of his career. Zelensky knows the Ukraine jig is up. The only play remaining may very well be to position himself as the ultimate Leftist hero, putting into the shade Greta Thunberg, the Just Stop Oil lunatics, the Pope, George Floyd, etc. When his regime crumbles, he will no doubt be wined and dined at all the hip places, with a first stop in Brussels to commune with the EU/WEF Kommisariat. No, Mr. Trump, one cannot “negotiate” a “deal” with a prophet. When you are face-to-face with a claimant to the throne of the Left, it is either crush or be crushed. You are confronting a challenge to civilization that will never compromise. |
Dystopian literatureWelcome to the blog! While you're here, check out the six dystopian novels by Gary Wolf. His latest is The Cubist Supremacy. 
Archives
April 2025
Categories
All
Interesting viewpointsAce of Spades |
RSS Feed