Saturday, June 13, 2020

Devolution to Revolution: An Already Demoralized U.S. is Now Being Destabilized - Selwyn Duke

by Selwyn Duke

Late Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB agent who fled to Canada in 1970explains it well

The two destabilizing events recently occurring back-to-back, the response to the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic, and the George Floyd rioting, illustrate well how America is now institutionally incapable of making decisions in her own best interests. That is, the overreaction to the disease and under-reaction to the rioting reflect a country long demoralized.

Moreover, if that’s not troubling enough, know that this is a state of being that usually leads to tyranny.

We’d had pandemics before — ones causing more death, especially when adjusted for population — but we’d never before embraced lockdowns, a cure worse than the disease.

But at least the disease was a relative unknown; riots are not. People the world over know how to deal with riots, and this isn’t by letting them metastasize so thugs can run wild, hurt the innocent and destroy the nation. Yet our “leaders” fiddled while the country burned, motivated by moral confusion and weakness, and some, most certainly, by ulterior motives.

You may recognize “demoralization” and “destabilization” as the first two steps in the process of communist subversion, explained well by late Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB agent who fled to Canada in 1970. Bezmenov stated in the mid-1980s already that the process of demoralization — an undermining of a target nation’s morals that makes it ripe for revolutionary takeover — was “basically completed already” in the United States. But a money line is what he said about demoralized people:

“[D]espite…the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interests of defending themselves, their families, their community and their country. It’s a great brainwashing process….”

Sound familiar, maybe a bit like people who can’t figure out how to handle rioters and why it’s necessary? How about people who think eliminating ICE, borders and the police are positive measures (I refer to the actually sincere individuals)?

Bezmenov also said that demoralized people “are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern; you cannot change their mind.” Sound familiar, perhaps like people who react to truthful statements by reflexively shouting “racist!” or “white supremacy!”?

One more familiar sentiment: Bezmenov also stated, “A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information — the facts tell nothing to him.” Just think here about how many today will react to air-tight, fact-based, logical arguments, not with assent or even open-minded pondering, but with angry rejection.

Note here that numbness to Truth is nothing new. British satirist Jonathan Swift observed hundreds of years ago already (I’m paraphrasing) that you “cannot reason a man out of a position he has not reasoned himself into.” The difference is that the process of demoralization in question yields large numbers of people egregiously detached from reality in a way that serves a specific agenda, and who are virtually impossible to change.

Our thoroughly demoralized state can best be understood by grasping how our society actually demonizes the elements of morality — virtues — while elevating vices. Chastity is called prudishness while sexual depravity is normalized and lust is branded “lifestyle choices.” Emphasizing diligence and its fruits (e.g., punctuality, hard work) is called “white supremacy” while sloth is rewarded with handouts. Prudence (wisdom) is branded bigotry while foolishness is called “wokeness.” Faith is deemed fantasy while secular cynicism is thought sophistication. Actions reflecting courage are called cruelty and cowardice is called compassion. Humility is considered weakness while pride is labeled “high self-esteem.” Patience is devalued while acting on wrath is called activism. Kindness is lacking while envy is euphemized as a desire for “social justice” and “equality.” This is a time of moral inversion. 

The result? Spoiled brats have access to supermarkets abundantly stocked with food, free time to fritter away on frivolity (including mindless protesting) and are awash in luxury goods — yet wail that they’re “oppressed.”

These people, of course, are the sheep. But there are also wolves in a sheepdog’s guise who herd the sheep toward revolution. Both types, do note — the demoralized and dull (credulous) and the demoralized and demonic (calculating) — are found in government and other influential positions.

Thus do we have many prominent people doing the unprecedented: actually encouraging the rioters. The result is that the destabilization is intensifying, aided and abetted from above and via demoralization-born policy.

Consider: One thing helping quell riots is arresting rioters and keeping them locked up until matters cool down. Recently enacted “bail reform” laws (in NY, for example) make this impossible, however, because they’re leading to rioters and looters being immediately released. Add to this George Soros-“installed” district attorneys who won’t prosecute rioters, and the picture is clear:
The powers-that-be are keeping these left-wing insurrectionists on the street, giving them free rein to destabilize society further.

Not that this is new. For years now mobs have been attacking Trump supporters, sometimes with the tacit acceptance or even approval of authorities. Trump officials have also been harassed, often encouraged by the likes of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.).

Some of what’s occurring today is orchestrated by well-funded “astroturfing” puppeteers behind the scenes, but this isn’t new, either. Remember, Democrat operatives were caught on hidden camera in 2016 confessing to how they were fomenting violence at Trump rallies. One of them, Scott Foval, actually said, “We’re starting anarchy here.”

Yet the mainstream culture has become so demoralized that much of this aid is overt. Just consider all the corporations that support, and even donate money to, Black Lives Matter and other similarly disposed groups. Cisco, for example, gave $5 million to BLM & Co.

When a country’s destabilization becomes severe enough, it can move into subversion’s next stage: crisis. This period only takes weeks and is when a revolution occurs that can sweep the puppeteers into power. This absolutely is the goal of the most Machiavellian authors of our destabilization.

Obviously, our country isn’t in this sense in crisis yet, but there are many disturbing developments. One, for example, is that ex-generals have been speaking out against President Trump. Emboldened by this, Stalin-enabler The New York Times encouraged the military to disobey the commander in chief and a University of Chicago law professor actually called on the generals to depose and jail the president. 

The last stage of subversion is “normalization.” This is a euphemism for stamping out all dissent and cementing control post-revolution.

Really, though, we’ve been experiencing this culturally, hence the term (not my favorite) “cultural Marxism.” Why, what do you think “cancel culture” involves? It’s about using extreme social pressure and the threat of career destruction to stamp out opposition to our politically correct cultural revolution.

For example, Sacramento Kings play-by-play announcer Grant Napear just lost his job for tweeting “All lives matter…Every single one!” while Los Angeles Galaxy soccer player Aleksandar Katai was axed over sentiments relating to the riots his wife posted to social media.

In contrast, L’Oreal just rehired black “transgender” model Munroe Bergdorf three years after firing him for disgorging racist sentiments such as how white people need “to admit that their race is the most violent and oppressive force of nature on Earth.” L’Oreal saw the graffiti on the wall.

So what’s happening is plain: Just as how the Iron Curtain-era Hungarian Marxists made clear that you could be Christian, sure — but they wouldn’t allow you to be Christian and successful — the leftists controlling our culture have made acceptance of their ideology a prerequisite for career success.

Now you know why cowardly quarterback Drew Brees folded like a tent after expressing patriotic sentiments; and why prominent people coast to coast have pledged obeisance to Black Lives Matter, essentially a terrorist group, on bended knee. They want to stay prominent and hope they can buy mercy by groveling. 

I’ve been warning for years about how, due to moral decay (demoralization), our culture drifts “left” no matter who is in office. And politics being downstream of culture, we can’t lose ever more control over the culture-shapers — the media, academia, entertainment and, increasingly, big business — without ultimately losing the political sphere completely and irretrievably. FACT: Unless we can change our cultural trajectory, tyranny will be our lot. It’s just a matter of time. 

The solution to demoralization is, of course, moralization (sense 3), the cultivation of virtue in the people. We can’t MAGA unless we MAMA: Make America Moral Again. We also can’t fight evil if we won’t even speak against it. Silence equals submission. Remember, too, that with every passing month the price of dissent becomes greater, the consequences for not registering it more obvious, and the odds of having an impact slimmer.

Right now speaking Truth may cost you money, but the price of cowardice and moral corruption today is that, tomorrow, it may cost you blood.

For anyone interested, below is a video of Yuri Bezmenov discussing destabilization.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Gab (preferably) or Twitter, or log on to

Selwyn Duke


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Free Citizens Do Not Kneel - Bruce Thornton

by Bruce Thornton

White progressive racial masochism is nothing new.

In the last couple of weeks we have witnessed people, most of them white, kneeling before black protestors and activists as a supposed gesture of repentance for their crimes of “white privilege” and tolerating “systemic racism.” The kneeling penitents include not just ordinary people, but police officers, National Guardsmen, and, in a shocking self-debasement of the world’s greatest democratic republic, a gaggle of House Representatives adorned with “culturally appropriated” African kente cloth scarves.

White progressive racial masochism is nothing new; Tom Wolfe skewered it brilliantly nearly a half century ago in essays like “Mau-Mauing the Flak-Catchers.” But the current manifestation is more significant and dangerous. It has taken place amidst violent widespread rioting and looting and assaults, and so these acts of kneeling are a form of tribute exacted by the sheer power of destruction wrought by the rioters and their “peaceful” abettors. As such, they undermine the very foundation of citizen self-rule and political freedom: Government by laws, offices, and free deliberation rather than by the whims and failings of one man; and by accountability to the sovereign people and their laws, instead of submission to violent coercion.

Kneeling specifically appears in Greek literature as an emblem of political slavery that follows an absence of rule by law and accountability. In the Histories, Herodotus’s narrative of the Persian wars continually contrasts the free, self-ruling Greek with the slavish, unfree Persians. One cultural practice in particular epitomized for the Greeks the political enslavement of the Persians who were ruled by the quasi-divine Great King Xerxes bestowed with absolute power over the lives and property of his subjects. Hence the law that anytime someone came into the presence of the King, he had to kneel before him, then bend over and kiss the ground as an act of submission. The Greek word for this was proskunesis, an act of “obeisance” suitable only for acknowledging the gods.

Herodotus illustrates this principle when two Spartan ambassadors meet with Xerxes and the King’s guards try to physically force them to bow down. The Spartans resisted and said that “even if the guards were to hurl them headlong down on the ground, they would never do such a thing, for it was not the Greek way to prostrate oneself before another human being.” This episode follows a conversation with their Persian escort Hydarnes, who asked the Spartans why they did not submit to the King and become rich as he was. They replied that he knew only half of the question: “Although you know what it’s like to be a slave, you have never experienced freedom.”

These two anecdotes together make the political point: true freedom is political freedom, which in turn is founded on the equal right a citizen has to participate in governance. A rule founded on radical distinctions among universally flawed and radically contingent human beings, with only one or a few deemed capable of governing, will require unjust force and compulsion. And given human flaws and passions, such a regime then is hostage to the weaknesses and lust for power that lies latent in all men. Such a rule will be a tyranny, which Aristotle said “no free man will endure.”

We have been witnessing for decades now the erosion of that foundational principle central to our own political order. Progressivism has relentlessly worked to create a technocracy that concentrates and centralizes power in an elite, weakening the checks on ambitious power provided by federalism and divided government. Hence the diminishment of the states, civil society, churches, businesses, and individuals––their freedom circumscribed and lessened by a regulatory regime that, as Tocqueville foresaw, “covers the surface of a society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform.” This dismantling of the Constitutional order was accelerated by the Obama administration, but was slowed by the Democrats’ loss of the House and then the Senate. The election of Donald Trump has marked a vigorous pushback, which is why the bipartisan managerial elite is striving so mightily to prevent his reelection. The riots and protest mark the latest front in that war.
The riots, moreover, are another assault on the nexus of political equality and freedom. 
Identity grievance politics is predicated on inequality: selected victims of history and fantasies such as “systemic racism” are “more equal” than others. They have the right, bestowed by sympathetic state governors, mayors, denizens of federal agencies, media, academics, activists, and the Democrat Party, to vandalize and loot, obstruct police attempting to restore order and protect other citizens, and do so with minimum accountability at best. As a result, surreally stupid policies such as defunding police departments are being bruited, even though that would give power to criminals and thugs, not to mention whatever activist groups that would take the place of the police. Our equal right to life that government should protect would exist only for an elite wealthy enough to buy their own security.

Furthermore, unalienable rights enshrined in the Constitution, rights bestowed by nature and nature’s God, are under assault as well. The quintessential political freedom, that of speaking openly without fear of reprisal or censorship or subjective “norms” or “decorum,” has been attacked during the riots. Any challenge to the illiberal doctrines of the protestors and their enablers are condemned as “racism” and silenced, at times with violence.

Worse yet, an esteemed institution like the New York Times has fired, with an accompanying barrage of groveling apologies, an editor for publishing a Republican Senator’s op-ed calling for the military to restore order, a legal power of the Chief Executive. Nothing in Senator Cotton’s essay was false or even exceptional. But Senator Cotton is not as “equal” as the thugs in the street whose violence and mayhem are deemed an expression of “free of speech.”

Then there are the inequalities in who gets to enjoy the First Amendment right to assemble during the lockdown. Churchgoers, who are also protected by the First Amendment’s phrase denying the feds from “prohibiting the free exercise” of faith, are not allowed to go to church because of the lockdown. They are not as “equal” as the violent protestors who have “assembled” in the tens of thousands, frequently packed together in violation of the six-foot social distancing rule.

What we are seeing here with these unequal applications of Constitutional rights is the expansion of tyranny, authority, and power not given by free citizens in elections, but seized by force with the help of state and federal office-holders desperate to keep Donald Trump from being reelected. Only then can they take up again their concentration and expansion of power that our Constitution was explicitly designed to prevent. And the wages if they succeed will be less freedom and less autonomy for those citizens who like being politically free and exercising autonomy over their lives.

The ritual of public kneeling, then, is just not virtue-signaling or moral preening or an act of cowardice. As Herodotus showed 2500 years ago, it is a sign of submission, a mark of inequality, and a surrender to tyranny. We should remember the Spartans who risked their lives to assert that they were free men who bow to no man. We need to do the same.

* * *
Photo credit: YouTube

Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Leftist Tyrants Occupy Seattle Neighborhood - Joseph Klein

by Joseph Klein

Welcome to the Revolution's "Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone.”

The Seattle Police Department decided to abandon one of their precincts in an effort to placate protesters after reportedly receiving threats that there would be attempts to burn it down. The leftists who seized the surrounding blocks of Seattle’s Capitol Hill neighborhood renamed it the "Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone.” The Seattle Police Department in the “liberated” zone was renamed the “Seattle People Department.” The radical occupiers issued their ultimatums entitled “THE DEMANDS OF THE COLLECTIVE BLACK VOICES AT FREE CAPITOL HILL TO THE GOVERNMENT OF SEATTLE, WASHINGTON.” They referred to the Seattle Police Department as a “terrorist cell.” A prominent Seattle neighborhood has surrendered to anarchy and lawlessness.

Here are a few highlights from the occupiers’ set of demands, which they say must be met before they consider ending their occupation:

·         “The Seattle Police Department and attached court system are beyond reform. We do not request reform, we demand abolition.” To eliminate any doubt, the “liberators” said they are demanding the elimination of “100% of funding.” 

·         “We demand a retrial of all People in Color currently serving a prison sentence for violent crime, by a jury of their peers in their community.”

·         “We demand the abolition of imprisonment, generally speaking, but especially the abolition of both youth prisons and privately-owned, for-profit prisons.”

·         “We demand in replacement of the current criminal justice system the creation of restorative/transformative accountability programs as a replacement for imprisonment.” 

·         “We demand autonomy be given to the people to create localized anti-crime systems.”

·         “We demand free college for the people of the state of Washington, due to the overwhelming effect that education has on economic success, and the correlated overwhelming impact of poverty on people of color, as a form of reparations for the treatment of Black people in this state and country.”

·         “We demand the hospitals and care facilities of Seattle employ black doctors and nurses specifically to help care for black patients.” In other words, racially segregated health care.

One of the occupiers intimidated a local Fox News affiliate reporter and a photographer trying to capture images of what was going on in the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone. Between curses, he yelled “Don’t let them get an inch of space” and “You ain’t getting no shots.”

A self-described “anarchist. abolish whiteness, capitalism, and civilization” eyewitness described the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone as “an area where state authority has been consciously rejected.” She added that “the police have been pushed out, and people are free to self-manage.”

Assistant Police Chief Deanna Nolette said that she had heard “anecdotally of citizens and businesses being asked to pay a fee to operate within this area,” which she described as “extortion.” There have also been reports of "citizen checkpoints" being set up in the area. Local rapper Raz Simone, reportedly one of the leaders of the occupiers, denied that there was any extortion. This is the same guy who, armed with an AK-47 and a pistol, has taken it upon himself to provide his own brand of unaccountable security for the “people.”

President Trump tweeted, “Radical Left Governor  @JayInslee and the Mayor of Seattle are being taunted and played at a level that our great Country has never seen before. Take back your city NOW. If you don’t do it, I will. This is not a game.”

Seattle’s mayor, Jenny Durkan, apparently thinks it is a game. Instead of regaining control of her own city from the anarchists, Durkan responded, “Make us all safe. Go back to your bunker. 

#BlackLivesMatter.” Evidently, Durkan is not as concerned about protecting the lives of everyone else. Washington state Governor Jay Inslee tweeted, “A man who is totally incapable of governing should stay out of Washington state’s business.” This governor has been so clueless about developments in his own state that on June 10th he responded “that’s news to me” to a question about the occupied “Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone” in Washington state’s largest city.

Socialist Alternative Seattle councilwoman Kshama Sawant has been encouraging the anarchists. She declared, for example, that the takeover was a “victory” against “the militarized police force of the political establishment and the capitalist state.”

The lunatics are taking over the asylum, with Seattle in the vanguard. And the lunacy is spreading. Areas of Portland Oregon may become the next target for anarchists to occupy and build their own autonomous zone.

Calls are mounting around the country to defund the police. Minneapolis is already beginning down that path. "We committed to dismantling policing as we know it in the city of Minneapolis and to rebuild with our community a new model of public safety that actually keeps our community safe," Council President Lisa Bender told CNN. When she was asked who should a person call if someone broke into that person's home, Bender replied, “yes, I mean I hear that loud and clear from a lot of my neighbors. And I know ⁠— and myself, too, and I know that that comes from a place of privilege.”

"Black Lives Matter means defund the police," the Washington D.C. branch of Black Lives Matter proclaimed. Not surprisingly Democrat-Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is on board with defunding the police. Many of her House Democrat colleagues, on the other hand, tried to avoid the issue for the moment by proposing sweeping changes in policing methods and calling for the diversion of some funds allocated for the police to social programs. The Democratic presumptive nominee for president Joe Biden claimed that he is opposed to defunding the police. He is trying to avoid as long as he can offending the many mainstream Americans concerned about their safety who support some sensible police reform but not abolition of the police. However, the progressive base of the Democratic Party will continue to move Biden and the party’s congressional leadership towards the extreme position of police defunding. They already have moved the party leftward on such issues as Medicare-for-All, free college tuition, and the Green New Deal.

When Democrats in the Senate had the chance to go on record opposing calls to defund the police, Senate Democrat Minority Leader Chuck Schumer balked. Schumer decided on their behalf to block a resolution introduced on June 10th by Republican Senator Tom Cotton that called for justice for George Floyd while also opposing efforts to defund the police.

The non-binding resolution, which required unanimous consent to pass, acknowledged that “the United States has a troubled history of racism that includes slavery, the terror of lynch mobs, segregation, and Jim Crow, and that history leaves the United States with important work to accomplish.” It called Floyd's death at the hands of Derek Chauvin, the now-former Minneapolis police officer who is under arrest for murder, a "horrific act that violated the public trust and was inconsistent with the values and conduct expected of law enforcement officers." It added that "good law enforcement cannot exist without accountability and justice."

At the same time, however, the resolution urged against throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It stated that "defunding the police would leave police departments understaffed and undertrained, while also increasing the risk of violent crime to the communities of the United States." This should be a non-controversial statement for legislators to make in any sane civilized society. But it is too controversial for cowardly Schumer and his Democrat flock. They are too afraid of offending their party’s progressive base.

America’s house is divided between the majority who believe our constitutional republic is built on a strong foundation of ordered liberty worth preserving and a militant minority who believe it is built on a rotten foundation that must be completely dismantled. We can only hope that reason will prevail and America will be able to avoid another civil war.

Joseph Klein


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

A Brief History of Antifa: Part I - Soeren Kern

by Soeren Kern

Antifa's stated long-term objective, both in America and abroad, is to establish a communist world order. In the United States, Antifa's immediate aim is to bring about the demise of the Trump administration.

  • Empirical and anecdotal evidence shows that Antifa is, in fact, highly networked, well-funded and has a global presence. It has a flat organizational structure with dozens and possibly hundreds of local groups.
  • Antifa's stated long-term objective, both in America and abroad, is to establish a communist world order. In the United States, Antifa's immediate aim is to bring about the demise of the Trump administration.
  • A common tactic used by Antifa in the United States and Europe is to employ extreme violence and destruction of public and private property to goad the police into a reaction, which then "proves" Antifa's claim that the government is "fascist."
  • Antifa is not only officially tolerated, but is being paid by the German government to fight the far right. — Bettina Röhl, German journalist, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, June 2, 2020.
  • "Out of cowardice, its members cover their faces and keep their names secret. Antifa constantly threatens violence and attacks against politicians and police officers. It promotes senseless damage to property amounting to vast sums." — Bettina Röhl, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, June 2, 2020.

A common tactic used by Antifa in the United States and Europe is to employ extreme violence and destruction of public and private property to goad the police into a reaction, which then "proves" Antifa's claim that the government is "fascist." Pictured: A senior citizen flees after being brutally beaten by members of Rose City Antifa on June 29, 2019 in Portland, Oregon. (Photo by Moriah Ratner/Getty Images)

U.S. Attorney General William Barr has blamed Antifa — a militant "anti-fascist" movement — for the violence that has erupted at George Floyd protests across the United States. "The violence instigated and carried out by Antifa and other similar groups in connection with the rioting is domestic terrorism and will be treated accordingly," he said.

Barr also said that the federal government has evidence that Antifa "hijacked" legitimate protests around the country to "engage in lawlessness, violent rioting, arson, looting of businesses, and public property assaults on law enforcement officers and innocent people, and even the murder of a federal agent." Earlier, U.S. President Donald J. Trump had instructed the U.S. Justice Department to designate Antifa as a terrorist organization.

Academics and media outlets sympathetic to Antifa have argued that the group cannot be classified as a terrorist organization because, they claim, it is a vaguely-defined protest movement that lacks a centralized structure. Mark Bray, a vocal apologist for Antifa in America and author of the book "Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook," asserts that Antifa "is not an overarching organization with a chain of command."

Empirical and anecdotal evidence shows that Antifa is, in fact, highly networked, well-funded and has a global presence. It has a flat organizational structure with dozens and possibly hundreds of local groups. Not surprisingly, the U.S. Department of Justice is currently investigating individuals linked to Antifa as a step to unmasking the broader organization.

In the United States, Antifa's ideology, tactics and goals, far from being novel, are borrowed almost entirely from Antifa groups in Europe, where so-called anti-fascist groups, in one form or another, have been active, almost without interruption, for a century.

What is Antifa?

Antifa can be described as a transnational insurgency movement that endeavors, often with extreme violence, to subvert liberal democracy, with the aim of replacing global capitalism with communism. Antifa's stated long-term objective, both in America and abroad, is to establish a communist world order. In the United States, Antifa's immediate aim is to bring about the demise of the Trump administration.

Antifa's nemeses include law enforcement, which is viewed as enforcing the established order. A common tactic used by Antifa in the United States and Europe is to employ extreme violence and destruction of public and private property to goad the police into a reaction, which then "proves" Antifa's claim that the government is "fascist."

Antifa claims to oppose "fascism," a term it often uses as a broad-brush pejorative to discredit those who hold opposing political beliefs. The traditional meaning of "fascism" as defined by Webster's Dictionary is "a totalitarian governmental system led by a dictator and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism, militarism, and often racism."

Antifa holds the Marxist-Leninist definition of fascism which equates it with capitalism. "The fight against fascism is only won when the capitalist system has been shattered and a classless society has been achieved," according to the German Antifa group, Antifaschistischer Aufbau München.
Germany's BfV domestic intelligence agency, in a special report on left-wing extremism, noted:
"Antifa's fight against right-wing extremists is a smokescreen. The real goal remains the 'bourgeois-democratic state,' which, in the reading of left-wing extremists, accepts and promotes 'fascism' as a possible form of rule and therefore does not fight it sufficiently. Ultimately, it is argued, 'fascism' is rooted in the social and political structures of 'capitalism.' Accordingly, left-wing extremists, in their 'antifascist' activities, focus above all on the elimination of the 'capitalist system.'"
Matthew Knouff, author of An Outsider's Guide to Antifa: Volume II, explained Antifa's ideology this way:
"The basic philosophy of Antifa focuses on the battle between three basic forces: fascism, racism and capitalism — all three of which are interrelated according to Antifa.... with fascism being considered the final expression or stage of capitalism, capitalism being a means to oppress, and racism being an oppressive mechanism related to fascism."
In an essay, "What Antifa and the Original Fascists Have In Common," Antony Mueller, a German professor of economics who currently teaches in Brazil, described how Antifa's militant anti-capitalism masquerading as anti-fascism reveals its own fascism:
"After the left has pocketed the concept of liberalism and turned the word into the opposite of its original meaning, the Antifa-movement uses a false terminology to hide its true agenda. While calling themselves 'antifascist' and declaring fascism the enemy, the Antifa itself is a foremost fascist movement.
"The members of Antifa are not opponents to fascism but themselves its genuine representatives. Communism, Socialism and Fascism are united by the common band of anti-capitalism and anti-liberalism.
"The Antifa movement is a fascist movement. The enemy of this movement is not fascism but liberty, peace and prosperity."

Antifa's Ideological Origins

The ideological origins of Antifa can be traced back to the Soviet Union roughly a century ago. In 1921 and 1922, the Communist International (Comintern) developed the so-called united front tactic to "unify the working masses through agitation and organization" ... "at the international level and in each individual country" against "capitalism" and "fascism" — two terms that often were used interchangeably.

The world's first anti-fascist group, Arditi del Popolo (People's Courageous Militia), was founded in Italy in June 1921 to resist the rise of Benito Mussolini's National Fascist Party, which itself was established to prevent the possibility of a Bolshevik revolution on the Italian Peninsula. Many of the group's 20,000 members, consisting of communists and anarchists, later joined the International Brigades during the Spanish Civil War (1936–39).

In Germany, the Communist Party of Germany established the paramilitary group Roter Frontkämpferbund (Red Front Fighters League) in July 1924. The group was banned due to its extreme violence. Many of its 130,000 members continued their activities underground or in local successor organizations such as the Kampfbund gegen den Faschismus (Fighting-Alliance Against Fascism).

In Slovenia, the militant anti-fascist movement TIGR was established in 1927 to oppose the Italianization of Slovene ethnic areas after the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The group, which was disbanded in 1941, specialized in assassinating Italian police and military personnel.
In Spain, the Communist Party established the Milicias Antifascistas Obreras y Campesinas (Antifascist Worker and Peasant Militias), which were active in the 1930s.

The modern Antifa movement derives its name from a group called Antifaschistische Aktion, founded in May 1932 by Stalinist leaders of the Communist Party of Germany. The group was established to fight fascists, a term the party used to describe all of the other pro-capitalist political parties in Germany. The primary objective of Antifaschistische Aktion was to abolish capitalism, according to a detailed history of the group. The group, which had more than 1,500 founding members, went underground after Nazis seized power in 1933.

A German-language pamphlet — "80 Years of Anti-Fascist Actions" (80 Jahre Antifaschistische Aktion)" — describes in minute detail the continuous historical thread of the Antifa movement from its ideological origins in the 1920s to the present day. The document states:
"Antifascism has always fundamentally been an anti-capitalist strategy. This is why the symbol of the Antifaschistische Aktion has never lost its inspirational power.... Anti-fascism is more of a strategy than an ideology."
During the post-war period, Germany's Antifa movement reappeared in various manifestations, including the radical student protest movement of the 1960s, and the leftist insurgency groups that were active throughout the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.

The Red Army Faction (RAF), also known as the Baader-Meinhof Gang, was a Marxist urban guerrilla group that carried out assassinations, bombings and kidnappings aimed at bringing revolution to West Germany, which the group characterized as a fascist holdover of the Nazi era. Over the course of three decades, the RAF murdered more than 30 people and injured over 200.
After the collapse of the communist government in East Germany in 1989-90, it was discovered that the RAF had been given training, shelter, and supplies by the Stasi, the secret police of the former communist regime.

John Philip Jenkins, Distinguished Professor of History at Baylor University, described the group's tactics, which are similar to those used by Antifa today:
"The goal of their terrorist campaign was to trigger an aggressive response from the government, which group members believed would spark a broader revolutionary movement."
RAF founder Ulrike Meinhof explained the relationship between violent left-wing extremism and the police: "The guy in uniform is a pig, not a human being. That means we don't have to talk to him and it is wrong to talk to these people at all. And of course, you can shoot."

Bettina Röhl, a German journalist and daughter of Meinhof, argues that the modern Antifa movement is a continuation of the Red Army Faction. The main difference is that, unlike the RAF, Antifa's members are afraid to reveal their identities. In a June 2020 essay published by the Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Röhl also drew attention to the fact that Antifa is not only officially tolerated, but is being paid by the German government to fight the far right:
"The RAF idolized the communist dictatorships in China, North Korea, North Vietnam, in Cuba, which were transfigured by the New Left as better countries on the right path to the best communism....
"The flourishing left-wing radicalism in the West, which brutally strikes at the opening of the European Central Bank headquarters in Frankfurt, at every G-20 summit or every year on May 1 in Berlin, has achieved the highest level of establishment in the state, not least thanks to the support by quite a few MPs from political parties, journalists and relevant experts.
"Compared to the RAF, the militant Antifa only lacks prominent faces. Out of cowardice, its members cover their faces and keep their names secret. Antifa constantly threatens violence and attacks against politicians and police officers. It promotes senseless damage to property amounting to vast sums. Nevertheless, MP Renate Künast (Greens) recently complained in the Bundestag that Antifa groups had not been adequately funded by the state in recent decades. She was concerned that 'NGOs and Antifa groups do not always have to struggle to raise money and can only conclude short-term employment contracts from year to year.' There was applause for this from Alliance 90 / The Greens, from the left and from SPD deputies.
"One may ask the question of whether Antifa is something like an official RAF, a terrorist group with money from the state under the guise of 'fighting against the right.'"
Germany's BfV domestic intelligence agency explains Antifa's glorification of violence:
"For left-wing extremists, 'Capitalism' is interpreted as triggering wars, racism, ecological disasters, social inequality and gentrification. 'Capitalism' is therefore more than just a mere economic order. In left-wing extremist discourse, it determines the social and political form as well as the vision of a radical social and political reorganization. Whether anarchist or communist: Parliamentary democracy as a so-called bourgeois form of rule should be 'overcome' in any case.
"For this reason, left-wing extremists usually ignore or legitimize human rights violations in socialist or communist dictatorships or in states that they allegedly see threatened by the 'West.' To this day, both orthodox communists and autonomous activists justify, praise and celebrate the left-wing terrorist Red Army Faction or foreign left-wing terrorists as alleged 'liberation movements' or even 'resistance fighters.'"
Meanwhile, in Britain, Anti-Fascist Action (AFA), a militant anti-fascist group founded in 1985, gave birth to the Antifa movement in the United States. In Germany, the Antifaschistische Aktion-Bundesweite Organisation (AABO) was founded in 1992 to combine the efforts of smaller Antifa groups scattered around the country.

In Sweden, Antifascistisk Aktion (AFA), a militant Antifa group founded in 1993, established a three-decade track record for using extreme violence against its opponents. In France, the Antifa group L'Action antifasciste, is known for its fierce opposition to the State of Israel.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the collapse of communism in 1990, the Antifa movement opened a new front against neoliberal globalization.

Attac, established in France in 1989 to promote a global tax on financial transactions, now leads the so-called alter-globalization movement, which, like the Global Justice Movement, is opposed to capitalism. In 1999, Attac was present in Seattle during violent demonstrations that led to the failure of WTO negotiations. Attac also participated in anti-capitalist demonstrations against the G7, the G20, the WTO, and the war in Iraq. Today, the association is active in 40 countries, with more than a thousand local groups and hundreds of organizations supporting the network. Attac's decentralized and non-hierarchical organizational structure appears to be the model being used by Antifa.

In February 2016, the International Committee of the Fourth International advanced the political foundations of the global anti-war movement, which, like Antifa, blames capitalism and neoliberal globalism for the existence of military conflict:
"The new anti-war movement must be anti-capitalist and socialist, since there can be no serious struggle against war except in the fight to end the dictatorship of finance capital and the economic system that is the fundamental cause of militarism and war."
In July 2017, more than 100,000 anti-globalization and Antifa protesters converged on the German city of Hamburg to protest the G20 summit. Leftist mobs laid waste to the city center. An Antifa group called "G20 Welcome to Hell" bragged about how it was able to mobilize Antifa groups from across the world:
"The summit mobilizations have been precious moments of meeting and co-operation of left-wing and anti-capitalist groups and networks from all over Europe and world-wide. We have been sharing experiences and fighting together, attending international meetings, being attacked by cops supported by the military, re-organizing our forces and fighting back. Anti-globalization movement has changed, but our networks endure. We are active locally in our regions, cities, villages and forests. But we are also fighting trans-nationally."
Germany's domestic security service, in an annual report, added:
"Left-wing extremist structures tried to shift the public debate about the violent G20 summit protests in their favor. With the distribution of photos and reports of allegedly disproportionate police measures during the summit protests, they promoted an image of a state that denounced legitimate protests and put them down with police violence. Against such a state, they said, 'militant resistance' is not only legitimate, but also necessary."
Part II of this series will examine the activities of Antifa in Germany and the United States.

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

China Takes Over Hong Kong: EU Shrugs - Giulio Meotti

by Giulio Meotti

There is no mediation with Chinese imperialism.

  • "Germany is leading the whole Europe, they're so ambitious, they want to be leader but morally they are so collapsed." — Ai Weiwei, artist, La Repubblica, June 1, 2020
  • "China is a predator and Europe is its prey". — François Heisbourg, French scholar, Le Figaro, May 29, 2020.
  • There is no mediation with Chinese imperialism.
  • "Why die for Hong Kong?", the Europeans shortsightedly seem to say today.
  • During the last year of protests, Hong Kong's demonstrators have waved the American flag. China well knows the meaning of that small outpost on its doorstep, with its freedom of speech and rule of law. Have you seen the European flag being waved in Hong Kong? No, and with good reason.

During the last year of protests, Hong Kong's demonstrators have waved the American flag. China well knows the meaning of that small outpost on its doorstep, with its freedom of speech and rule of law. Have you seen the European flag being waved in Hong Kong? No, and with good reason. Pictured: Protesters, many waving American flags, attend a pro-democracy rally in Hong Kong on October 14, 2019. (Photo by Anthony Wallace/AFP via Getty Images)

In the aftermath of China's approval of a new national security law for Hong Kong, which de facto ends the autonomy of the former British colony guaranteed by an international treaty, two Anglo-Saxon democracies immediately protested very loudly.

The United States and the United Kingdom tried to convene a meeting of the UN Security Council to deal with the matter (China prevented it). Then the governments of the United States, Britain, Australia and Canada released a joint statement stressing that the international community has a lasting interest in the stability and autonomy of Hong Kong. The UK even announced that it will extend to more than three million residents of Hong Kong a renewable one-year visa and the eventual possibility of obtaining British citizenship. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo raised the possibility of canceling the privileged commercial status that the US has so far given to Hong Kong, and President Donald Trump announced sanctions against Chinese leaders responsible for introducing the national security law in Hong Kong.

The last British governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, said that China had "betrayed" Hong Kong. True, the Chinese regime has forsaken the commitment laid down in the treaty. But a greater betrayal is from Europe. What did the EU do on Hong Kong? Nothing. It is simply allowing China to overpower and crush its last bastion of freedom.

The EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Josep Borrell, ruled out sanctions against China for initiating the new Hong Kong law. "The EU's decision not to use its leverage as the world's biggest trade bloc comes in stark contrast to the U.S., which is threatening trade measures if Beijing proceeds with imposing national security laws", Politico related.

The French Foreign Minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, at a hearing in the country's Senate, announced that Europe must not get carried away in a clash between US and China, and that "a new cold war" must be avoided. "A policy aimed at isolating China is not in Germany's or Europe's interests", noted Norbert Röttgen, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee in German parliament.

These Europeans are implicitly saying that, as with turning over Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland to Nazi Germany roughly 80 years ago, that sacrificing Hong Kong is necessary to protect its investments in China. "At the end of the day, I fear that the economic relationship with China is just too important", a European diplomat confessed.

Europe's self-censorship over China is grotesque. Brussels already rewrote a report criticizing China for its handling of the coronavirus. To Jonathan Holslag, a Belgian professor of international politics, the crisis is just another indicator of the continued weakening of an opportunistic Europe in the face of a rising China. Nicole Gnesotto, who holds the EU chair at the National Conservatory of Arts and Crafts, remarked: "Europe is immature: is it a childhood disease that will pass, or a genetic disease?".

"I very much hope Angela Merkel doesn't sacrifice Germany's fundamental values to support the economy and appease China", Joshua Wong, Hong Kong's heroic activist, said. "Being dependent on China will sooner or later do Germany serious harm".

Last year, China fumed over the meeting between Wong and Germany's foreign minister. Now that China has driven the final nail in the coffin of Hong Kong, Germany appeased Beijing and said that it wanted to "mediate" between China and US over Hong Kong. But there is no mediation with Chinese imperialism.

The Chinese artist and dissident Ai Weiwei attacked German appeasement:
"France, England, especially Germany is the most dark, tricky one, they [Germany] also have a great strategic discipline, they're so identified with an authoritarian state, in their blood they have this, they love China so much, you can see all those [German] politicians, they go to China more than they go to see their grandma. Germany is leading the whole Europe, they're so ambitious, they want to be leader but morally they are so collapsed. It's so fake in Germany. That's why the European family don't trust Germany. They want to break away it because the Germans get the most benefits from China. German industrial leaders officially announced that German future belongs to China. German banks, German technology, they're really supporting this so well. And you can never see German leaders criticize China openly, even during this virus crisis, but you can say the same of every European nation. I am really worried. The West is going down so fast because doesn't uphold its beliefs".
Europe is deluding itself on China. As the French scholar François Heisbourg noted, "China is a predator and Europe is its prey".

"Around the world, voices have been raised in support of Hong Kong's brave pro-democracy demonstrators", US author George Weigel wrote. "Has the Holy See's voice been heard? If so, I missed it and so did many others".

The EU and the Vatican have stayed silent about China's takeover of Hong Kong. Criticism also came from Hong Kong's bishop, Joseph Zen: "I'm sorry to say that we have nothing to expect from the Vatican. In these past few years, they have never said anything to reproach China for their persecution". They have "surrendered the Church to the Chinese authority".

The journal Civiltà Cattolica, edited by Jesuits and is reviewed by the Vatican before publication, just launched a new Chinese edition. According to Vatican expert John L. Allen Jr., it is the proof of a "Vatican 'all in' on Chinese courtship". The Vatican's pact with China seems to have bought the Holy See's silence at the expense not only of millions of Catholics, but also of Hong Kong. "We are at the end of a long process of surrender", Cardinal Zen concluded.

Thanks to the alliance of democracies around the United States, the containment strategy, and the struggle for values ​​that allowed the delegitimization of the lies and terror that served as a cement to Soviet communism, the West managed to defeat the Soviet Empire and cause its collapse from within. The West today has all the resources it needs to stop Communist Chinese imperialism. The only thing missing is Europe's will to defend itself. There is still time to avoid the fatal mistake of the 1930s, when Europe's democracies were torn apart by abasement in front of the rise of totalitarianism. Europe needs to wake up and counter China.

Tibet's spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, also urged Europe not to appease China: "During Chamberlain, just before the Second World War, too much appeasement failed", he said, referring to the misguided attempt of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to reach an accommodation with Hitler's Germany in the 1930s. As Churchill wrote to Chamberlain, "You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour and you will have war".

"Why die for Danzig?", asked the French pacifist Marcel Déat in 1939. He meant that the fate of the city of Danzig was not worth a confrontation. He argued in favor of appeasement with Nazi Germany, which demanded to annex the semi-autonomous Free City of Danzig.

"Why die for Hong Kong?", the Europeans now seem to say.

During the last year of protests, Hong Kong's demonstrators have waved the American flag. China well knows the meaning of that small outpost on its doorstep that refuses to yield, with its freedom of speech, rule of law and religious freedom unthinkable in mainland China.

Have you seen the European flag being waved in Hong Kong? No, and for good reason.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

How Weak Is Hezbollah? (Part 1) - Hugh Fitzgerald

by Hugh Fitzgerald

Hezbollah's -- ability to act as Iran’s deterrent has been severely compromised by Lebanon’s domestic situation, and this may not end any time soon.

The story, posted at The National, a UAE paper opposed both to Iran and to its proxy Hezbollah, is here:
Some would say that, given the crisis Lebanon is facing today, Hezbollah’s project for the country is dead. Such statements, however, go too far.
With thousands of men under arms, a missile arsenal, Iranian backing and much of the Shiite religious community behind the party, Hezbollah remains a potent force in Lebanese society. Yet it is also true that today its ability to act as Iran’s deterrent has been severely compromised by Lebanon’s domestic situation, and this may not end any time soon.
Hezbollah has 140,000 missiles in its armory, hidden throughout civilian areas so as to make it more difficult for Israel to destroy them. But the Israelis have made clear that they will not be deterred in any future conflict; the Lebanese will not be spared, and it is up to them to pressure Hezbollah to move those missiles out of civilian areas. Those who are not in Hezbollah – the Christians, the Sunnis, and even a growing number of Shi’a – are angry with the terror group for taking the country hostage. They remember the great damage inflicted by Israel on Lebanon’s infrastructure in its 2006 war with Hezbollah, and have no desire to repeat that experience. The Lebanese are not consumed, as Hezbollah is, with a fanatical desire to destroy Israel whatever the cost. They are simply trying to survive in the face of their country’s impending economic ruin and a political class of thieves and incompetents.
What is Hezbollah’s plan? Principally, it is to turn the country into a so-called “resistance state” that acts as an outpost for Iranian influence, and another counterweight to Israel and the United States. The common assumption is that the militant party has succeeded in that effort.
But has it?
Hezbollah has power over the Lebanese state, but its sway has also helped to bankrupt and undermine Lebanon, negatively affecting the party’s capacities.
Hezbollah has helped to bankrupt Lebanon in two ways. First, the war it began with Israel in 2006 led to massive destruction, costing the Lebanese state tens of billions of dollars to repair. Second, Hezbollah’s support has kept the corrupt ruling elite in power, where they continue to siphon off for their own benefit large sums from the state treasury.
In protecting a corrupt political class and allowing it to continue its looting of the state, Hezbollah was partly responsible for the collapse last October of Lebanon’s financial order. At the time, the party’s secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah, had understood the risks of popular protests against the ruling class and tried to neutralise public anger. He failed.
When Hassan Nasrallah gave his support to the regime that, through mismanagement and corruption, has helped to bankrupt the Lebanese state, by sending his fighters out to suppress the protests, his terror group lost whatever residual sympathy it might still have possessed among ordinary (i.e., non-Hezbollah) Lebanese.
For weeks Hezbollah sought to retain some control over a system that had lost all legitimacy, and in January it thought it had succeeded when a government formed by the party and its allies came to power.
But something was definitely broken. Lebanon was insolvent, hundreds of thousands of people were out of work and all of the political parties were forced to recalculate.
The change in government in January meant that Hezbollah was ever more closely identified with the regime – it had, after all, with its allies, been responsible for forming that new government. Hezbollah thought that “new” government – which kept many of the same figures — would satisfy the protesters. It did not. It only enraged them further.

As for the financial debacle, Hezbollah has had nothing to offer to solve Lebanon’s colossal problems. For years the country has been living far beyond its means, racking up debt. Some of that debt was e tens of billions in reconstruction costs, the damage a result of the war that Hezbollah instigated with Israel in 2006. Those in charge didn’t care very much, as long as they and their cronies could continue to divert funds to themselves. Then came the steep rise in unemployment, exacerbated by the closures of businesses due to the coronavirus. Lebanon now has a debt of more than $100 billion, and no way to pay any of it back. The cupboard is bare.

A report on Lebanon, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, is hair-raising:
The Lebanese suffer from many afflictions: an insufficient voice in government, a lack of government transparency, limited economic opportunities, corruption, nepotism, and poor quality of life. Lebanon’s infrastructure is crumbling, and the Lebanese experience daily electricity outages, garbage piled up in the streets, sporadic water cuts, and environmental degradation. Since October 2019, protesters have taken to the streets to blame the sectarian political system for their economic plight and demand a complete replacement of Lebanon’s political system and leadership.
The protests ceased as the country went into lockdown over the pandemic of a novel coronavirus disease, COVID-19, but difficult living conditions exacerbated by the COVID-19 response reignited the protests in late April. Lebanon is suffering what is likely its worst-ever financial crisis. There is a dollar shortage, which in turn has seen the Lebanese pound lose more than 50 percent of its value on parallel markets in the past six months. In that time, banks—some of which are on the verge of collapse—have limited withdrawals of the Lebanese pound and entirely phased out withdrawals in the foreign currencies the Lebanese use to pay a variety of obligations, such as mortgages and tuition.2
Coronavirus-related restrictions have added to systemic economic problems, pushing the unemployment rate to over 30 percent and reducing incomes and economic activity. Multiple humanitarian organizations have warned of food insecurity.
And the ruling elite who have brought about these wretched economic conditions remain in power thanks mainly to the support of Hezbollah. No wonder the Lebanese masses are enraged with the Shi’a terror group.
This lost Hezbollah two of the essential prerequisites needed to conduct a war against Israel, were Iran to demand it. The first is Lebanon’s ability to absorb Israeli retaliation and rebuild, as happened in 2006. The second is a minimum level of consensus nationally behind Hezbollah’s “resistance” agenda.
Following the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war, Lebanon managed to rebuild despite the enormous damage done to the country’s infrastructure by Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah outposts in civilian areas. But Lebanon is now completely broke. If there is another war, instigated like the previous one, by Hezbollah, it will be unable to rebuild. And in 2006, there was much more domestic support for Hezbollah, which had been presenting itself as a movement of “national resistance.” The Lebanese no longer believe that. They have seen how Hezbollah, at Iran’s command, sent thousands of troops to fight in the Syrian civil war, which had nothing to do with any “national resistance” against Israel. Hezbollah was no longer seen as a Lebanese movement but, rather, as a Shi’a movement based in Lebanon, but directed from Tehran. It owed its allegiance not to Lebanon, but to Iran. That has decreased still further any residual support for the so-called “national resistance” agenda of Hezbollah.

Hugh Fitzgerald


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter