The Second Vatican Council: Starting Shot for Manifest Global Apostasy


Architects of Catholic “aggiornamento”, John XXIII and soon-to-be Paul VI


Despite all the Luthers, Voltaires, Mazzinis, Darwins, Marxes, Blavatskys, Freuds, Steiners, Crowleys, Teilhards and Hitlers of this world, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, whatever gradually losing influence since the Middle Ages, nevertheless kept standing firm all the way up to (and including) the pontificate of Pope Pius XII, that ended on October 9, 1958. The “stubborn” maxim, coined by 17th-century Carthusian Dom Nicolas Molin, “Crux stat dum volvitur orbis”, meaning, “The Cross is steady while the world turns,” this clear-cut, transcendent maxim could be also a maxim for the entire Roman Catholic Church – that is, as it was until that autumn day in 1958, when “good Pope” John XXIII, after a fairly chaotic Conclave, succeeded “Pastor Angelicus”, Pius XII, the last angelic pope the world has had to this very day. The secular world’s journalistic profession – liberal to the core, then as now – showed an interest in Catholic matters never seen before. St. Peter’s Square was packed, on the day of the election of Cardinal Roncalli as new pope, with an estimated 400,000 souls (God knows how many of them actually belonged to the realm of the faithful). A strange sense of expectation, of optimism and indeed change, filled the air. The world (including the communist world) was looking at Rome with the greatest excitement (as if already in the know of the unlikely outcome).

Indeed, already in his time as Apostolic Visitor to Bulgaria and Apostolic Delegate to Turkey in the 1920s and ’30s, then as Papal Nuncio to France from 1944, and beginning in 1953 as Patriarch of Venice (where he had been virtually banned by Pope Pius XII because of his heretical activities), Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli, unlike his Papal predecessor, showed no signs whatsoever of being even remotely “angelic”. Rather, the man was driven by a modernist and Freemasonic outlook completely antagonistic to any and every Church teaching (an outlook he shared with his fellow conspirator and successor as pope, Giovanni Montini). Despite Pope John’s misleading “folkish” appearance and seeming traditional attitude, he was a dedicated (though sufficiently ambiguous) progressive, a friend of the Lodge and even of communism (by which fact, according to the standards of the Catholic Church, he was excommunicated “ipso facto” and thus, as standing outside the Church, in no way qualified to be a priest, let alone pope).

The more prescient immediately understood the fatal ramifications of this election (doubtful as it may have been). Deep down, they knew that the modernists, who were eager to take over and put everything Catholic upside down once and for all, had been preparing for this event over a long time. In fact, had it not been for the veto by the Emperor of Austria, Francis Joseph I, already in 1903 a modernist candidate, Cardinal Mariano Rampolla, would have been Pope. Instead, Cardinal Giuseppe Sarto, a saintly man of God and staunch defender of Catholic Tradition, was elected, to be Pope Pius X and become canonised in 1954. This narrow decision gave the Roman Catholic Church another half century to continue to be what it had been for nearly two thousand years. Now, in 1958, the die was cast, finally: A destructor was to take the Chair of Peter, with an army of well-organised “progressives” in his wake, and soon all hell would break loose.

How grave this new situation was can be found in Rama P. Coomaraswamy’s unmatched reference work, The Destruction of the Christian Tradition (first published in 1981, updated and revised in 2006). Coomaraswamy, a profound Catholic scholar, wrote about the situation leading up to Roncalli’s election:

Pope Pius XII who came to the papal throne in 1939 was certainly aware of the threat that modernism posed to the Church; not only did he complain about it being taught covertly in seminaries, he more than once was known to have stated that, even though he was the last Pontiff to hold the line on innovation, he would hold it firmly. To quote him directly, “après moi, le déluge” [i.e., ‘After me, the deluge’]. How prophetic such a stance was is only now obvious. Yet, surrounded as he was by men committed to “the revolution,” even he was often lacking in vigilance. He allowed men of dubious quality to rise to the top and gave his approval to liturgical changes of a most questionable nature – such as the new rites for Holy Week. (This occurred in November 1955 – when he was very ill, and one suspects, easily put upon.) He was followed in 1958 by Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli who took the name of John XXIII.

Something new now happened. For the first time we had a Pope that was welcomed by the liberal press, a man characterized as a “simple peasant,” and a “man of the people.” He was neither. Far more accurate is the evaluation of Robert Kaiser, the correspondent for Time Magazine accredited to Vatican II and an intimate of John XXIII. Kaiser describes him as “a political genius,” and a “quiet and cunning revolutionary.”

And what were the first acts of this “quiet and cunning revolutionary”? Well, already the name he gave himself, “John XXIII”, foreboded disaster: There had been, in the early 15th century, an anti-Pope named John XXIII (and, with eery precision, the 20th-century version turned out to live as pope for roughly five years, just like his predecessor’s pontificate in the Quattrocento lasted for five years). Also, as a most symbolic gesture, Pope John chose to throw open a window of the Vatican “to let in some fresh air”. The sarcasm was of course meant to denigrate the very Church he was now in charge of and which he was intent on destroying. Basically overnight, any criticism by the Church of communism, Freemasonry, and modernism ceased. Christians in general, and Catholics in particular, oppressed and persecuted under communism saw themselves abandoned by Rome and on their own. Roncalli’s papal motto, Oboedientia et Pax (i.e., obedience and peace) seemed to intend to forestall from the outset any resistance to his grand project of “aggiornamento”, of “updating” the Church’s style as well as teaching to put her in line with the whims and fashions of the modern world. He and his successor Paul VI, by opening the Church to the world, actually embraced the world (quote, Paul VI: “We want to be loved.”) But, the fruits of all this reforming, modernising and desacralising couldn’t have been more devastating and miserable: The world didn’t become more interested in Catholicism (which henceforth increasingly turned into an abominable clown-show); it lost interest. Significant and telling also the following incident, as described by Rama Coomaraswamy:

It seems clear that John XXIII set a pattern to be followed by all his post-Conciliar successors. Shortly after he became Pope he went to the Holy Office and demanded his dossier. Written on the cover was “suspected of modernism” which comment he crossed out and replaced with the statement: “I was never a modernist.”

Of course he was, and he knew it all too well. Coomaraswamy continues,

Roncalli also initiated the post-Conciliar policy of frequently breaking with Papal tradition—a process which has gone so far that when John Paul II came along, there were almost no Papal traditions left to break. Immediately upon election Roncalli refused to allow the cardinals to kiss the papal slipper (symbolizing their submission to the authority of Christ). He put aside his Papal Tiara (symbolic of “triumphalism”) on state occasions, had Peter’s throne lowered, and instructed those around him not to use his (really Peter’s) honorific titles. All these actions will of course appeal to modern man’s egalitarian prejudices, but the problem is that John XXIII was not an ordinary man; he was allegedly Christ’s representative on earth. To put such actions into a clearer perspective, one might try to imagine the Queen of England divesting herself of her royal robes to disco-dance with her subjects on state occasions. Hardly a dignified scene. Paul Johnson tells us about Roncalli’s attitude towards the Church he was commissioned to preserve, and towards his predecessors to whose stance he was indefectibly tied: “When necessary he simply contradicted previous Popes. He rejected in toto Gregory XVI’s Mirari Vos and Singulari Nos, and the Quanta Cura of Pius IX, to which was attached, as appendix, The Syllabus of Errors. John was ruthless in dismissing the views of his predecessors.” Finally, if any doubt remains, let me give you the response he is reported to have given a friend who asked him how he managed to follow in the footsteps of so great a man as Pius XII. “I try to imagine what my predecessor would have done, and then I do just the opposite.”

Before long, the new “Pope” (with him and his successors, we should always put the word Pope under apostrophes) announced he was thinking about convening an “Ecumenical Council”. The Church was in no crisis. On the contrary, following the horrors of World War II (and much to the credit of Pius XII) the Catholic Church saw record numbers of converts, including from the Anglosaxon world. It wasn’t a question of necessity anyway, but a plan to effectively revolutionise the Church and turn her against herself. After three years of preparation, the Council eventually began in October 1962. However, it soon became evident that a veritable coup had been thought out, very much supported of course by Pope Roncalli, who did his best though to appear neutral, which he never was (after all, it was his Council, in the first place). Indeed, the modernists were following a precise surprise tactic to outmaneuvre the traditionalist faction right from the get-go. Every trick in the book was used to push their agenda through, and push through they did. So much so that some of them even boldly proclaimed Vatican II, as it then became known, to be the French Revolution, or even the October Revolution, in the Catholic Church. Critics rather spoke of a “robber council”. Either way, the years 1962 to 1965 (during which the Council was held), even the time mark of 1958 (when the Council’s architect, Angelo Roncalli, was elected Pope), represent a colossal and absolutely monstrous watershed that separates this revolutionary “New Church” from its authentically Catholic predecessor, the Church of all times. Here is what famous book author, scholar and until 1965, Jesuit, Fr. Malachi Martin (1921 – 1999) said in an interview in early 1990:

So, if you want an overview of what’s happened, take it like this: How come, or take an image: I think it was in 1966, suddenly all electric power disappeared from the North-East corner of the United States. The reservoir filled with “juice”, as we say in the United States, suddenly was emptied. Nobody has as yet explained how it all disappeared like that. Similarly, if you look at the Church, between 1965 and 1975, suddenly Catholicity disappeared. Suddenly, priests left, nuns left. Suddenly, bizarre ceremonies took place. Suddenly, every practice, like devotion of the Sacred Heart, to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, confraternities, sodalities, sending to the [?] work, pilgrimages, benedictions of the Blessed Sacrament, the habit of visiting the Blessed Sacrament, children’s first Holy Communion, marriage, abortion, contraception, homosexuality, everything was turned upside down, suddenly. The reservoir of Catholicism suddenly – shuu – was sucked out, disappeared. And the only theological way you can look at that – theology, not historical in the secular sense – is that God withdrew Grace. God withdrew Grace, sanctifying Grace, without which you can’t be Catholic.

What a devastating analysis, from a priest who knew! Let us look back to those late fifties, early/mid sixties, when the Roman Catholic Church, as a truly Catholic institution, ceased to exist:

Over night, as Rome no longer called communism out, the world revolution was given free rein. Unsurprisingly, mere two months after “good Pope” John XXIII’s election, Cuba, the first country in the Western hemisphere, fell to the communists. Once known as the “pearl of the Caribbean”, Cuba would soon be turned into a totalitarian hell on earth (and a powerful outpost for Moscow in spreading the revolution throughout Latin America, Africa and even into the United States). Khrushchev, at the same time, ran a merciless religious persecution in the Soviet Union itself. The Cold War was reaching fever pitch. President Kennedy’s failed attempt to topple Castro in April 1961 and his equally disastrous summit meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna two months later exposed America’s weakness for the whole world to see. Tragically, it was Kennedy, America’s first-ever Catholic President, who was then butchered less than three years into his presidency by an American communist under control of Soviet/Cuban intelligence. Kennedy’s Vice President and successor as President, Lyndon B. Johnson, chose to not rock the boat, as they say, and swept Lee Harvey Oswald’s Soviet/Cuban connections under the rug (which conveniently gave rise to all kinds of anti-American conspiracy theories regarding the JFK assassination).

Communist intellectuals, such as the members of the infamous Frankfurt School, had long been preparing the ground for a revolutionary breakthrough also in the industrialised countries. Theodor Adorno’s The Authoritarian Personality was published in 1950; Herbert Marcuse’s Eros and Civilization, in 1955. French existentialist (and communist) Simone de Beauvoir came out with her cult book The Second Sex in 1949. Icon of American second-wave feminism (and also a communist), Betty Friedan, published her feminist “bible”, The Feminine Mystique, in 1963. And so, the “British Invasion” into the United States, starting in early 1964 with the Beatles and soon to be followed by the Rolling Stones and other bands, didn’t come out of the blue at all. Nor did the rising tide of nationwide unrest (that was as much about revolution as it was about civil rights), or the legendary 1967 “Summer of Love” or the 1969 Woodstock music festival. The way things were beginning to fall apart was clearly by design. And the post-Catholic “church” in Rome, part and parcel of the Revolution itself, found it all wonderful! Liberation across the board! Said the second Pope of the Council, Paul VI (who was a personal friend of the General Secretary of the Italian Communist Party, Palmiro Togliatti, and the translator of Jaques Maritain’s Integral Humanism into Italian) in his 1965 speech before the UN General Assembly in New York:

It is your task here to proclaim the basic rights and duties of man, his dignity and liberty, and above all his religious liberty. We are conscious that you are the interpreters of all that is paramount in human wisdom. We would almost say: of its sacred character. For your concern is first and foremost with the life of man, and man’s life is sacred. No one may dare to interfere with it. . . . The people turn to the United Nations as their last hope for peace and concord. . . . [The goals of the UN] are the ideal that mankind has dreamed of in its journey through history. We would venture to call it the world’s greatest hope—for it is the reflection of God’s design—a design transcendent and full of love—for the progress of human society on earth; a reflection in which We can see the gospel message, something from heaven come down to earth.

Wasn’t that a bizarre thing to say for a supposed Vicar of Christ? Praising the godless, socialistic United Nations as “the world’s greatest hope”?  But he wasn’t a man of God, much less an authentic Pope, but a communist usurper, and the communists of Rome and Provincia, following his death in 1978, indeed plastered the house walls of Rome with sympathetic obituaries honouring “his passionate effort and elevated humanity with which he worked for the peace and progress of the peoples…”

And so, the world’s last line of defence against communism – which had very much been the old, pre-1958 Roman Catholic Church – had fallen, had been erased. The implications and consequences of this event were, naturally, absolutely catastrophic. If not even the Catholic Church criticises communism, maybe communism isn’t that bad, after all! If she avoids discussing religious persecution behind the then-Iron Curtain, maybe there is no religious persecution under communism! On top of it, if she herself promotes a secular “humanism”, maybe Christendom and communism are perfectly compatible! Perhaps, communism is really the true Christendom we’ve all been longing for for such a long time! You see: By turning the Catholic Church upside down, communism had rid itself of its fiercest and most serious enemy. And that’s where the resistance against all aspects of the revolution virtually collapsed. School prayer: gone: As a result, piety: gone. Humility: gone. Authority: gone. Connubial trust and fidelity: gone. Patriotism: gone. Self-reliance and individual responsibility: gone. Decency: gone. Courtesy: gone. Chastity: gone. Courtship: gone. Sacredness of the unborn: gone. Everthing gone!

Since that fabulous victory over the old Church, all that communism needed was some more time to fully consolidate its position and let the older generation who still was trained in the old ways die off. The height of irony was of course the alleged “collapse” of communism thirty years ago, by which the West lost any remaining focus whatsoever. Today, the once-free world lies in shambles, while the communist world has armed itself to the teeth with state-of-the-art weapons that the West, having lost its image of the enemy, failed to build.

And it all started with Roncalli & Montini’s questionable “aggiornamento” (i.e., updating) of the Church, the inevitable (and perfectly intended) result of which was a church embracing the world, rather than the world embracing Christ! Paul VI knew what he was saying when he spoke of the smoke of Satan having made its way into the Temple of God. What he didn’t say was that he himself served as the devil’s abominable master of ceremonies in this dreadful transformative operation…

As a reminder, here are some excerpts from Pope Pius XI’s crystal-clear encyclical, Divini Redemptoris – On Atheistic Communism, of March 19, 1937 (which should be read in full), that puts things back into proportion:

[…] Ever since the days when groups of “intellectuals” were formed in an arrogant attempt to free civilization from the bonds of morality and religion, Our Predecessors overtly and explicitly drew the attention of the world to the consequences of the dechristianization of human society. With reference to Communism, Our Venerable Predecessor, Pius IX, of holy memory, as early as 1846 pronounced a solemn condemnation, which he confirmed in the words of the Syllabus directed against “that infamous doctrine of so-called Communism which is absolutely contrary to the natural law itself, and if once adopted would utterly destroy the rights, property and possessions of all men, and even society itself.” Later on, another of Our predecessors, the immortal Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, defined Communism as “the fatal plague which insinuates itself into the very marrow of human society only to bring about its ruin.” With clear intuition he pointed out that the atheistic movements existing among the masses of the Machine Age had their origin in that school of philosophy which for centuries had sought to divorce science from the life of the Faith and of the Church. […] The Communism of today, more emphatically than similar movements in the past, conceals in itself a false messianic idea. A pseudo-ideal of justice, of equality and fraternity in labor impregnates all its doctrine and activity with a deceptive mysticism, which communicates a zealous and contagious enthusiasm to the multitudes entrapped by delusive promises. […] The doctrine of modern Communism, which is often concealed under the most seductive trappings, is in substance based on the principles of dialectical and historical materialism previously advocated by Marx, of which the theoricians of bolshevism claim to possess the only genuine interpretation. According to this doctrine there is in the world only one reality, matter, the blind forces of which evolve into plant, animal and man. Even human society is nothing but a phenomenon and form of matter, evolving in the same way. By a law of inexorable necessity and through a perpetual conflict of forces, matter moves towards the final synthesis of a classless society. In such a doctrine, as is evident, there is no room for the idea of God; there is no difference between matter and spirit, between soul and body; there is neither survival of the soul after death nor any hope in a future life. Insisting on the dialectical aspect of their materialism, the Communists claim that the conflict which carries the world towards its final synthesis can be accelerated by man. Hence they endeavor to sharpen the antagonisms which arise between the various classes of society. Thus the class struggle with its consequent violent hate and destruction takes on the aspects of a crusade for the progress of humanity. On the other hand, all other forces whatever, as long as they resist such systematic violence, must be annihilated as hostile to the human race. Communism, moreover, strips man of his liberty, robs human personality of all its dignity, and removes all the moral restraints that check the eruptions of blind impulse. There is no recognition of any right of the individual in his relations to the collectivity; no natural right is accorded to human personality, which is a mere cog-wheel in the Communist system. In man’s relations with other individuals, besides, Communists hold the principle of absolute equality, rejecting all hierarchy and divinely-constituted authority, including the authority of parents. What men call authority and subordination is derived from the community as its first and only font. Nor is the individual granted any property rights over material goods or the means of production, for inasmuch as these are the source of further wealth, their possession would give one man power over another. Precisely on this score, all forms of private property must be eradicated, for they are at the origin of all economic enslavement. […] When all men have finally acquired the collectivist mentality in this Utopia of a really classless society, the political State, which is now conceived by Communists merely as the instrument by which the proletariat is oppressed by the capitalists, will have lost all reason for its existence and will “wither away.” However, until that happy consummation is realized, the State and the powers of the State furnish Communism with the most efficacious and most extensive means for the achievement of its goal. Such, Venerable Brethren, is the new gospel which bolshevistic and atheistic Communism offers the world as the glad tidings of deliverance and salvation! It is a system full of errors and sophisms. It is in opposition both to reason and to Divine Revelation. It subverts the social order, because it means the destruction of its foundations; because it ignores the true origin and purpose of the State; because it denies the rights, dignity and liberty of human personality. How is it possible that such a system, long since rejected scientifically and now proved erroneous by experience, how is it, We ask, that such a system could spread so rapidly in all parts of the world? The explanation lies in the fact that too few have been able to grasp the nature of Communism. The majority instead succumb to its deception, skillfully concealed by the most extravagant promises. By pretending to desire only the betterment of the condition of the working classes, by urging the removal of the very real abuses chargeable to the liberalistic economic order, and by demanding a more equitable distribution of this world’s goods (objectives entirely and undoubtedly legitimate), the Communist takes advantage of the present world-wide economic crisis to draw into the sphere of his influence even those sections of the populace which on principle reject all forms of materialism and terrorism. And as every error contains its element of truth, the partial truths to which We have referred are astutely presented according to the needs of time and place, to conceal, when convenient, the repulsive crudity and inhumanity of Communistic principles and tactics. Thus the Communist ideal wins over many of the better minded members of the community. These in turn become the apostles of the movement among the younger intelligentsia who are still too immature to recognize the intrinsic errors of the system. The preachers of Communism are also proficient in exploiting racial antagonisms and political divisions and oppositions. They take advantage of the lack of orientation characteristic of modern agnostic science in order to burrow into the universities, where they bolster up the principles of their doctrine with pseudo-scientific arguments. If we would explain the blind acceptance of Communism by so many thousands of workmen, we must remember that the way had been already prepared for it by the religious and moral destitution in which wage-earners had been left by liberal economics. Even on Sundays and holy days, labor-shifts were given no time to attend to their essential religious duties. No one thought of building churches within convenient distance of factories, nor of facilitating the work of the priest. On the contrary, laicism was actively and persistently promoted, with the result that we are now reaping the fruits of the errors so often denounced by Our Predecessors and by Ourselves. It can surprise no one that the Communistic fallacy should be spreading in a world already to a large extent de-Christianized. […] This, unfortunately, is what we now behold. For the first time in history we are witnessing a struggle, cold-blooded in purpose and mapped out to the least detail, between man and “all that is called God.” Communism is by its nature anti-religious. It considers religion as “the opiate of the people” because the principles of religion which speak of a life beyond the grave dissuade the proletariat from the dream of a Soviet paradise which is of this world. […]




© The Contemplative Observer 2021


The So-Called Left-Right Paradigm Isn’t Just Useless; It’s a Trap!


The historical origins of the left-right political dualism famously lead us back to the early stages of the French Revolution, when King Louis XVI, under growing pressure from his Parlement and with rebellion brewing throughout the kingdom, summoned in January 1789, after a pause of 175 years, once again an Estates-General, to be held in May of the same year. Louis’ attempt to sort things out (that were aggravated particularly by France’s then-disastrous state finances) and preserve his absolutist reign failed, and what started out as an orderly Estates-General soon turned into a revolutionary “National Assembly” driven by the Third Estate, i.e., the Commons, which were soon joined by an ever-increasing number of nobles. (No doubt, the Masonically inspired Enlightenment, promoted by the likes of Voltaire, Rousseau and the Encyclopédistes, had prepared the ground for revolution, to begin with.) At first, France remained – in theory – a monarchy, albeit seemingly on a path to becoming a constitutional monarchy. In reality, after the Storming of the Bastille on July 14, 1789, the king essentially became a captive of the revolution, was finally overthrown altogether in September 1792 (which was the foundation of the First French Republic), tried, and executed like a criminal on January 21, 1793.

Now, as far as the left-right paradigm is concerned, it stems from a seating arrangement that developed in the first weeks of the French National Assembly in June 1789: To the left of the chairman (and thus of the king) sat the Third Estate, the Commons, the revolutionaries (also known as the “bourgeoisie”). To his right sat the First and Second Estates, i.e. the clergy and the nobility, who were loyal to the king. (The biblical analogy to sitting “at the right hand of God” is striking.) Hence, being “on the left” means being part of the revolution (or the eternal rebellion, if you will). Being on the right, in contrast, means standing on the side of, literally, righteousness and goodness. The English/Latin word “sinister”, by the way, as the Latin original means: “left”!

Over the years and centuries this political dualism has constantly shifted further left, with the “bourgeoisie”, at the time of the French Revolution representing the “revolution”, later becoming the so-called “reaction”, challenged by a new set of revolutionaries (spoilt upperclass kids, all of them), who claimed to be speaking up for the “exploited”, the “downtrodden”, for the “proletariat”. Needless to say, these political adventurers (nay: political criminals) have never delivered “progress” or any sort of improvement of people’s lives, but have brought with them solely death and destruction and infinite misery. It all boils down to being a recipe for complete overthrow of any traditional (lawful and God-given) order whatsoever. Everything else is sweet and deceptive rhetoric.

But why is the classification of left and right, as stated in the header of this piece, useless and even a trap? Not only because of the obvious fact that not everyone posing as a conservative is indeed a conservative. There is a much more complicated element involved in all of this, which should make us think: In the course of the 20th century, the political label of being on the “right” (meaning, being conservative and traditional or royalist) all of a sudden acquired a completely new, additional meaning; a meaning which has nothing to do with conservatism at all. It now (confusingly) could also mean being a National Socialist (a.k.a. “Nazi”) or a fascist (along the lines of Mussolini’s fascism, first of all). Were Hitler and Mussolini (both, mad totalitarians) conservatives and “reactionaries”, warranting the same political label to be applied to them and to traditionally-minded conservatives (who, by the way, if their traditionalism is sincere, are never atheists or nihilists, but believers in God)? There is a horrible and scandalous contradiction between being “on the right” in the sense of being conservative, and being allegedly “on the right” in the sense of following the detestable ideologies of either Nazi Germany’s “Führer” Adolf Hitler or Fascist Italy’s “Duce” Benito Mussolini! This confusion has not come about by chance. It’s been the result of a deliberate defamation effort on the part of the revolution (meaning, of communists) to discredit conservatives by more or less equating them to Nazis and fascists! It’s a semantic trick! And there even is the brand “far-right” or “extreme right”, which is funny, because since when have traditional conservatives been into extremism? After all, one can’t be more conservative than conservative! Either one is conservative, or one isn’t. To say somebody is “a bit” conservative is as non-sensical as to say someone is “extremely” conservative, or he is a “conservative extremist”. Either you are conservative (valueing tradition, family, God and country), or you aren’t! There is no possibility of “extremism” in being conservative, only the question of being genuinely conservative, yes or no! And yet, “right” – according to the script given to us by Marxist Orwellians – is supposed to mean conservative, and “far right” or “extreme right” is supposed to mean National Socialism or fascism. They have even invented the term “religious right” – very dangerous! – to make sure every “decent conservative” stays away from religion, even though there is no conservatism without acknowledging that the foundation, not only of our entire civilisation, but of life in the first place, is God, the Creator of you and me and everything on earth and in the heavens!

Both Hitler and Mussolini were rabid progressives and revolutionaries! They held no sympathies whatsoever for the old elites (even though they cleverly manipulated them). They were just as much against the aristocracy, the Church and, yes, against conservatives at large, like the Bolsheviks were in the Soviet Union! And although the Hitlerian programme was primarily based on race rather than class (with the Jews and other groups in their genodical focus), the “Deutsche Volksgemeinschaft” nonetheless represented a form of fierce collectivism, as well! Hitler and Mussolini weren’t reactionaries, but ambitious competitors inside the wider camp of the revolution – which is why we can observe today Russia’s fake-nationalist, still-communist regime under Putin and China’s chauvinist-communist regime under Xi adopt, with great ease, elements of Hitler’s National Socialism! After all, the Nazis and the fascists were, in essence, Marxist heretics, but in no way anti-Marxists! (The Nazis didn’t call themselves “National Socialists” without reason, while Mussolini started out initially as an official socialist!) And so, Nazis and fascists are NOT on the right AT ALL, but of course on the left!!!

Leading this thought to its logical conclusion, this author would suggest that conservatives stop using or even accepting the label “right” precisely because of the misleading double meaning of the word, as it’s being used nowadays. Conservatism isn’t a position halfway toward National Socialism or fascism! On the contrary, conservatives are threatened by communists and fascists (whoever they may be) alike! Call yourselves conservatives, or (as for the American context) Constitutionalists, or patriots, or all of the above, but please, please stop embracing the killer label of “right-wingers”, which places you in the same corner with Nazis and fascists (while the communist thugs, and their overlords, sailing under the banner of “anti-fascism” are the true elephants in the room of fascism, and no one else).

We need to stop using the manipulative language of the enemy (and communists ARE every living being’s enemy), which is designed to distort the truth and ultimately brand us as the dangerous totalitarians that they are (this applies not only to the term “political right”, but to a whole array of words, including the word “capitalism”, which is actually a communist smear word). With regard to “live-and-let-live” libertarians, who don’t care much about values and principles, may they wake up in time to the reality that without recognising the difference between right and wrong, ultimately between good and evil, freedom becomes, first a joke, and then destroyed.



© The Contemplative Observer 2021                     

Obama’s Big-C Communists Are Back, and Back to Stay


The carp enjoys being seethed in cream, and the bourgeois being slain by a Power which is stern, and ready to kill him… Even though our souls may revolt from the task, let us use strong measures, and bring the bourgeoisie to their senses, seeing that we need but shoot a few dozen of the fools, of the wastrels, and make the rest clean the streets, and set their womenfolk to scour out Red Guard barracks (though even this is too great an honour for them!), for the bourgeoisie to realise that our Government is a Government come to stay, and that it is useless to look for help from Englishmen or Hottentots. (From a Bolshevist newspaper article during the years of Dzerzhinsky’s Red Terror in the early Soviet Union. In: Sergey Petrovich Melgounov: The Red Terror In Russia. First published 1924. Edward Harle Ltd., 2008. p. 27.)

In the new worldwide communist federation the present different brands of communism would disappear, to be replaced by a uniform, rigorous brand of Leninism. The process would be painful. Concessions made in the name of economic and political reform would be withdrawn. Religious and intellectual dissent would be suppressed. Nationalism and all other forms of genuine opposition would be crushed. Those who had taken advantage of detente to establish friendly Western contacts would be rebuked or persecuted like those Soviet officers who worked with the allies during the Second World War. In new communist states – for example, in France, Italy, and the Third World – the “alienated classes” would be reeducated. Show trials of “imperialist agents” would be staged. Action would be taken against nationalist and social democratic leaders, party activists, former civil servants, officers, and priests. The last vestiges of private enterprise and ownership would be obliterated. Nationalization of industry, finance, and agriculture would be completed. In fact, all the totalitarian features familiar from the early stages of the Soviet revolution and the postwar Stalinist years in Eastern Europe might be expected to reappear, especially in those countries newly won for communism. Unchallenged and unchallengeable, a true communist monolith would dominate the world. (Anatoliy Golitsyn. The Communist Strategy of Deception and Disinformation. Dodd & Mead, 1984. pp. 345-347.)

You know, when the communists are getting near success … there’s gonna come a time where they’re gonna have to run butt-naked to the finish line, they’re gonna have to throw off all their pretenses, they’re gonna have to throw off all the lies, because they’re saying, “We’re going for power! We’re going for it! We’re going for broke!” And that’s what the communists in this country are doing right now. They’re going for broke. And it’s a very risky move for them, because it’s gonna backfire hugely if they don’t win. But if they do win, we’re done. They will control this country, and they will come after their enemies. (Trevor Loudon, author of (1) Barack Obama and the Enemies Within; (2) The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress; and (3) White House Reds: Communists, Socialists and Security Risks Running for U.S. President, 2020, in a half-hour interview of October 2020 on Cultural Marxism.)       

It’s been a long time comin’, but tonight, because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America! … The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year, or even in one term, but, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there! I PROMISE YOU: WE, AS A PEOPLE, WILL GET THERE! (Barack Obama, 2008 victory speech, Grant Park, Chicago, Nov. 4, 2008)


Get where? Get to communism! Obama’s “promise” was in reality a thinly veiled threat. The brazen communist coup d’etat that just happened (not the least, thanks to media complicity) didn’t come out of the blue. In fact, it had already begun twelve years ago when Obama got first elected (to say nothing of a century’s worth of revolutionary preparation that has led to this horrifying outcome, in the first place). America’s political institutions have miserably failed throughout. The revolution rolled over them all, and none dared stand up for the country, that now seems lost. Pres. Trump, probably the most-smeared president in all of U.S. history, tried his best and ended up abandoned and betrayed. A landslide victory was turned into a monumental defeat. While the putschists are getting ready for countrywide persecution of conservative “deplorables”, branding them, after their January 6th Reichstag Fire-like provocation, as “domestic terrorists”. What a shameless inversion of reality (but what else can one expect from these people other than lies, lies, and more lies). Freedom-loving Americans and those sympathetic with them across the world are still trying to comprehend what has occurred: Could it be that America, the very leader and defender of the free world,  has indeed fallen? And if so, what are the ramifications for the whole of mankind? What kind of fate is awaiting the once-United States? And what lies in store for the rest of the not-yet-communist world? Is the West checkmate? Are we about to enter an era of absolute darkness, the era of communist world dominion? We shudder. Outstanding U.S. geopolitical analyst J. R. Nyquist ( wrote this the other day as a response to a reader’s comment: “Communism has overtaken many other countries. Why should God spare us? Are we particularly deserving? No. The situation itself is a test. Let’s see if we fail the test.” Nyquist, replying to another commenter, also wrote:

We must remember that the country is attempting to process what has happened. People are not seeing the same things, but are sometimes imagining what is not there (on the left and the right). This is a very real problem, which is causing a lot of confusion. In fact, the present hysteria fosters abject fantasies about Trump and secret military actors, insurrectionist plots, etc. People are not into reality at times like these, because their desire for fantasy gets the better of them, on account of their inability to digest the bad news. If there is an answer to our desperate situation, it is something that has not occurred to us; or is something that has not happened. Everything in history is resolved, one way or another; often tragically, always opening the door to the next thing. There are no guaranteed happy endings in this world; only in the mystery that follows. So very much lies in our consciousness, and depends on our qualities, and our strengths. The reality of what is happening, because it involves elements of deception and self-deception, is not fully recognized as yet. There is, as well, an hysterical optimism that has existed in the American psyche, which is manifesting on the right and left in different ways. Contact with reality is not readily met with. Dan Bongino is an exception. A rare person who is actually processing the situation. We need a thousand like him.

Glenn Beck recently explained in one of his presentations how he could have possibly foreseen much of the development that has indeed come to pass. His answer was that he takes those people on the hard Left at their word! He takes them seriously and does not dismiss their threats as empty talk. The time has come, for all of us, to acknowledge that the “Democrats”, who are now in fact communists, indeed “mean it”. So, what are they saying, whether as politicians, activists or journalists (beyond mere name-calling)? They are talking about barring conservatives from “polite society” and completely marginalising them. They use demonising, to the point of dehumanising invective of the worst kind (without repercussions to be feared, as the “revolutionary vanguard” stands above the law). They cancel the conservatives’ right to free speech, free assembly (the Covid lockdowns, where they are in place, are coming nicely to their assistance). They are talking about disarming the American population (after all, courtesy of the Jan. 6  false-flag operation at the Capitol, conservatives are now “dangerous domestic terrorists” that need to be dealt with accordingly). They are branding Christendom as an outlandish and politically dangerous cult (while the real dangerous cult is their own Marxism – do these people even realise how much they project their own madness onto everybody else?). Reminiscent of the radicals of the sixties and seventies, they slander police officers as “pigs”. They are calling for “lists” to be made of conservatives supporting the “worst pig” of them all, “fascist-racist-mysoginist” Donald Trump. They demand that conservatives be excluded from public service and pressure companies to screen their staff with regard to political affiliation. They even talk about the need for conservatives to get “reprogrammed” and “re-educated”, possibly in camps. Some media figures such as unhinged “Trump-resister” Keith Olbermann (who calls Trump a madman, a terrorist, and “Twitler”) go as far as to publicly demand, on air, that Trump be “expunged”. Rages Olbermann on Oct. 8, 2020,

So, let us brace ourselves! The task is twofold: The terrorist Trump must be defeated, must be destroyed, must be devoured, at the ballot box. And then he and his enablers, and his supporters, and his collaborators, and the Mike Lees, and the William Barrs, and the Sean Hannitys, and the Mike Pences, and the Rudy Giulianis, and the Kyle Rittenhouses, and the Amy Coney Barretts, must be prosecuted and convicted and removed from our society while we try to rebuild it and to rebuild the world Trump has nearly destroyed by turning it over to a virus.

Totally over the top, and speaks entirely for itself. But is it just insanity? Could it not be also very calculated propaganda to finish off freedom-loving, conservative (and, by the way, tolerant) America once and for all and set the stage for actual Red Terror? It’s the Leninist programme that is a programme of hatred, not anybody else’s. It’s the Leninists who are fiercely intolerant of everything and everybody standing in their way to total power. It’s the Leninists (as history has abundantly shown) who are the terrorists (now hiding behind fictitious race arguments and so forth). As the Jacobin terrorists of the French Revolution, in all frankness, put it: “La fraternité ou la mort!” (‘Brotherhood or Death!’) The Cuban Revolution came up with a similar slogan: “Revolución o muerte” (‘Revolution or Death!’). What sounds like a “heroic” credo, is at the same time a sinistre threat. Yet, during the Revolution of 1848, there was a popular saying in circulation in Germany that more than anything else hit the nail, proverbially, on the head with regard to the “benevolent intentions” of the revolution: “Und willst du nicht mein Bruder sein, so schlag’ ich dir den Schädel ein.” (freely interpreted by this author:, ‘If you refuse to be my brother, I’ll smash your head, one way or other.’) Of course, communism always includes both insanity and methodical precision. The insane part is their political objective; the methodical part is their indeed-scientific way of how “to get there”, to paraphrase Comrade Obama.

No defeatism intended, one must see that the world has arrived at the brink of an unprecedented abyss. And no institution, secular or religious, seems to be willing or able to do anything about it. Worse, the contemporary Catholic Church has very much been part of this Marxist revolution as well ever since the days of Vatican II. Tough times for conservatives, tough times indeed! We’ve already entered totally uncharted territory, and no historical comparisons seem to fit, as there is no dividing line visible between good and evil any more. It’s now one all-encompassing darkness. Where are the heroes who would selflessly and courageously step forth? Donald Trump tried, and was defeated. For now, Obama, Harris & friends will at record speed undo every one of Pres. Trump’s accomplishments. They will run the United States into the ground as never before, culturally, economically, and militarily – until Moscow and Beijing may decide that the time has come to finally slay their hated “imperialist class enemy”, giving way to a new era of everlasting “worldwide democratic peace”…




© The Contemplative Observer 2021


The First-Ever “Vaporisation” of a U.S. President Is Underway

Truly, we are living in exceptional times! Nothing appears to be fixed anymore; everything’s in flux – first of all, truth itself. Those in control of the narrative have now fully made a mockery of the term “reality”. After all, revolution is about inversion; inversion of all things, including the fundamentals. Turn it all upside down, inside out, back to front! The greater and more shameless the lie, the better. Black is white; two plus two equals five; good is evil, and evil is good. There are no limits to this kind of overthrow of the truth. The rewriting and turning on its head of the Good, True and Beautiful must first slander, then wipe out each and every memory of the old pre-revolutionary days – while the “new normal”, that is predicated on evil, falseness and ugliness, boldly claims the moral highground and just as boldly demonises, marginalises and finally exterminates everything and everybody representing the Ancient Régime. It happened during the French Revolution. It happened during the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the National Socialist Revolution in Germany, the Maoist Revolution in China, and in every other communist takeover anywhere in the world. Now it’s America’s turn, with Europe and the rest of the once-free world soon to be devoured by the communists, as well. Whether we like it or not, it’s World October. As we speak, we’re still in the phase of marginalisation of conservatives, soon to be followed by extermination. The ultimate punishment by (and victory for) the communists, however, is virtually deleting anybody they don’t like from the records, forever. George Orwell’s famous dystopian novel 1984, which is probably the harshest and most prescient polemic against communist totalitarianism ever written, uses for this the term “vaporisation”:

It was always at night – the arrests invariably happened at night. The sudden jerk out of sleep, the rough hand shaking your shoulder, the lights glaring in your eyes, the ring of hard faces round the bed. In the vast majority of cases there was no trial, no report of the arrest. People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: VAPORIZED was the usual word.

Keep in mind: Hubristic communism has always sought and continues to seek to irreversibly establish a “new world”, a “new man”, a “new civilisation” – without God, and with man himself (or rather: “the Party”) enthroned as the architect of his own destiny. We in the Western world, at least the older ones, know well from history where such insane arbitrariness and unchecked concentration of power inevitably lead: The result has always, in every single case, been: TYRANNY. Unfortunately, this knowledge of the nature of so-called socialism/communism – the communists have always used the terms as synonyms, so why shouldn’t we! – this knowledge is not as widespread among the societies forced to live under that system, overt or covert (as, sadly, there is no such thing as post-communism). These unlucky populations were indeed subjected to decades of intense propaganda, disinformation and outright brainwashing. Only on the basis of such “re-wiring” (that famously includes the manipulative technique of “gaslighting”) has it been possible to keep them in check even in a “hybrid”, supposedly post-communist environment, that of course is still controlled by the old communist elite. They have very real blank spots in their collective memory as to what the communists have actually done (and continue to do) to them. In fact, a considerable portion of them longs back for the “good old days” of socialism, where they may not have enjoyed freedom or prosperity, but at least some sense of whatever dubious “security”. In other words, the deletion of true history has already happened in these countries and is now raising its same ugly head in the West, first and foremost – dare we recognise? – in the once-land of the free and home of the brave, the United States of America.

Insofar, the truism that the victors (in a war) write the history, acquires a much more horrible dimension. First, the West even neglected for a long time being at war with communism. Senator Joseph McCarthy’s investigations were ridiculed (and the man himself demonised and destroyed). President John F. Kennedy’s profound warnings are widely forgotten (as is the indisputable fact that his assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was not a “patsy”, but a fanatical communist acting under the direction of, and being probably assisted by, Soviet and Cuban intelligence). Finally, a “new type” of General Secretary of the CPSU rose to power in the person of Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev, basically a more charismatic variation of Czech reform communist Alexander Dubček. Indeed, Dubček’s 1968 “Prague Spring” had been the dress rehearsal for Soviet perestroika some twenty years later (and it was the Western Left that celebrated Dubček more than anybody else at the time). Gorbachev’s impact was devastating: “Iron Lady” Margaret Thatcher melted in his resolute hands like butter. Even staunch anti-communist Ronald Reagan fell for Gorbachev’s deceptive charms and suddenly believed the “Evil Empire” was genuinely interested in democratisation (rather than long-term victory through deception). The alleged “collapse of communism” in 1989/91 indeed cast a terrible spell upon the free world, that naïvely thought peace and friendship and “fruitful cooperation” between the nations were in the cards. Nothing could have been further from the truth, and everybody with eyes to see can see today what giant hoax it has all been. But, open societies – whatever prosperous and free – are always at a massive disadvantage vis-à-vis totalitarian, militaristic communism. They get much more easily infiltrated; public opinion can be greatly manipulated, too. Their political leaders, by merely meeting communist leaders, risk getting tricked at best, or else getting harmed physically. America’s Original Sin in this regard was certainly FDR’s diplomatic recognition of the USSR at the beginning of his twelve-year presidency in 1933. Writes the brilliant Diana West in her 2013 reference work, American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character (pp. 195, 196):

The West’s decision to recognize the USSR – and its determination to keep recognizing it, no matter how much lying and acquiescence to betrayal that entailed – did more to transform us than any single act before or since. The profound diplomatic shift – part Faustian bargain, part moral lobotomy – didn’t just invite the Soviet Union into the community of nations. To make room for the monster-regime, the United States had to surrender the terra firma of objective morality and reality-based judgment. No wonder, then, that tens of thousands of Dreyfus Cases in Russia meant nothing to the “conscience of the civilized world.” Implications had already been officially sundered from facts.

To be sure, there was something new in the way recognition ever after reordered the priorities and actions of our republic, something that marked the beginning of a different kind of era. The fact is, the implications of normalizing relations with the thoroughly abnormal USSR didn’t just reward and legitimize a regime of rampantly metastasizing criminality. Because the Communist regime was so openly and ideologically dedicated to our destruction, the act of recognition defied reason and the demands of self-preservation. Recognition and all that came with it, including alliance, would soon become the enemy of reason and self-preservation. In this way, as Dennis J. Dunn points out, we see a double standard in American foreign policy evolve, and, I would add, in American thinking more generally. It was here that we abandoned the lodestars of good and evil, the clarity of black and white. Closing our eyes, we dove head first into a weltering morass of exquisitely enervating and agonizing grays.

How can one ever expect to effectively deal with a deadly enemy whom one has mistakenly decided to make into a “friend”? In the ghastly parallel universe of communist class struggle, as it’s called, eternal war to the death against the “capitalist oppressor” is absolutely non-negotiable. “Either the dictatorship of the landowners and capitalists, or the dictatorship of the proletariat … There is no middle course … There is no middle course anywhere in the world, nor can there be,” said Lenin. By engaging in rapprochement with these political criminals, one opens a dangerous pathway to ultimate suicide by becoming like them. Has there ever been an exorcist who successfully cast out a demon by treating it “on an equal footing”, to use the ambiguous language of the documents of Vatian II? The only way of dealing with these monsters, unless one possesses solid exorcistic abilities, would have been NOT TO DEAL WITH THEM AT ALL! KGB-defector Yuri Bezmenov, in his famous 1984 interview conducted by G. Edward Griffin, put it this way:

There must be a very strong national effort to educate people in the spirit of real patriotism, number one. Number two, to explain them the real danger of socialist-communist-whatever welfare state, big-brother government. If people will fail to grasp the impending danger of that development, nothing ever can help United States. You may kiss good-bye to your freedom, including freedoms to homosexuals, to prison-inmates, all these freedoms will vanish, will evaporate in 5 seconds, including your precious lives. – The second thing: at the moment [i.e. in 1984] at least part of the United States population is convinced that the danger is real, they have to force their government – and I’m not talking about sending letters, signing petitions and all these beautiful, noble activities -, I’m talking about forcing United States government to stop aiding communism; because there is no other problem more burning and urgent than to stop the Soviet military-industrial complex from destroying whatever is left of the free world. And this is very easy to do: NO credits; NO technology; NO money; NO political or diplomatic recognition; and of course NO such idiocies as grain deals to USSR. The Soviet people, 270 millions of Soviets, will be eternally thankful to you if you stop aiding a bunch of murderers who sit now in Kremlin and whom President Reagan respectfully calls ‘government’. They do not ‘govern’ anything, least of all such complexity as the Soviet economy. So, basically, two very simple, maybe too simplistic answers or solutions. Nevertheless, they are the only solutions! Educate yourself! Understand what’s going on around you! You are NOT living at a time of peace; you are in the state of war! And you have precious little time to save yourselves. You don’t have much time, especially if we are talking about young generation, there’s not much time left for convulsions and sexual masturbations to the beautiful disco-music. Very soon it will go [snapping] just, just overnight. If we are talking about capitalists, or wealthy businessmen, they, I think, they are selling the rope on which they will hang very soon. If they don’t stop, if they cannot curb their insatiable desire for profit and they will keep on trading with the monster of Soviet Communism, they are going to hang, very soon! And they will pray to be killed, but unfortunately they will be sent to Alaska, probably, to manage industry of slaves. It’s simplistic; I know it sounds unpleasant; I know Americans don’t like to listen to things which are unpleasant, but I have defected not to tell you the stories about such idiocies as microfilm-James-Bond-type espionage, this is garbage, you don’t need any espionage any more. I have come to talk about: SURVIVAL! It’s a question of survival of this system. You may ask me what is it then for me: survival, obviously, because, unlike – as I said: I am now in your boat! If we sink together, we will sink beautifully – together. THERE IS NO OTHER PLACE ON THIS PLANET TO DEFECT TO!

Tragically, the West made all the worst choices. Instead of standing clear of the communists, it has built – to its own detriment – a system of international interdependence, which the communists just love and which has become an irreversible fait accompli! Especially since 1991, it’s been increasingly downhill for the Western world. George H. W. Bush lost his 1992 re-election to radical leftist Bill Clinton. South Africa saw a revolutionary regime change in 1994 from the former Apartheid system to, of all possible options, a government under the communist “Tripartite Alliance” of ANC, South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions, which ever since has run South Africa’s economy and social stability into the ground (they are now threatening the remaining Boer farmers with “expropriation without compensation”, something similar is going on in neighbouring Namibia, which has been ruled since 1990 by the Marxist SWAPO). German reunification in 1990 didn’t work out as expected by Chancellor Helmut Kohl; although West Germany put massive amounts of money into the run-down East, the Left from both sides outmanoeuvred Kohl and finally got control of the whole of Germany. When Soviet propaganda under Gorbachev was praising perestroika i.a. as a project of “acceleration”, one can only say that the development of the 1990s was just that – after which 9/11 opened the new strategic phase of “Grey Terror”, meaning false-flag terror. Then came “The One”, as Oprah Winfrey hailed Barack Obama during the 2008 election campaign. Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan even called him “the Messiah”. Obama’s intense communist connections (to communist “preacherman” Jeremiah Wright, to Communist Party USA operative Frank Marshall Davis, and also to Weatherman communist terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn) hardly made it into the headlines and were all outright denied by Obama himself. Whoever dared present evidence suggesting Obama could have been no less than the ultimate communist Trojan Horse was either ridiculed or simply ignored.

Despite the shocking speed (successful revolutions always overwhelm the other side) at which Americans are now losing their country to a nominal Democratic Party that is meanwhile indistinguishable from the Communist Party USA, nonetheless a great deal of grief work, or mere reflection, seems appropriate, if not necessary, in order to comprehend what’s going on and what has led to this calamitous state of affairs. After all, this is now America’s own Bolshevik Revolution. It may have begun with Barack “Change Has Come to America” Obama’s first election victory twelve years ago (strangely, also Lenin needed twelve years from the failed 1905 Revolution till his definitive takeover in 1917). But now things are all in place for the revolutionaries, and unconcealed Red Terror is coming into sight. One can see the coordination between the radicals inside America and the dangerous moves by Moscow and Beijing. In a way, we have already entered World War III, ironically with one side only fighting. We are witnessing the same tactics as in every other communist revolution applied against the hated “bourgeoisie”: Wild intimidation; public shaming; aggressive ostracisation (they are indeed speaking of excluding conservatives from participating in “polite society”); systematic censorhip of conservatives; threats of ruining their careers, their families, and even threats against their very lives. Nothing of which gets ever prosecuted or brought to a halt, as the system is irredeemably broken. Those who aren’t communists, cower before the aggression, hoping the revolution will spare them.

And then there’s the object of the communists’ fiercest hatred, Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States. The revolution may have stolen a landslide election victory from him, and still they won’t rest until they have totally destroyed both him as a person and his political legacy of “America First”. And that’s where Orwell’s “vaporisation” comes into the picture. The communists certainly do everything they can to slander Donald Trump, to isolate him, to defame his presidency, even to get him arrested or, God forbid, killed. But their final objective goes deeper still. They want to ERASE him. His name will be turned, and is already being turned, into a “non-word”. They will soon suppress every mentioning of him. Following Stalin’s practice of blotting out “disgraced” comrades from photographs and other records, Donald J. Trump may well become the first President of the United States that never was!

While the communist usurping the Chair of Peter will give his “Papal” blessings to it all and most happily deliver the Trump-supporting nuns – God bless them! – to the gallows…


Postscript: Here are some key excerpts from premier Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn’s 1984 book, New Lies for Old: The Communist Strategy of Deception and Disinformation, that foresaw, to a T, what is happening today:

The communist bloc, with its recent accretions in Africa and South-East Asia, is already strong. European-backed Soviet influence and American-backed Chinese influence could lead to new Third World acquisitions at an accelerating pace. Before long, the communist strategists might be persuaded that the balance had swung irreversibly in their favor. In that event they might well decide on a Sino-Soviet “reconciliation.” The scissors strategy would give way to the strategy of “one clenched fist.”

At that point the shift in the political and military balance would be plain for all to see. Convergence would not be between two equal parties, but would be on terms dictated by the communist bloc. The argument for accommodation with the overwhelming strength of communism would be virtually unanswerable. Pressures would build up for changes in the American political and economic system on the lines indicated in Sakharov’s treatise. Traditional conservatives would be isolated and driven toward extremism. They might become the victims of a new McCarthyism of the left. The Soviet dissidents who are now extolled as heroes of the resistance to Soviet communism would play an active part in arguing for convergence. Their present supporters would be confronted with a choice of forsaking their idols or acknowledging the legitimacy of the new Soviet regime.

The Worldwide Communist Federation:

Integration of the communist bloc would follow the lines envisaged by Lenin when the Third Communist International was founded. That is to say, the Soviet Union and China would not absorb one another or other communist states. All the countries of the European and Asiatic communist zones, together with new communist states in Europe and the Third World, would join a supranational economic and political communist federation. Soviet-Albanian, Soviet-Yugoslav, and Soviet-Romanian disputes and differences would be resolved in the wake, or possibly in advance of, Sino-Soviet reconciliation. The political, economic, military, diplomatic, and ideological cooperation between all the communist states, at present partially concealed, would become clearly visible. There might even be public acknowledgement that the splits and disputes were long-term disinformation operations that had successfully deceived the “imperialist” powers. The effect on Western morale can be imagined.

In the new worldwide communist federation the present different brands of communism would disappear, to be replaced by a uniform, rigorous brand of Leninism. The process would be painful. Concession made in the name of economic and political reform would be withdrawn. Religious and intellectual dissent would be suppressed. Nationalism and all other forms of genuine opposition would be crushed. Those who had taken advantage of détente to establish friendly Western contacts would be rebuked or persecuted like those Soviet officers who worked with the allies during the Second World War. In new communist states – for example, in France, Italy, and the Third World – the “alienated classes” would be reeducated. Show trials of “imperialist agents” would be staged. Action would be taken against nationalist and social democratic leaders, party activists, former civil servants, officers, and priests. The last vestiges of private enterprise and ownership would be obliterated. Nationalization of industry, finance, and agriculture would be completed. In fact, all the totalitarian features familiar from the early stages of the Soviet revolution and the postwar Stalinist years in Eastern Europe might be expected to reappear, especially in those countries newly won for communism.Unchallenged and unchallengeable, a true communist monolith would dominate the world.




© The Contemplative Observer 2021

Donald J. Trump, Truth-Teller



Raphael: St. Michael and the Dragon (ca. 1505), Musée du Louvre, Paris.



By the blessing of the upright the city is exalted: but it is overthrown by the mouth of the wicked. (Proverbs 11:11, KJV)



Like or dislike Donald Trump (and whatever the leftwing propaganda machine would try to tell you to the contrary), (1) he is, undeniably so, sharp as a razor blade and always incredibly well informed, (2) he has backbone, daring to call a spade, a spade, and fighting a 24/7 uphill battle, meanwhile for four years and with the determination of an exorcist, against the forces of socialism/communism (which sadly even include today’s Roman Catholic Church), (3) he has thrown himself into the political arena, not for the purpose of personal aggrandisement or gain, but in order to achieve a political turnaround, away from Obama’s revolutionary threat of “fundamental transformation” and towards restoring the constitutional Republic of the United States, (4) he very much is a presidential figure, whom the Revolution hates all the more simply for his strength, authenticness, and genuine concern for the country (they are even calling for his head!), and finally (5) the Left is desperate, given Trump’s immense (and well-earned) popularity, which they couldn’t possibly overcome other than through crippling the economy by massive Covid lock-downs and, quote Joe Biden: “the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organisation in the history of American politics.”

So, let’s examine (apart from Donald Trump’s impressive record as President) what this alleged “idiot”, “self-absorbed narcissist”, “dangerous fascist”, “racist” and “mysogynist” had to say in the second 2020 presidential debate of October 22nd against pale, weak, confused and as-ever dishonest “challenger” Joe Biden… (Exact word-by-word transcript by this author.)



Asked by the moderator about a Covid vaccine said to be coming within weeks and whether this was a guarantee: “No, it’s not a guarantee, but it will be by the end of the year. But I think it has a good chance; there are two companies, I think within a matter of weeks, and it will be distributed very quickly.” 

Moderator asks about which pharmaceutical companies are involved: “Johnson & Johnson is doing very well. Moderna is doing very well. Pfizer is doing very well. And we have numerous others. And then we also have others that we are working on very closely with other countries, in particular Europe.”

Won’t it take well into 2021 at the earliest to get enough Americans vaccinated and won’t mask mandates and social distancing have to be continued until 2022? “No, I think my timeline’s going to be more accurate. I don’t know that they are counting on the military the way I do, but we have our generals lined up, one in particular, that’s the head of logistics, and this is a very easy distribution for him, he’s ready to go. As soon as we have the vaccine, and we expect to have a hundred million vials, as soon as we have the vaccine, he is ready to go.”

Reacting to Joe Biden’s prognostication of a “dark winter” lying ahead with regard to the Covid pandemic: “I don’t think we are going to have a ‘dark winter’, at all. We’re opening up our country, we’ve learned and studied and understand the disease, which we didn’t at the beginning. When I closed and banned China from coming in heavily infected, and then ultimately Europe, but China was in January, months later he was saying I was xenophobic, I did it too soon; now he is saying I should have, you know, moved quicker. But he didn’t move quicker. He was months behind me; many months behind me. And frankly, he ran the H1N1 swine flu, and it was a total disaster; far less lethal, but it was a total disaster. Had that had this kind of numbers, seven hundred thousand people would be dead right now. But it was a far less lethal disease. Look, his own person, who ran that for him, who as you know was his chief of staff, said it was catastrophic, it was horrible, we didn’t know what we were doing. Now he comes up and he tells us how to do this? Also, everything that he said about the way, every single move that he said we should make, that’s what we’ve done. We’ve done all of it. But he was way behind us.”

Responding to Joe Biden claiming that he, Trump, had said the pandemic was going to be over soon: “I didn’t say, ‘over soon’; I say we are learning to live with it. We have no choice. We can’t lock ourselves up in a basement like Joe does. He has the ability to lock himself up, I don’t know, he’s obviously made a lot of money some place, but he has this thing about living in a basement. People can’t do that. By the way, I as the President couldn’t do that. I’d love to put myself in the basement or in a beautiful room in the White House and go away for a year and a half until it disappears. I can’t do that. And, Kristen, every meeting I had, every meeting I had, and I’d meet a lot of families including Gold Star families and military families, every meeting I had, and I had to meet them, I had to, it would be horrible to have cancelled everything. I said, you know, this is dangerous. And, you catch it. And, you know, I caught it, I learned a lot, I learned a lot, great doctors, great hospitals, and now I recovered. 99.9 [%] of young people recover. 99% of people recover. We have to recover. We can’t close up our nation. We have to open our schools, and we can’t close up our nation – or you’re not going to have a nation.”

Responding to Joe Biden’s claim that he, Trump, wouldn’t take responsibility: “Excuse me, I take full responsibility. It’s not my fault that it came here. It’s China’s fault. And, you know what, it’s not Joe’s fault that it came here either. It’s China’s fault. They kept it from going into the rest of China, for the most part, but they didn’t keep it from coming out to the world, including Europe and ourselves.”

Responding to Biden’s claim that he, Trump, had erroneously considered the pandemic as being under control and that, due to Trump’s alleged laissez-faire policy, 200,000 more Americans were going to die: “Look, perhaps just to finish this, I was kidding on that [referring to an ironic joke he made with regard to Covid at some campaign event, which Joe Biden said that Trump was serious about], but just to finish this: When I closed, he said I shouldn’t have closed. And that went on for months. Nancy Pelosi said the same thing. She was dancing on the streets in China Town in San Francisco, but when I closed, he said: This is a terrible thing; he is xenophobic! I think he called me ‘racist’ even, because I was closing it to China. Now he says I should have closed it earlier. It just, Joe, it doesn’t work.”

Responding to Joe Biden’s call for stricter and more extensive anti-Covid measures: “Well, I think we have to respond if I might. Look, all he does is talk about shut-downs. But forget about him; his Democrat governors, Cuomo in New York, you look what’s going on in California, you look at Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Democrats, Democrats all, they are shut down so tight, and they are dying. They are dying. And he supports all these people. All he talks about is shut-downs. No. We’re not going to shut down. And we have to open our schools. And it’s like, as an example, I have a young son, he also tested positive; by the time I spoke to the doctor the second time, he was fine; it just went away. Young people. I guess it’s their immune system.”

Asked by the moderator about recent school shut-downs in Boston and what to do about schools in general: “Okay. I want to open the schools. The transmittal rate to the teachers is very small. But I want to open the schools. We have to open our country! We are not going to have a country! You can’t do this! We can’t keep this country closed! This is a massive country, with a massive economy! People are losing their jobs. They are committing suicide. There is depression, alcohol, drugs, at a level that nobody has ever seen before. There is abuse; tremendous abuse. We have to open our country! You know, I’ve said it often: The cure cannot be worse than the problem itself! And that’s what’s happening! And he wants to close down, he’ll close down the country if one person in our massive bureaucracy says we should close it down!”

Responding to Joe Biden talking about social distancing, rapid testing, plexiglass barriers in restaurants to be made mandatory, and contact-tracing to be increased and so forth: “By the way, we’ll say this: If you go and look at what’s happened to New York, it’s a ghost town! It’s a ghost town. And when you talk about plexiglass, these are restaurants that are dying! These are businesses with no money! Putting a plexiglass is unbelievably expensive! And it’s not the answer. I mean, you’re gonna sit there in a cubicle, rapped around with plastic? These are businesses that are dying, Joe! You can’t do that to people, you can’t! Take a look at New York and what’s happened to my wonderful city! For so many years I loved it, it was vibrant! Now it’s dying! Everyone’s leaving New York!”

Responding to Biden’s claim that the greatest spikes in Corona infections have occurred in Red states in the upper Midwest, his call for mask mandates, and his saying that the Trump administration had not used money already passed by Congress to support anti-Covid measures: “Kristen, New York has lost more than 40,000 people; 11,000 people in nursing homes. When you say, ‘spike’, take a look at what’s happening in Pennsylvania, where they’ve had it closed. Take a look at what’s happening with your friend in Michigan, where her husband is the only one who’s allowed to do anything. It’s been like a prison. Now, it was just ruled unconstitutional. Take a look at North Carolina; they’re having spikes, and they’ve been closed. And they’re getting killed financially. We can’t let that happen, Joe! You can’t let that happen! We have to open up! And we understand the disease. We have to protect our seniors,  we have to protect our elderly! We have to protect especially our seniors with heart problems and diabetes problems, and we will protect. We have the best testing in the world by far. That’s why we have so many cases!”

Explaining his criticism of Anthony Fauci and other infectious disease experts as being ‘a disaster’ and being ‘idiots’, and to whom he is actually listening: “I’m listening to all of them, including Anthony. I get along very well with Anthony, but he did say, ‘Don’t wear masks!’ He did say, as you know, ‘This is not going to be a problem.’ I think he is a Democrat, but that’s okay. He said, ‘This is not going to be a problem. We’re not going to have a problem at all.’ When Joe says that I said, Anthony Fauci said, and others, and many others, and I’m not knocking them – look, nobody knew, nobody knew what this thing was, nobody knew where it was coming from, what it was. We’ve learned a lot. But Anthony said, ‘Don’t wear masks!’ Now he wants to wear a mask. Anthony also said, if you look back, exact words, here is his exact words, ‘This is no problem. This is going to go away soon.’ So, he is allowed to make mistakes. He happens to be a good person.”

Responding to Joe Biden’s accusation that he, Trump, at the beginning deliberately hid the dangerousness of the virus from the American people, but let his people inform Wall Street about it: “Well, this is what I haven’t heard… Somebody went to Wall Street. You are the one that takes all the money from Wall Street! I don’t take it. You have raised a lot of money; tremendous amounts of money. And every time you raise money, deals are made, Joe. I could raise so much more money, as President and as somebody that knows most of these people, I could call the heads of Wall Street, the heads of every company in America, I would blow away every record, but I don’t want to do that, because it puts me in a bad position. And then you bring up Wall Street? You shouldn’t be bringing up Wall Street, because you are the one that takes the money from Wall Street, not me. I could blow away your records, like you wouldn’t believe. We don’t need money. We have plenty of money. In fact, we beat Hillary Clinton with a tiny fraction of the money that she was able to [incomprehensible]. Don’t tell me about Wall Street.”

On National Security

Responding to the moderator’s question about possible Russian/Iranian interference in this election and to Biden’s cryptic insinuation that Trump might be in bed with Russia: “Well, let me respond to the first part as Joe answered. Joe got three and a half million dollars from Russia, and it came through Putin, because he was very friendly with the former Mayor of Moscow, and it was the Mayor of Moscow’s wife, and you got three and a half million dollars. Your family got three and a half million dollars. And, you know, some day you gonna have to explain: Why did you get three and a half million – I never got any money from Russia. I don’t get money from Russia. Now, about your thing last night: I knew all about that. And through John, who was – John Ratcliffe, who was fantastic, DNI, he said: The one thing that’s common to both of them, they both want you to lose, because there has been nobody tougher to Russia, between the sanctions, nobody tougher than me on Russia. Between the sanctions, between all of what I’ve done with NATO; you know, I’ve got the NATO countries to put up an extra 130 billion going to 420 billion dollars a year. That’s to guard against Russia. I sold, while he was selling pillows and sheets, I sold tank busters to Ukraine. There has been nobody tougher on Russia than Donald Trump! And, I’ll tell you, they were so bad, they took over the submarine port, you remember that very well, during your term, during you and Barack Obama, they took over a big part of what should have been Ukraine. You handed it to them. But you were getting a lot of money from Russia. They were paying you a lot of money. And they probably still are. But now, with what came out today, it’s even worse. All of the e-mails, the e-mails, the horrible e-mails of the kind of money that you were raking in, you and your family! And, Joe, you were Vice President when some of this was happening, and it should have never happened. And I think you owe an explanation to the American people. Why is it, somebody just had a news conference a little while ago, who is essentially supposed to work with you and your family, but what he said was damning. And, regardless of me, I think you have to clean it up and talk to the American people. Maybe you can do it right now.”

Responding to Biden saying that he, Trump, won’t pay his taxes, which is why he won’t make his tax returns public, and probably receives money from foreign governments, and that Biden himself has never taken a penny from any foreign source ever in his life: “First of all, I called my accountants, under audit, I’m gonna release them as soon as we can, I want to do it, and it’ll show how successful, how great this company is. But much more importantly than that, people were saying: 750 dollars. I asked them a week ago, I said, ‘What did I pay?’ They said, ‘Sir, you prepaid tens of millions of dollars.’ I prepaid my tax. Tens over the number of years. Tens of millions of dollars I prepaid. Because at some point they think, it’s an estimate, they think I may have to pay tax. So I already prepaid it. Nobody told me that. Nobody told you that. [Moderator trying to interrupt.] Excuse me. And it wasn’t written, whenever they write this, and they keep talking about 750 dollars, which I think is a filing fee. But let me just tell you, I prepaid millions and millions of dollars in taxes, number one. Number two, I don’t make money from China; you do. I don’t make money from Ukraine; you do. I don’t make money from Russia; you made three and a half million dollars, Joe! And your son gave you – they even have a statement that ‘we have to give 10% to the “Big Man”‘. You are the ‘Big Man’, I think. I don’t know, maybe or not. But you’re the ‘Big Man’, I think. Your son said, ‘We have to give 10% to the “Big Man”.’ Joe, what’s that all about? It’s terrible!”

Moderator asks when Trump’s accountants will release his tax returns: “As soon as the audit is finished. I get treated worse than the Tea Party got treated, because I have a lot of people in there, deep down in the IRS, they treat me horribly. We made a deal, it was all settled, until I decided to run for President. I got treated very badly by the IRS, very unfairly. But we had a deal all done. As soon as we were completed with the deal, I want to release it. But, I have paid millions and millions of dollars. It’s worse than paying; I paid in advance, it’s called prepaying your taxes. I paid it in advance.”

Replying to Biden’s accusation that he, Trump, either pays no taxes or very minor taxes and that he admittedly games the system: “So, I was put through a phony witch-hunt for three years. It started before I even got elected. They spied on my campaign. No president should ever have to go through what I went through. Let me just say this. Mueller and eighteen angry Democrats and FBI agents all over the place spent 48 million dollars, they went through everything I had, including my tax returns, and they found absolutely no collusion and nothing wrong. 48 million! I guarantee you, if I spent one million on you, Joe, I could find plenty wrong, because the kind of things that you’ve done and the kind of monies that your family has taken, I mean your brother made money in Iraq, millions of dollars. Your other brother made a fortune, and it’s all through you, Joe, and they say you get some of it, and you do live very well, you have houses all over the place, you live very well.”

Responding to Joe Biden saying that his son Hunter’s foreign deals were in no way unethical and that the only one who made money from China was Donald Trump: “I have no deals with China. By the way, can I just say one thing: His son didn’t have a job for a long time, was sadly no longer in the military service, I won’t get into that, and he didn’t have a job. As soon as he became Vice President, Burisma, not the best reputation in the world, I hear they paid him 183,000 a month, listen to this, a hundred and eighty-three, and they gave him a three million dollar upfront payment, and he had no energy experience! That’s a hundred percent dishonest!”

Moderator suggests Trump might have foreign conflicts of interest as he has allegedly not divested from his company during his time as President, is still promoting his properties abroad, and that his company is keeping a bank account in China: “I have many bank accounts, and they are all listed, and they are all over the place. I mean, I was a businessman doing business. The bank account you’re referring to, which is, everybody knows about it, it’s listed, the bank account was in 2013, that’s what it was, it was opened. It was closed in 2015, I believe. And then I decided, because I was going to do, I was thinking about doing a deal in China, like millions of other people, I was thinking about it and I decided I’m not going to do it, didn’t like it, I decided not to do it, had an account opened and I closed it. Excuse me. And then, unlike him, where he is Vice President and he does business, I then decided to run for President after that. That was before. So I closed it before I even ran for President, let alone became President. Big difference! He is the Vice President of the United States, and his son, his brother and his other brother are getting rich! They are like a vacuum cleaner! They’re sucking up money… [Moderator talks over Pres. Trump]

Following a question by the Moderator whether China should pay for their lack of transparency with regard to the Corona virus and in response to Joe Biden’s claim that he, Trump, has increased the U.S.-China trade deficit (while Obama/Biden were tough on China, he says) and that Trump has been cosying up with Xi, Kim, Putin and other dictators around the world, rather than keeping good relations with America’s allies: “Oh, oh, oh. Excuse me, I have to respond to that. His son walked out with a billion and a half dollars from China to manage after spending ten minutes in office and being in Air Force Two, number one. Number two, there is a very strong e-mail talking about your family wanting to make $ 10 million a year for introductions; introductions.”

Moderator asks what specifically Trump would do to make China pay: “First of all, China is paying. They’re paying billions and billions of dollars. I just gave 28 billion dollars, listen, I just gave 28 billion dollars to our farmers.”

Joe Biden interjects, “Taxpayer’s money!” – “It’s what?” – “Didn’t come from China!” – “No, no. You know who the taxpayer is. It’s called China. China paid 28 billion, and you know what they did to pay it, Joe? They devalued their currency and they also paid up. And you know who got the money? Our farmers. Our great farmers. Because they were targeted. You never charge them anything. Also, I charged them 25% on dumped steel, because they were killing our steel industry. We were not going to have a steel industry. And now we have a steel industry.”

Responding to Biden’s claim Trump doesn’t want to talk about the wellbeing of American families: “That’s a typical political statement. Let’s get off this China thing, and then he looks, ‘The family around the table, everything.’ Just a typical politician when I see that. I’m not a typical politician. That’s why I got elected. ‘Let’s get off the subject of China and let’s talk sitting around the table.’ Come on, Joe. You can do better.”

Moderator asks whether Pres. Trump sees Kim Jong-un’s latest development of ICBMs as a betrayal of their relationship: “No. So, when I met with Barack Obama, we sat in the White House, right at the beginning, had a great conversation that was supposed to be 15 minutes and it was well over an hour, he said the biggest problem we have is North Korea. He indicated we will be in a war with North Korea. Guess what, it would be a nuclear war. And he [meaning, Kim] does have plenty of nuclear capability. In the meantime, I have a very good relationship with him, different kind of a guy, but he probably thinks the same thing about me. We have a different kind of a relationship, we have a very good relationship, and there’s no war. And you know, about two months ago, he broke into a certain area. They said, ‘Oh, there’s going to be trouble.’ I said, ‘No, there are not. Because he is not going to do that.’ And I was right. Look, instead of being in a war where millions of people, Seoul, you know, is 25 miles away, millions and millions, 32 million people in Seoul, millions of people would be dead right now. We don’t have a war, and I have a good relationship.”

Responding to Biden’s accusation that he, Trump, by his North Korea diplomacy, has legitimised Kim Jong-un and that he, Biden, as President would only meet with Kim Jong-un on the basis of a nuclear-free Korean peninsula: “They tried to meet with him. They tried to meet with him. He wouldn’t do it. He didn’t like Obama. He didn’t like him. He wouldn’t do it. I know for a fact. They tried. He wouldn’t do it. And that’s okay. You know what? North Korea: We’re not in a war. We have a good relationship. You know, people don’t understand. Having a good relationship with leaders of other countries is a good thing.”

Responding to Joe Biden’s objection that Kim Jong-un only refused to meet with Obama because Obama’s condition was North-Korean denuclearisation: “And it didn’t happen. Excuse me. He left me a mess. Kristen, they left me a mess. North Korea was a mess. And in fact, if you remember the first two or three months, it was a very dangerous period in my first three months before we sort of worked things out a little bit. They left us a mess, and Obama would be, I think, the first to say it was the single biggest problem he thought that our country [Trump’s mic gone mute].”

On American Families and the Economy

Responding to the Moderator’s question about the Trump administration intending to overturn the Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare) and what this would mean for twenty million Americans who could then lose their health insurance: “Sure. First, I have already done something that nobody thought was possible. Through the legislature, I terminated the individual mandate. That is the worst part of Obamacare, as we call it. The individual mandate, where you have to pay a fortune for the privilege of not having to pay for bad health insurance, I terminated. It’s gone. Now, it’s in court, because Obamacare is no good. But then I made a decision: Run it as well as you can, to my people, great people, run it as well as you can! I could have gone the other route and made everybody very unhappy. They ran it. Premiums are down. Everything’s down. Here’s the problem: No matter how well you run it, it’s no good. What we’d like to do is terminate it; we have the individual mandate done. I don’t know that it’s going to work. If we don’t win, we will have run it and we’ll have Obamacare, but it’ll be better run. But it no longer is Obamacare, because without the individual mandate, it’s much different. Pre-existing conditions will always stay. What I would like to do is a much better healthcare, much better. We’ll always protect people with pre-existing [conditions]. So, I’d like to terminate Obamacare, come up with a brandnew, beautiful healthcare. The Democrats will do it, because there’ll be tremendous pressure on them. And we might even have the House by that time. And I think we’re going to win the House, okay? You’ll see, but I think we are going to win the House. But, come up with a better healthcare, always protecting people with pre-existing conditions, And one thing, very important: We have 180 million people out there that have great private healthcare. Far more than we’re talking about with Obamacare. Joe Biden is going to terminate all of those policies. These are people that love their healthcare. People that have been successful, middle-income people, been successful. They have 180 million plans, 180 million people, families. Under what he wants to do, which will basically be socialised medicine, he won’t even have a choice, they want to terminate 180 million plans. We have done an incredible job at healthcare, and we’re going to do even better. Just you watch.”

Responding to Biden’s promise he would not terminate private insurance and to Biden’s criticism of the existing system: “Excuse me, he was there for 47 years! He didn’t do it. He was now there as Vice President for eight years, and it’s not like it was 25 years ago, it was three and three quarters, it was just a little while ago, right? Less than four years ago. He didn’t do anything. He didn’t do it. He wants socialised medicine. And it’s not that he wants it. His vice president, I mean: she is more liberal than Bernie Sanders and wants it even more. Bernie Sanders wants it. The Democrats want it. You’re going to have socialiced medicine, just like you want it with fracking. ‘We’re not going to have fracking. We’re going to stop fracking. We’re going to stop fracking.’ Then he goes to Pennsylvania after he gets a nomination, where he got very lucky to get it. And he goes to Pennsylvania, and he says, ‘Oh, we’re going to have fracking.’ And [addressing moderator Kristen Welker] you never ask that question. And by the way, so far, I respect very much the way you’re handling this, I have to say. But somebody should ask the question. He goes for a year, ‘There will be no fracking, there will be no petroleum!’ No, no. But that’s a big question! It’s the same thing with socialized medicine.”

Reacting to Joe Biden’s healthcare promises: “Kristen, when he says, when he says ‘public option’, he’s talking about socialiced medicine and healthcare. When he talks about a public option, he’s talking about destroying your Medicare, totally destroying, and destroying your Social Security. And this whole country will come down. You know, Bernie Sanders tried it in his state. He tried it in his state. His governor was a very liberal governor. They wanted to make it work. It was impossible to work. It doesn’t work.”

Responding to Biden claiming to be against socialised medicine: “He tried to get rid of, he tried to hurt Social Security years ago. Years ago. Go back and look at the records. He tried to hurt Social Security years ago. One thing. But this is the guy that when they announced last week, they say the stock market will boom if I’m elected. If he’s elected, the stock market will crash. The biggest analysts are saying that.”

Reacting to Biden’s claim that the stock market is near irrelevant when it comes to the ordinary people, e,g, in Scranton, PA, where he says he comes from: “401(k)s, Kristen, 401(k)s are through the roof. People’s stock are through the roof. And he doesn’t come from Scranton. He lived there for a short period of time before he even knew it. And he left. And the people of Pennsylvania will show you that. They understand.”

Moderator asks why, given the (Corona-caused) rise in unemployment and poverty, Washington can’t get a relief bill passed to help these people: “Because Nancy Pelosi doesn’t want to approve it. I do. I do. But I still have to get, unfortunately… That’s one of the reasons I think we’re going to take over the House, because of her. Nancy Pelosi doesn’t want to approve anything because she’d love to have some victories on a date called November 3rd. Nancy Pelosi does not want to approve it. We are ready, willing, and able to do something. Don’t forget, we’ve already approved three plans. And it’s gone through, including the Democrats, in all fairness. This one, she doesn’t want. It’s near the election. Because she thinks it helps her politically. I think it hurts her politically. If we made a deal, the Republicans will pass it.”

Responding to Biden: “The bill that was passed in the House was a bailout of badly run, high crime, Democrat, all run by Democrat cities and states. It was a way of getting a lot of money, billions and billions of dollars, to these guys. It was also a way of getting a lot of money from our people’s pockets to people that come into our country illegally. We were going to take care of everything for them. And I’d love to do that. I’d love to help them. But what that does, everybody all over the world will start pouring into our country. We can’t do it. This was a way of taking care of them. This was a way of spending on things that had nothing to do with COVID, as for your question. But it was really a big bailout for badly run Democrat cities and states.”

Responding to Biden: “Excuse me. One thing very quickly. He said we have to help our small businesses, by raising the minimum wage? That’s not helping. I think it should be a state option. Alabama is different than New York. New York is different from Vermont. Every state is different. It should be a state option. It’s very important. We have to help our small businesses. How are you helping your small businesses when you’re forcing wages? What’s going to happen, and what’s been proven to happen, is when you do that, these small businesses fire many of their employees.”

Moderator asks about Trump’s position regarding a minimum wage of 15 dollar an hour: ” What I really like, and I would consider it to an extent, but what I really like, in a second administration. But not to a level that’s going to put all these businesses out of business. It should be a state option. Look, I’ve lived in different places. I know different places. They’re all different. Some places, $ 15 is not so bad. In other places, other states, $15 would be ruinings.”

On Immigration

Asked by the Moderator about children separated from their parents at the southern border: “Children are brought here by coyotes and lots of bad people, cartels, and they’re brought here and they used to use them to get into our country. We now have as strong a border as we’ve ever had. We’re over 400 miles of brandnew wall. You see the numbers. And we let people in, but they have to come in legally and they come in through [crosstalk]. But let me just tell you. Let me just tell you. They built cages. You know, they used to say I built the cages, and then they had a picture in a certain newspaper, and it was the picture of these horrible cages and they said, ‘Look at these cages. President Trump built them.’ And then it was determined they were built in 2014. That was him. They built cages. Yes. We’re working on it very… We’re trying very hard. But a lot of these kids come out without the parents. They come over through cartels and through coyotes and through gangs.”

Referring to Joe Biden: “Kristen, they did it. We changed the policy. They did it. We changed. They built the cages. Who built the cages, Joe? Who built the cages, Joe? Kristen, I will say this. They went down. We brought reporters, everything. They are so well taken care of. They’re in facilities that were so clean. They have gotten such good… But just ask one question. Who built the cages? I’d love you to ask him that. Who built the cages, Joe?”

Responding to Biden’s criticism of the so-called human tragedy and his declaring he will give all those 11 million so-called dreamers U.S. citizenship: “Kristen, he had eight years to do what he said he was going to do. And I’ve changed. Without having a specific, we got rid of Catch and Release. We got rid of a lot of horrible things that they put in and that they lived with. But he had eight years he was Vice President. He did nothing except build cages to keep children in. So important. It just shows that he has no understanding of immigration, of the laws. Catch and release is a disaster. A murderer would come in. A rapist would come in. A very bad person would come in. We would take their name. We have to release them into our country. And then you say they come back. Less than 1% of the people come back. We have to send ICE out and Border Patrol out to find them. We would say, ‘Come back in two years, three years. We’re going to give you a court case. You did Perry Mason. We’re going to give you a court case.’ When you say they come back, they don’t come back, Joe. They never come back. Only the really… I hate to say this, but those with the lowest IQ, they might come back, but there are very, very few. You don’t know the law, Joe. Well, check it out. They don’t come back. But we don’t have to worry about it, because they terminated it. So we don’t have to worry about it anymore, Joe.”

On Race in America

Responding to the moderator’s question whether he understands why parents of colour need to fear for their children, given police violence and so forth: “Yes, I do. And again, he’s been in government 47 years, he never did a thing, except in 1994, when he did such harm to the black community, and they were called, and he called them superpredators. And he said that, he said it, superpredators. And they never lived that down. 1994, your crime bill, the superpredators. Nobody has done more for the black community than Donald Trump. And if you look, with the exception of Abraham Lincoln, possible exception, but the exception of Abraham Lincoln, nobody has done what I’ve done. Criminal justice reform, Obama and Joe didn’t do it. I don’t even think they tried because they had no chance at doing it. They might’ve wanted to do it. But if you had to see the arms I had to twist to get that done, it was not a pretty picture. And everybody knows it, including some very liberal people that cried in my office. They cried in the Oval Office. Two weeks later, they’re out saying, ‘Gee, we have to defeat him.’ Criminal justice reform, prison reform, Opportunity Zones with Tim Scott, a great Senator from South Carolina. He came in with this incredible idea for Opportunity Zones. It’s one of the most successful programmes. People don’t talk about it. Tremendous investment is being made, biggest beneficiary, the black and Hispanic communities. And then Historically Black Colleges and Universities, after three years of coming to the office, I love some of those guys, they were great. They came into the office and I said, ‘What are you doing?’ After three years, I said, ‘Why do you keep coming back?’ ‘Because we have no funding.’ I said, ‘You don’t have to come back every year.’ ‘We have to come back.’ Because President Obama would never give them long-term funding and I did. 10 year long-term funding and I gave them more money than they asked for because I said, ‘I think you need more.’ And I said, “The only bad part about this is I may never see you again.” Because I got very friendly with them and they like me and I like them. But I saved Historically Black Colleges and Universities.”

Responding to Joe Biden’s rosy promises of criminal justice reform: “But why didn’t he do it four years ago? Why didn’t you do that four years ago? Even less than that. Why didn’t you when you were Vice President? You keep talking about all these things you’re going to do, and you’re going to do this, but you were there just a short time ago and you guys did nothing. You know Joe, I ran because of you. I ran because of Barack Obama, because you did a poor job. If I thought you did a good job, I would’ve never run. I would’ve never run. I ran because of you. I’m looking at you now, you’re a politician, I ran because of you.”

Responding to Joe Biden’s claim that he, Biden, stood for integrity, character, honour and truth: “Excuse me! If this stuff is true about Russia, Ukraine, China, other countries, Iraq. If this is true, then he’s a corrupt politician. So don’t give me the stuff about how you’re this innocent baby. Joe, they’re calling you a corrupt politician. They’re calling it the laptop from hell. Excuse me, they’re calling it the laptop from hell!”

Reacting to Biden’s claim that 50 former National Intelligence people and five former CIA Directors believe that the Hunter Biden laptop was planted by Russia: “You mean the laptop is now another Russia, Russia, Russia hoax? You got to be kidding me. This is where he’s going. The laptop is Russia, Russia, Russia? You have to be kidding, here we go again with the Russia. Boy, oh, boy. Can’t believe that one.”

Moderator asks Pres. Trump about his position on Black Lives Matter, already implying in her question that he is a racist: “Well, you have to understand the first time I ever heard of Black Lives Matter, they were chanting, ‘Pigs in a blanket,’ talking about police, pigs, pigs, talking about our police. ‘Pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon.’ I said, ‘That’s a horrible thing.’ And they were marching down the street. And that was my first glimpse of Black Lives Matter. I thought it was a terrible thing. As far as my relationships with all people, I think I have great relationships with all people. I am the least racist person in this room.”

Moderator insists there’s a problematic rhetoric on the part of Pres. Trump: “I don’t know. I mean, I don’t know what to say. I got criminal justice reform done and prison reform and Opportunity Zones, I took care of Black colleges and universities, I don’t know what to say, they can say anything, I mean, they can say anything. It’s a very… Makes me sad, because I am the least racist person, I can’t even see the audience because it’s so dark, but I don’t care who’s in the audience, I’m the least racist person in this room.”

Reacting to Biden painting him as a dark racist and Islamophobe and implying that Trump would think he was Abraham Lincoln: “So, he made a reference to Abraham Lincoln, where did that come in? I mean, where did that….. No, I said, ‘Not since Abraham Lincoln has anybody done what I’ve done for the Black community.’ I didn’t say, ‘I’m Abraham Lincoln.’ I said, ‘Not since Abraham Lincoln has anybody done what I’ve done for the Black community.’ Now, you have done nothing other than the Crime Bill, which put tens of thousands of Black men, mostly, in jail. And you know what? They remember it because if you look at what’s happening with the voting right now, they remember that you treated them very, very badly, just take a look at what’s happening out there.”

Responding to Joe Biden’s admission that the crime bills of the ’80s and ’90s were a mistake: “But, why didn’t he get it done? See, it’s all talk, no action with these politicians, why didn’t he get it done? ‘That’s what I’m going to do when I become president.’ You were Vice President along with Obama as your president, your leader, for eight years, why didn’t you get it done? You had eight years to get it done, now you’re saying you’re going to get it done because you’re all talk and no action, Joe. You didn’t get anything done. You got nothing done.”

Pres. Trump insists: “I just have one question: Why didn’t you do it in the eight years, a short time ago? Why didn’t you do it? You just said, ‘I’m going to do that, I’m going to do this.’ You put tens of thousands of mostly Black young men in prison, now you’re saying you’re going to get… You’re going to undo that, why didn’t you get it done? You had eight years with Obama. You know why, Joe? Because you’re all talk and no action.

Biden objects, saying there was a Republican Congress at the time: “Well, you got to talk them into it, Joe, sometimes you got to talk them into it. Like I did with criminal justice reform, I had to talk Democrats into it.”

On Climate Change

Moderator asks both candidates how either of them intend to ‘combat climate change’ and support job growth at the same time: “So, we have the Trillion Trees programme, we have so many different programmes, I do love the environment, but what I want is that cleanest crystal clear water, the cleanest air. We have the best lowest number in carbon emissions, which is a big standard that I noticed Obama goes with all the time, not Joe, I haven’t heard Joe use the term because I’m not sure he knows what it represents or means, but I have heard Obama use it. And we have the best carbon emission numbers that we’ve had in 35 years under this administration, we are working so well with industry, but here’s what we can’t do. Look at China, how filthy it is, look at Russia, look at India, it’s filthy, the air is filthy. The Paris Accord, I took us out because we were going to have to spend trillions of dollars and we were treated very unfairly. When they put us in there, they did us a great disservice, they were going to take away our businesses. I will not sacrifice tens of millions of jobs, thousands and thousands of companies because of the Paris Accord. It was so unfair. China doesn’t kick in until 2030, Russia goes back to a low standard, and we kicked in right away, it would have been… It would have destroyed our businesses. So, you’re ready? We have done an incredible job environmentally, we have the cleanest air, the cleanest water, and the best carbon emission standards that we’ve seen in many, many years. And we haven’t destroyed our industries.

Responding to Joe Biden’s Climate Change mantra and textbook-like citing of the whole list of “Green technologies” and “Green economic opportunities: “They came out and said very strongly $6,500 will be taken away from families under his plan, that his plan is an economic disaster. If you look at what he wants to do, if you look at his plan, his environmental plan, do you know who developed it? AOC plus three, they know nothing about the climate. I mean, she’s got a good line of stuff, but she knows nothing about the climate and they’re all hopping through hoops for AOC plus three. Look, their real plan cost a hundred trillion dollars. If we had the best year in the history of our country for a hundred years, we would not even come close to a number like that. When he says buildings, they want to take buildings down because they want to make bigger windows into smaller windows. As far as they’re concerned, if you had no window, it would be a lovely thing. This is the craziest plan that anybody has ever seen and this wasn’t done by smart people. This wasn’t done by anybody. Frankly, I don’t even know how it can be good politically. They want to spend a hundred trillion dollars. That’s their real number. He’s trying to say it was six. It’s a hundred trillion dollars. They want to knock down buildings and build new buildings with little, tiny, small windows and many other things. And many other things. And many other things. It is crazy. You’ll destroy our country.”

Responding to Biden’s hymns to solar and wind energy: “Excuse me. We are energy independent for the first time. We don’t need all of these countries that we had to fight war over because we needed their energy. We are energy independent. I know more about wind than you do. It’s extremely expensive. Kills all the birds. It’s very intermittent. It’s got a lot of problems and they happen to make the windmills in both Germany and China and the fumes coming up, if you’re a believer in carbon emission, the fumes coming up to make these massive windmills is more than anything that we’re talking about with natural gas, which is very clean. One other thing, solar. I love solar, but solar doesn’t quite have it yet. It’s not powerful yet to really run our big, beautiful factories that we need to compete with the world. So, it’s all a pipe dream, but you know what we’ll do? We’re going to have the greatest economy in the world, but if you want to kill the economy, get rid of your oil industry, you want. And what about fracking? Now we have to ask him about fracking. You said it on tape. I’ll put it on. Excuse me. He was against fracking. He said it. I will show that to you tomorrow. ‘I am against fracking’, until he got the nomination, he went to Pennsylvania. Then he said, ‘But you know what Pennsylvania?’ He’ll be against it very soon because his party is totally against it. The families that we’re talking about are employed heavily and they are making a lot of money, more money than they’ve ever made. If you look at the kind of numbers that we’ve produced for Hispanic, for Black, for Asian, it’s nine times greater the percentage gain than it was under in three years than it was under eight years of the two of them, to put it nicely, nine times more. Now somebody lives, I have not heard the numbers or the statistics that you’re saying, but they’re making a tremendous amount of money. Economically, we saved it and I saved it again a number of months ago, when oil was crashing because of the pandemic. We saved it. Say what you want to bet relationship. We got Saudi Arabia, Mexico and Russia to cut back, way back. We saved our oil industry and now it’s very vibrant again and everybody has very inexpensive gasoline. Remember that.”

Catching Joe Biden totally off guard, as he was speaking about pollution from oil refineries and the harm it does to public health: “Would he close down the oil industry? Would you close down the oil industry?”

Biden, already tired and having gradually lost concentration during the last half hour of the debate, indeed spills the beans about what his party really has in mind: a ‘transition from the oil industry’: Oh, that’s a big statement! That’s a big statement!”

Biden continues that fossil fuels would have to be replaced by renewable energy over time, and no more federal subsidies should be given to the oil industry, instead they should be given to renewable energy: “We actually give it to solar and wind. That’s maybe the biggest statement, in terms of business, that’s the biggest statement, because basically what he’s saying is he is going to destroy the oil industry. Will you remember that, Texas? Will you remember that, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma? Remember that, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Ohio! [Biden then says he will rejoin the Paris Climate Accord and wants a ‘zero-carbon-emission’ economy by the year 2050.] Is he going to get China to do it? Is he going to get China to do it?”

Moderator asks both candidates what they would say, in their inauguration speeches in case they get elected, to those Americans who didn’t vote for them: “We have to make our country totally successful, as it was prior to the plague coming in from China. Now, we’re rebuilding it and we’re doing record numbers, 11.4 million jobs in a short period of time, et cetera. But, I will tell you, go back, before the plague came in, just before, I was getting calls from people that were not normally people that would call me. They wanted to get together. We had the best Black unemployment numbers in the history of our country. Hispanic, women, Asian, people with diplomas, with no diplomas, MIT graduates; number one in the class, everybody had the best numbers. And you know what? The other side wanted to get together. They wanted to unify. Success is going to bring us together. We are on the road to success. But I’m cutting taxes, and he wants to raise everybody’s taxes and he wants to put new regulations on everything. He will kill it. If he gets in, you will have a Depression, the likes of which you’ve never seen. Your 401(k)s will go to hell, and it’ll be a very, very sad day for this country.


This was the 45th President of the United States speaking. A man of tremendous courage, energy, determination, and finally love of country. A man who reveres life (and God, Who is the source of all life), not death (which is celebrated by Satan and his minions); who’s been working for friendly relations between all ethnic groups in society, not racial war; and who is fighting like a lion to save the constitutional Republic of the United States at this moment of clear and present danger.  

Should the ongoing communist coup d’etat against his rightful re-election (which is clearly part of a wider plan of world revolution) succeed,  future generations will read his statements and speeches, perhaps secretly in catacombs, and will draw inspiration and encouragement from this larger-than-life figure who dared stand up against the all-consuming madness of communism right at the hour of its greatest triumph.

So, let us pray:

Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.





© Compiled by The Contemplative Observer 2020



The Great Tribulation Is Here

Albrecht Dürer: The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (1498), Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City.


There is always hope, they say, and that’s certainly true. Without hope, how would God’s great experiment (so to speak) known as man ever make sense? But the Lord gave us free will, and ever since that initial step away from unity, which was the Fall, we’ve been out on the high seas, sometimes more, at other times less pleasing to our Creator. Throughout history, our innate tendency to rather listen to the seductive blandishments whispered in our ears by the eternal Serpent than to the clear-cut Commandments of our Heavenly Father, has produced all kinds of bizarre fruits. Marxism, or communism, is such a fruit (the Second Vatican Council and what it brought about is another). Betraying, robbing, enslaving and butchering generation after generation ever since that infamous day in November of 1917 when Lenin’s Bolsheviks overthrew the provisionary government under Kerensky and subsequently erected the worst tyranny the world had ever seen (and so under the banner of “workers’ liberation”!), communism is still around a century later. It’s well and alive. It’s become stronger, more influential and more sophisticated than ever in taking over country after country (using false splits and false collapses along the way) – until it has finally arrived, as an old and familiar enemy anyway and as a meanwhile frightening and immensely powerful force akin to the Russian Bolshevists a century ago, at the very doorstep of its “main enemy”, the United States of America, where it had been bred and nurtured secretly over many decades (and which is the last obstacle on their path to world dominion). As communists, who are political criminals in the guise of socially concerned “humanitarians”, know how unpopular their programme is, they use deception. Hardly anyone in his right mind would ever vote for a life in misery and servitude. And so communists, who’ve been systematically infiltrating the mainstream of society and every branch of it, come along as “environmentalists” pretending to “save” our climate (that needs no saving), while in fact their goal is to cripple our economies; they come along as multiple Robin Hoods, “concerned” about minorities, while cynically using them for their revolutionary cause. They function along dialectical lines; in other words, they are profound strategists, exploiting every weakness, every division, every shortcoming in society for their ends of “fundamental transformation”. Their vision is an unrealisable utopia (a place that doesn’t exist except in their twisted minds), but they fanatically stick to it with religious fervour. If man’s God-given nature has to be perverted to fit their crazed concept of a “just”, egalitarian, collectivist society, so be it! If huge portions of the population, who refuse to go along with this madness, have to be killed in order to give way to the communists’ envisioned new Red dawn, so be it! If total “creative destruction” of the whole of the wealth, the culture, the tradition of a nation is necessary to start anew from scratch and build communism (they are now talking about a “Great Reset”), go for it! It’s about the most dangerous cult (misunderstood as a political movement) in the whole of history. And it is now ready to take over the entire world!

As various scholars and analysts have repeatedly warned, civilisations – all civilisations – rise and fall. Curiously, a society is most vulnerable when it reaches its climax in terms of wealth, territorial power and cultural refinement. It seems that such a society, spoilt by its manifold conveniences and distractions, loses sight of whatever threats there might be building up against it. It becomes careless and irresponsible (it loses its faith in God), exchanging vigilance for comfort. This is of course a certain path to destruction. And communists, who are all about envy, hatred and overthrow, can be compared to vultures spotting from far away a dying animal, in this context: a dying culture.

Will we be able, at this late hour, to achieve a 180° turnaround in our attitudes – and quick! – in order to ward off otherwise certain defeat? Hard to tell. Time will tell. Because everything is at stake now, including our precious lives! We need to wake up and muscle up, immediately. If we don’t, the grim alternatives will be: Red or Dead!


Hector Berlioz (1803 – 1869): Symphonie Fantastique (1830):

4. March to the Scaffold

5. Dream of a Witches’ Sabbath




© The Contemplative Observer 2020



Europe’s Future: A Soviet “Common European Home from the Atlantic to Vladivostok”?

Marx-Denkmal in Chemnitz

Chemnitz (from 1953 till 1990, Karl-Marx-Stadt), Saxony, Germany (former German Democratic Republic). The colossal Marx monument erected in 1971 is still in place today.


Adopting a bold, realistic, mobilising and inspiring strategy, one that is Leninist in spirit, the struggle for the triumph of Communist ideals, of peace and progress, the 27th Congress of the CPSU expresses the Party’s firm determination to honourably follow our great road, and open up new vistas for the creative energy and revolutionary initiative of the… people’s intelligentsia. The Congress calls on all Soviet people to dedicate all their strength, knowledge, ability, and creative enthusiasm to the great goals of Communist construction, and to worthily continue Lenin’s victorious revolutionary cause, the cause of the October Revolution! (Mikhail Gorbachev, closing address to the 27th CPSU Congress, March 6, 1986)

We are moving towards a new world, the world of Communism. We shall never turn off that road. (Mikhail Gorbachev, Nov. 2, 1987, final words of his report, ‘October and Perestroika: The Revolution Continues’.)

I think that the idea of a Common European Home, the building of a united Europe, and I would like to underline today, of Great Europe, the building of Great Europe, great, united Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, from the Atlantic to Vladivostok, including all our territory, most probably a European-American space, a united humanitarian space: this project is inevitable. I am sure that we will come to building a united military space, as well. To say more precisely: we will build a united Europe, whose security will be based on the principles of collective security. Precisely, collective security. (Soviet foreign secretary of the day, Eduard Shevardnadze, on November 19, 1991, interviewed on a Moscow television programme along with NATO Secretary General of the day, Lord Robertson.)

However, our vision of the European space from the Atlantic to the Urals is not that of a closed system. Since it includes the Soviet Union, which reaches to the shores of the Pacific, and the transatlantic USA and Canada with inseparable links to the Old World, it goes beyond its nominal geographical boundaries. (Mikhail Gorbachev in his Nobel Peace Prize speech in Oslo of June 5, 1991.)

I dare say that the European process has already acquired elements of irreversibility. In such a context, in the process of creating a new Europe… self-determination of sovereign nations will be realised in a completely different manner. (Mikhail Gorbachev, in the same speech in June 1992; nota bene: speaking for the Yeltsin regime to which, allegedly, he was in opposition!)

Russian membership of the Council of Europe will open up intensified new cooperation between Russia and Europe and will assist us in reaching our objectives of achieving membership of the European Union and of NATO. (Then Russian Foreign Minister, Andrei Kozyrev, after Russia’s admission to the Council of Europe by February 8, 1996.)


The fate of the once-free world hangs in the balance as never before. Karl Marx’s evil gospel of rigid egalitarian collectivism coupled with brutal atheism (turning man – or a tiny self-acclaimed “vanguard” of political criminals – into his own god) is about to swallow us all. With economies still under (partial) lock-down and the West’s former vibrant social and cultural life still frozen, with America in particular suddenly facing a more-than-mysterious Bolshevik revolution of her own, and Europe having long changed her loyalties from Washington to Moscow, one can only wonder how freedom is going to be saved at this proverbial eleventh hour. Pres. Trump is trying his best to stem the tide, but his allies, at home and abroad, are few in number.

Oh yes, Europe (i.e., Western Europe) has long embraced Eastern communism, at first by miscalculation and naïveté, lateron deliberately and treasonously by far-left elements (and even outright communist Trojan horses) in control especially of Germany’s federal government. The late German Chancellor Helmut Kohl’s attempt to outsmart Gorbachev, in 1989/90, and ram through German reunification whatever the cost was shortsighted and irresponsible. West Germany took on the burden of rebuilding a completely wrecked East German economy, in exchange for what: for taking in 16-plus million East German communists (so to speak); a strategic blunder not unlike those of the Kaiser’s support for Lenin in early 1917, the 1922 Rapallo Treaty, or the notorious Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of August 1939. Germany is at the heart of the European question (it always has been), but Germans, despite their precise, methodical thinking, have time and again been fooled by the Marxist-Leninists in Moscow. By now, Germany appears to have decided for joining the socialist camp, and be it at the price of a miserable subsidiary position at the feet of Russia. There are still American soldiers in Europe, NATO has not yet been formally dissolved, but it has been massively hollowed out. While Chancellor Merkel quite unashamedly likes to term Russia, “Germany’s strategic partner” – not the United States; Russia!

EWG, 1942

Of course, the traumatic experience of World War II deeply affected a whole generation of European politicians. The idea was to never let the nations of Europe go to war against each other again. A noble idea, on its surface (America was all for it), but pan-German endeavours continued in that new European framework. “Old Fox” Konrad Adenauer (post-war Germany’s first – Catholic-conservative – Chancellor from 1949 till 1963) successfully extracted huge sums from the American taxpayer (what is known as the Marshall Plan) and managed to accomplish what the initial European institution (i.e., the European Coal and Steel Community founded in 1951) was supposed, among other objectives, to precisely forestall: a Europe again dominated by an all-powerful Germany. But Adenauer’s Germany, more than France, was keen on establishing on top of the ECSC and Euratom, a “Common Market” as well, a customs union, which would greatly benefit Germany’s export-oriented economy (there has been found a 1942 German strategy paper that was indeed titled, “Europäische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft”, thus: European Economic Community). That’s where all the trouble began and member states (initially, the other five founding members, France, Italy and the Low Countries) had to gradually sacrifice more and more of their respective national sovereignty (while Germany pretended to do just the same). It was a clever maneouvre on the part of the unchanged pan-Germans, and this new behemoth was soon to include, from 1973, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Denmark and Greenland (Greenland only stayed for a decade); from 1981, Greece; and from 1986, Spain and Portugal (with exception of Ireland, this was at the same time a club of NATO countries). But it went considerably further: Immediately after the alleged “collapse” of communism in Eastern Europe and the deceptive “dissolution” of the Soviet Union on Christmas Day 1991, the whole “process”, as it’s always called, took on a new and quite suspicious dynamics: the former EEC was transformed, via the Maastricht Treaty, into a political union! In other words, one “union” (the Soviet Union) had just been – at least nominally – buried, while a new “union” was given birth! Soon after that, the three neutral (and socialist-leaning) countries of Sweden, Finland and Austria joined in 1995. It was now a club of 15, all basically Western countries (although such a categorisation in the cases of Finland and Austria may have been quite a stretch). But dark clouds – for those with eyes to see – were forming on the horizon, foreboding much worse things to come still.

In this context, it is worth quoting the late British analyst Christopher Story (1938 – 2010), who in a 1995 interview on the perestroika deception conducted by Bill McIlhaney, said (that video appears to be no longer available on YouTube, but this author luckily did a full transcript of it):

What is the Soviet interest in the European Union? The European Union is intended to be the bloc which will expand to cover the whole of the landmass from the Atlantic to Vladivostok. We have, and I have friends among them, we have MPs in the Conservative Party calling for – vociferously – the expansion of the European Union, to include all the so-called non-communist East European countries, all of which, by the way, are run by communists. What happened was that immediately after the so-called changes, groups of apparent dissidents were put in power, and the West thought, “That’s it. We’ve got non-communists in power.” They didn’t stay there for more than a year, most of them, nine months in some cases. In the case of Vaclav Havel, the President of the Czech Republic, he had other tasks to perform, he was in charge of dividing Czechoslovakia in two. Incidently, there is a secret agreement between Kohl, the Chancellor Kohl of Germany, and Gorbachev, which was reached in Geneva in September 1990, for the subdivision, for the division of Central Europe. And under this agreement, a copy of which I have, I obtained in Prague, Czechoslovakia was to be divided. The reason I know this document is genuine is that it’s dated November 1991, and these events took place at the end of 1992. Czechoslovakia was to be divided in halves. The Slovak area was to be in the immediate Russian sphere of influence, and the Czech Republic was to be in the German sphere of influence and was to be merged with Germany within 15 years. So, Havel has other tasks to perform, that’s why he is still visible there. Wałęsa, Lech Wałęsa of Poland, similarly. By the way, he can’t move, he can’t brush his teeth, without the local KGB’s permission. The same applies to Yeltsin, by the way … Yes. The European Union is pushing for expansion eastwards to embrace all these so-called non-communist countries; they are of course controlled by communists. John Major, the British Prime Minister, said on BBC Radio 4, in his New Year message on the 1st of January, 1992, and I quote, because I heard him with my own ears, “I look forward to the day when Russia is a fully-fledged member of the European Community,” as it then was. So, by expanding NATO to include these countries, and expanding the European Union to include these countries, we are actually accommodating and facilitating Russian strategy, which is to achieve hegemony over the whole landmass. Now, in general terms, what is the object of Soviet strategy? The object of Soviet strategy, at the present phase, is: convergence. That’s the word that Golitsyn uses in his books. That is the purpose of, that is the general purpose of the deception: to create the environment which will encourage the West to believe that there has been a political discontinuity, so that the West ‘can relax’, the West is caught off guard, and the West now indulges in collaboration, but in fact the Soviet equation consists of what I call: “collaboration”-hyphen-“blackmail”. The second part of the equation is “blackmail”. And we are collaborating and forgetting about the blackmail element, and this is very, very dangerous! Very dangerous!!!

And on pages 91/92 of his 2002 reference book, The European Union Collective: Enemy of Its Member States, Christopher Story wrote (italics by this author):

The European Union’s member governments and the political collective’s structures have failed to detect, or else have chosen to ignore, one fundamentally unfriendly hidden strategic purpose of the “liberation” of Central and Eastern Europe, and of the “former” Soviet Union’s apparent fragmentation – which was to create the conditions for the intended adherence, in due course, of the “former” East European satellites and of the “former” Soviet Republics, to the eastwards-expanding European Union collective. By this means, the unified (Communist) political space “from the Atlantic to Vladivostok” will gradually be established. – By encouraging the illusion that the European Union has an “historic opportunity” and a moral duty to entice and welcome all the East European countries and then the Republics and Russia itself into the orbit of the West, the strategists have bamboozled the socialist European Union Collective into active cooperation with them in furthering the creative implementation of the Leninist strategy to establish a single (eventually Communist) European space in accordance with the unchanging objective enunciated by Gorbachev, Shevardnadze and their successors. The trick has been to encourage the Europeans at national and collective levels in the mistaken view that the way to deal with Russia is “not to isolate it”, but rather to “draw” it into the West’s structures so that Moscow is not “left out in the cold”. This is comparable to the psychological pressure routinely used on the reluctant British, to persuade them to abandon the pound sterling and their residual sovereignty. In reality, it is not the West which is enticing the East into its orbit, but the East which is covertly enticing the West into its enlarging sphere of control through “convergence” on its own terms.

In other words, the more thoroughly one examines the European geopolitical chessboard, the more it looks like a firm fait accompli for the Leninists (who may at present pose as “Russian nationalists”, but that’s mere eyewash). Germany has no military means to defend itself against Russia, has made itself (suicidally) dependent on Russian oil and gas, and has been “governed” ever since 1998 by, first, a Red-Green Marxist coalition and then, for meanwhile 15 long years, by a more-than-obvious East-German communist plant. By now, the Christian Democratic Union (after almost twenty years of Angela Merkel’s chairmanship) has ceased to be the conservative party it had once been. At the same time, clandestine pan-Germanism is over.

As predicted by KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn, the Leninist programme of gradual convergence has progressed almost without opposition. Most of still-communist Eastern Europe has long been integrated into the EU, with Eastern mafiyas having flooded the West (that, since 2007, has no borders anymore) and Eastern Europe’s impoverished masses having realised that places like Stockholm, Berlin or Vienna are much nicer places to live in than their own cities such as Budapest, Belgrade, Bukarest or Tirana, and where they can find work. With regard to Russia, which doesn’t send its poor, but its KGB-oligarchs, whose job is money laundering and gaining political influence, they are omnipresent in the capitals of Western Europe. It even seems as if they secretly view Western Europe already as their property! Has America already lost her European allies? Well, Germany, for one, might even have fully switched camps and turned into an enemy of the United States! Also France is fairly hopeless. The country is inextricably tied, by a number of bilateral treaties, to Moscow. What about Italy, Spain? Both are now under far-left governments. On top of it all: NO European member state is still a sovereign nation. They are all, collectively, marching towards doom. America still needs to realise this sobering reality: Unless a miracle happens, Europe (minus the United Kingdom) is lost. Soon, the countries of Western Europe will decide for year-around daylight saving (or abolish daylight saving altogether), by which they will adapt to Russia’s time setting, that has done away with daylight saving in 2010. European and Russian passport formats (and colours) are the same. “Cooperation” and “exchange” in all spheres have long been firmly implemented. Western Europe has been silently sovietised. And no criticism of Russia allowed.

The endpoint in all of this will be terrible: Political surveillance, re-education, extermination. For the silent majority: a gruesome “new normal” (it’s already here) in which all joy, all happiness, all achievement also will be things of the past. The sole common denominator will be endless misery, increased by total dependence on the state. As America descends ever further into anarchy, chaos and civil war, communists around the world are getting ready for carving up the world among themselves. God help us!




© The Contemplative Observer 2020


The Sea Change We Didn’t Notice Until Now

English Ships in a Storm

Johan van der Hagen: English Ships in a Storm, 1714. Oil on canvas, National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London.


… You know, if you get up in the morning – I want to study our present system by which we are living and what we are facing, especially the younger people, not us poor whiteheads perhaps – if you get up in the morning and head out the door to work, and you find the front gate is gone, and your mail-box is gone, and the lamp-post you used to walk by is gone, you say, “Well, what the –”, I mean “Who has taken away my front gate? Where is the mail-box? And where has the lamp-post gone anyway?” In other words: We are used to small things; we are creatures of localised habits. And we see it immediately, the moment a thing has changed: “Where are my cornflakes?” You know, “Where is that lamp-post?” “What did they do with the mail-box?” But, the other characteristic of our character is – i.e., the other characteristic of our mode of living is – that any vast change, any all-embracing change not immediately affecting our localised habits – our home locale, our community, our job, our friends, our city, our state, our government even – any such sea-change: we don’t notice it, until it becomes an accomplished fact! And then we say, “Oh! That’s what it is!” We don’t notice it because it doesn’t affect us and affect our localised habits. And with very few exceptions, we are creatures of localised habits. Now, the most choking element about a sea-change is that you are helpless when it comes. It’s a fait accompli. It’s done. And you have to live with it. Towards the final stamping of that new change, bit by bit, piece by piece, element by element, you begin to have a queasy feeling that there is something happening you don’t know. You know there is something big affecting everybody, affecting us all, it’s a vast, encompassing change, and then you suddenly – everybody says, “This is the way it is now. This is going to be the way it’s going to be.” And then you’re faced with that fait accompli … (Fr. Malachi Martin: “Global Conflict of Life and Anti-Life Forces”; speech given at a 1991 Human Life International conference.)

O divine art of subtlety and secrecy! Through you we learn to be invisible, through you inaudible; and hence we can hold the enemy’s fate in our hands. (Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Chapter 5: Weak Points and Strong; par. 9)

Let us get down to work, to slower, more cautious, more persevering and persistent work! (Lenin. New Times and Old Mistakes in a New Guise, 1921.)

 (Sun Tzu, The Art of War; l

We’re nearing the end of a long road, that is to say: the end of a long dead-end road. Over the course of a full century, not only has mankind gone through catastrophes and traumas quite unprecedented in history, both by their nature and scale. There has also been going on, in addition to all the traumatising, a much more subtle (and perfidious) process of a deliberate and systematic reshaping of people’s attitudes, beliefs, and even perceptions. The hearts and minds of whole nations until recently considering themselves free, have for several generations in a row nevertheless been “scientifically” re-conditioned, re-wired, Pavlovian-style, into monstrous caricatures of what they had once been. What is at work is a through-and-through revolutionary force (already controlling more than half of the planet) that’s inspired by gnosticism, equipped with exact strategy, operating by way of stealth as well as using intimidation and brute force, and fiercely determined to smash Christian civilisation (in fact, any civilisation) once and for all.

That force, that fanatical cult – widely known as “communism” (though sailing under a variety of banners) – represents an enemy so formidable and deadly that one might have expected (and wished) the whole of humanity to unite against it, across continents, faiths and races. However, the deceptive nature and the insidious mode of operation of this enemy of mankind makes it infinitely difficult to identify it, in the first place (even to understand its goals), to keep track of it, and to properly and effectively respond to its manifold moves and stratagems. To adequately fight such an enemy, to defend against such a threat, naturally requires the same level of strategic grasp, despite the vast difference in mentality. What’s more, free societies are inevitably open societies and can thus easily be subverted, infiltrated and manipulated. President John F. Kennedy described well the dilemma of such asymmetrical warfare in his legendary April 27, 1961 speech, The President and the Press (given, notoriously, weeks after the failed Bay of Pigs invasion against Fidel Castro’s communist regime in Cuba, to which outcome a number of indiscretions on the part of the American press had considerably contributed):

… Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired. If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of “clear and present danger”, then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent. It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions – by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labour leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence, on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumour is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match. Nevertheless, every democracy recognises the necessary restraints of national security – and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion. […] And I hope that every group in America – unions and businessmen and public officials at every level – will ask the same question of their endeavours, and subject their actions to the same exacting test. And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations. Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war … 

A “cold and secret war”, fought with great patience and discipline by an enemy who understands the strategic concept of long-term gradualism: Undermine the bourgeoisie! Wear it out! Change it subtly, bit by bit, from within, until it will indeed beg for communism (or even better: adopt communism unknowingly)!

Our generation of today bears little to no resemblance with earlier generations. It is safe to assume that these ancestors of ours would turn in their graves (possibly they do), could they see what has happened to their countries – to a world, a culture, a civilisation, that they had helped build.

This author, born in the first half of the 1960s, still has experienced, mostly as a child and youth, the final years of an entirely different world (which the revolution of the late sixties and seventies did away with). Everybody of his age, or older, has. So, let’s take a look back on how things were then, and what things are like now.

What first comes to mind is the authority parents, relatives, teachers and even neighbours had over children. One simply didn’t object; or protest; or address adults (let alone complete strangers) on a first-name basis (or even try to argue with them or school them). It was called respect, and obedience, and decent conduct – all of which have been subsumed by the Left under their deadly label of “poisonous pedadgogy”, the real poison properly so called having been their own widely advertised (and widely accepted) “anti-authoritarian education” (the term nicely echoing Frankfurt School member Theodor Adorno’s 1950 book, The Authoritarian Personality).  The irony of it all is that the forces pushing this dismantling of traditional society in the West have been and still are, ultimately, those ultra-authoritarian (nay: ultra-totalitarian) communist regimes (they are still all communist) in Moscow, Beijing and elsewhere throughout the communist world (that never imploded), the rationale being that a one-sided collapse of order and decency in the societies of the West would give predatory world communism a huge advantage in its “struggle” against so-called bourgeois capitalism. And it wasn’t just obedience, that used to be held in high regard, but along with it a kind of humbleness and truly childlike innocence, that have mysteriously disappeared when we look at the present situation. Children then understood and accepted that they didn’t have to be in the centre of everybody’s attention 24/7. They also were made to acknowledge that what adults were talking about was not always comprehensible to the still-developing and imperfect mind of a child. Furthermore, there was no “family parliament” in place, where parents treat their children as if they were grown-ups too, placing an amount of responsibility and decision-making on their children’s shoulders that is entirely inappropriate, as it overwhelms a child’s limited capacity of discernment, let alone prudence. At the time, it was crystal-clear to everyone that as long as children are still children, it’s the parents’ duty and responsibility (and therefore their right) to make decisions on behalf of their children – otherwise, what are adults there for, in the first place (being adults and parents). Today, to exercise parental authority even in a very mild and non-physical manner, might be easily denounced as “abusive”. To say “no” and stick to it, as overly “oppressive”. The disastrous fruits of decades of such ill-advised (and irresponsible) pedagogy, we can see in the young generation of today. Infinitely spoilt, ever-demanding, used to always have their way, they represent a generation of full-scale tyrants (already, in many cases, before they even enter school). Such disobedient, respectless and totally pretentious youth now sadly turns out as ideal cannon-fodder for the revolution. Everything that they’ve ever been granted, they have taken for granted. Their egos are as tall as Mount Everest, never mind that – courtesy of decades of revolutionary education – there isn’t all that much there inside their heads. Minimise knowledge and understanding; maximise brutality and ruthlessness! Our ever-politically-correct parent generations of recent decades have bred a frightening new generation of – dare we say? – monsters!

Aidan Courtright

Among all the (organised) revolutionary burning and looting following the George Floyd incident, there occurred a totally inconceivable act of mindless brutality on June 2, 2020, in Fall River, Massachusetts (the case has gained wide notoriety anyway). 82-year-old Air Force veteran and Trump supporter Charles Chase, standing at a roundabout, holding up a Trump sign and wearing a Trump cap, was approached, out of the blue, and violently attacked by 27-year-old leftist Aidan Courtright, who ripped the elderly man’s cardboard sign apart, knocked the Trump hat off his head, threw him to the ground and mercilessly kicked him so that Mr. Chase had to be treated in hospital. The victim later described the incident thus: “The guy when he came at me, I have never seen a horror story that the face was so filled with hate and anger as his was… I was just frozen.” Everybody would have been! Look at these dreadful eyes (that’s the Fall River police photo), full of cold hatred, despise, and contempt! A Red Samurai who has fully embraced the nihilistic programme of revolutionary destruction. This is the young generation we are looking at today, possibly to a far larger extent than we would like to admit: Beyond control; manifestly inaccessible to any sound argument; to be utterly afraid of. No wonder Mr. Chase told the Boston Herald, “I love this country … But what’s going on makes me want to cry. It’s so sad. I lived in the years of the Cold War and I see what’s happening now … This isn’t the America I served for.” An American patriot, heartbroken (and yet he has resumed his silent political activism, holding up signs, as before, in favour of an America he doesn’t want to see overthrown).

The communist organisers (including the Great Polariser Himself) have indeed done a terrifyingly great job in preparing kids – mind, in the midst of a free society! – for rejecting that same freedom and calling for tyranny. The link between the generations, that used to be the bridge for passing on the traditions of old, seems (for the most part) irreparably broken. Turning the young against the old is a cruel thing to do. But let us remember: Hitler did it. Lenin, Stalin, Mao and the rest of them did it. If you want a revolution to be successful (and to be irreversibly successful), you must drive a wedge between young and old. The inexperienced and gullible youth becomes your following. The older generation, your (and their) target. In such an environment, it is only a small step to fanaticised youngsters reporting (i.e., denouncing) their own parents to the new revolutionary authorities. Where loyalty and gratitude have gone out the window (whether towards one’s family or one’s country), all bets are off. If the family is but an anachronistic form of social organisation, why defend it? Why stand up for Mum and Dad? If your country is but an artificial, meaningless construct, nothing you can ever relate to, why defend it either? Why enlist in its military? Why bother about its history, its constitutional foundation, its accomplishments? You see: The youth of today has been sold a bill of goods that equates to total nihilism. But nature doesn’t accept a vacuum, anywhere. Neither does the human soul. Hence, such nihilism is but the precondition for a new set of “values”, a new “normal”, a radically new state of affairs. Our brainwashed kids running after the Left like crazy won’t understand the lie they’ve sold out to before it’s too late, before they are either dead or cruelly subjected to a new (and ultimate) Stalinism that will then control the whole world. If America falls, the whole world falls – to the men of the Red Star.

But it isn’t just the youth that’s been targeted for recruitment (breaking the bond between parents and children). It’s also been women who have been conditioned to hate men. Their own men. Their fathers, their bridegrooms, their husbands. All of a sudden, being a housewife was seen as degrading. Women should instead realise their full potential (whatever that means), they were told by their “good and caring” sister Betty Friedan. The politicians, media- and business people (most of them men at the time) didn’t quite see through (or simply didn’t care) from what ideological corner that attack had been launched. Friedan was a die-hard communist in an innocent housewife’s clothing, fooling and tricking an entire nation into abandoning its old family ways. Henceforth, “home, sweet home” was an empty home for most of the week. Children were increasingly kept in boarding schools or day care facilities, educated not so much by their own parents any more, but by strangers. While marriages started crumbling. Not just because of the plenty of temptation that a mixed men-women work place brought about. Having now careers and salaries of their own, women soon found out that basically they didn’t need their husbands any longer. They were now independent. They were free. They were, to use the Left’s favourite cliché: liberated! Who were the prime profiteers in all of this? Promiscuous bosses, for sure, but then also divorce attorneys, abortion providers, and – oh yes! – psychotherapists (one might add to the list young attractive men on distant shores willing to sell their special favours to the highest bidder). So, what has feminism given us, all of us, men, women and children alike? A complete and utter mess! But it was mere patriarchal propaganda, wasn’t it, that held that women in the old days were cherished and venerated as queens, while today they are mostly seen as – you get the point. That’s the thing about communism (of which feminism is merely one branch out of many): Whatever it touches, whatever it brings under its control, it makes cheap, interchangeable, and ultimately valueless. If you take personality and meaning out of people’s lives, what remains? A desert. But weren’t wives and mothers (known once as housewives or homemakers) living treasure chests of knowledge and skill, guarantors and arbiters of living tradition? Through them it was that the wisdom and culture of old was passed on to the next generation. What do we have now? Stressed and exhausted career women who would so much love to spend more time with their children (at least, so they say), who on their part spend most of their time with paid social engineers. Where is the glue, the binding element between the family members? It’s gone. Oh yes, let’s not forget the elderly, and we won’t: We visit them in their seniors’ homes a couple of times a year. And isn’t it better for them to live there than in the midst of this rough, ever-faster changing world, where everyone’s far too busy to look after Grandma and Grandpa on top of everything else, anyway?

The assault wasn’t limited – devastating enough! – to turning women and children into complete narcissists. It descended headlong into the demonic when it gave to the world that new hellish paradigm of “sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll”. Why wait for hell in the afterlife when you can have it in the here and now! The softening-up process began “innocuously” with Elvis the Pelvis in the fifties (in fact, earlier than that). The initiation, so to speak, was done by the Beatles, the Rolling Stones and dozens of other music groups in the sixties. Until, by the seventies, rock bands had begun to openly praise Satan in concert performances that carried all the hallmarks of Black Masses. What started in 1967 with the famous Summer of Love, was in fact a revolutionary explosion of unlimited promiscuousness and libertinage (“free love”, it was called). Following Timothy Leary’s seductive maxim, “Turn on, Tune in, Drop out!”, young people across America (and the West) decided to turn their backs on civilisation in its entirety and become modern-day Rousseauan savages ready to lose themselves (and their souls, it seemed) in random sexual activity, drug-induced hallucinations and the beautifully disinhibiting power of rock music. Who cares about such petty concerns as making a living any more? Of getting married, starting a family, getting on in life? What counts is the moment (which is why the triad of sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll should be extended by a fourth element: New-Age-style Eastern mysticism). Today, God knows what the percentage of Westerners is who believe in reincarnation (a Hindu concept first promoted in the West by Blavatsky’s Theosophical Society), not to think of the ever-growing number of people who simply believe nothing. But nihilism (as in atheistic communism) is a dangerous road to embark on: By not believing in God, one likewise doesn’t believe in anything else, be it family or country or even life itself. Nothing has value, or taste, let alone truth any more (which is why communism, in the final analysis, simply isn’t sustainable on the long run, even if it first destroys the whole planet; its programme simply has nothing to offer except death and destruction and tyranny). The experience of the moment was the new imperative, whatever the cost for body, mind and soul. Such hedonistic thinking has also given us a new way of doing commerce and consumption: People (not just governments) began to finance the expenditures of today with the prospective income of tomorrow. In other words, everybody was now sliding into debt.

The horrifying legacy of the so-called sexual revolution also includes a state of affairs where adolescent girls find no value in preserving their virginity till marriage, but on the contrary can’t wait to get rid of it at the first opportunity, as if it were a stain! Teenage girls, for the last fifty years, have been tricked into becoming whores, and teenage boys into becoming whoremongers (the rap music genre is eloquent proof of this). Who needs courtship any more? Girls just need to be “layed”, and they want it that way, anyway, right? That’s the new state of affairs. Combined with the feminist programme of female careerism and egotism, a general hardening of people’s hearts, and a collapse in religious education, the result has been what? Systematic contraception (as a means of family “planning”) and abortions in the millions. In other words, we’ve adopted a “culture” of death, rather than life. In this overall atmosphere of worthlessness and filth, it is no wonder that tattoos, body piercings, and even worse forms of self-mutilation, have long become mainstream. Think about it: Until sixty years ago, the only people tattoed were (apart from indigenous tribes here and there) sailors, maybe truckers, and certainly criminals. Other than that, nobody had his skin tattoed. Nobody. The revolution also opened up a new pathway into dirty language. Watch a movie from the fifties, and then watch a movie of today! It’s heartbreaking what they have done. There are now movies where you get hardly a sentence without one of these four-letter-words!

Women are no longer women. Men are no longer men. Children are no longer children. In politics, we now have spineless opportunists (and outright traitors) rather than statesmen. In the judiciary, willing accomplices of the revolution. In academia, ideologues who prefer peddling the one or other Great Lie. In journalism and book publishing, well: let’s forget about them. In art, childish clowns. In commerce, people without conscience, who are even willing to sell out their own country as long as it serves them. In finance, witch doctors. In medicine, men and women totally absorbed with their own grandeur. In teaching, social engineers determined to bring about a “new world”. In churches, shameless hypocrites and downright wolves in sheep’s clothing. – While the rainbow flag, soon to be replaced by the Red Banner, is flying over it all…

Shall we dare ask these terrible questions: Have we completely lost our minds? Worse, are we still human? Are we still worthy of God’s grace? Are all those Frankensteinian fantasies by transhumanists and other dystopian freaks (including the communists) not the logical continuation of a path we’ve been on for more than half a century?

Perhaps, communist revolution and destruction is precisely what we deserve, if one thinks of communism as a Divine tool of punishment. Perhaps we should first and foremost repent





© The Contemplative Observer 2020



Fundamental Transformation

U.S. protests 2020


It’s happening. Right before our very eyes. The final chapter of the World Revolution, by communists referred to as “World October”, is upon us!

As the countries of the West are still struggling to contain the Chinese-orchestrated pandemic and are desperately trying to get their grounded economies back running, the spiral of calculated escalation has moved on to the next stage: the instigation of chaos (possibly, civil war) as a means to bring down the rule of law and government itself. These are not spontaneous protests against a “systemic racism” that doesn’t even exist (certainly not in the United States). This is a coordinated attack on nothing less than the constitutional foundations of the American Republic, carried out by Moscow/Beijing-directed communists (sailing under whatever banner) and reminiscent of every communist revolution in history (including the French Revolution, by the way).

With so much at stake – it’s now a matter of life or death! – one would expect the U.S. federal government (as well as state- and local governments) to act swiftly and rigorously to protect the country and its citizenry from otherwise certain destruction.

But not so. The President appears to be isolated in his wanting to stamp out the flames of insurrection with full force (and has meanwhile retracted). He is surrounded by appeasers and worse, while a new, revolutionary spirit has taken hold of the land, that goes way beyond mere appeasement (mind, appeasement to anarcho-communists): a spirit of flat-out submission. America appears to have lost, virtually overnight, its pride and self-esteem, and instead kneels down before political radicals intent on creating a communist America. If one takes into account that quite a number of states, and big cities, are under the control of Democrat politicians who are in fact (like former President Obama) communists, it becomes clear why these people support the burning and looting and even call for defunding, if not abolishing, the police and opening the prisons: Both more-than-obvious revolutionary demands designed to bring about total collapse, a reign of terror (and/or civil war), and ultimately a military invasion by China and Russia.

We are now witnessing an America in its death-throes. The “land of the free and the home of the brave”, that has so greatly inspired (and attracted) so many people from all over the world, that great experiment of “government of the people, by the people, for the people”, that “shining city on a hill”, is in mortal danger (and with it, the whole of the free world, if not to say: Christian civilisation altogether). Once a bright and hopeful place “from sea to shining sea”, it is today threatened, particularly from those same shores, by a generation that no longer identifies with America; that believes in the hoax of anthropogenic global warming; that believes in an inflated socialist nanny state; in “economic redistribution” (read: expropriation, and it’s coming); ultimately, in Marx and Engels and all the rest of them. With several generations in a row indoctrinated in schools and universities by Marxist infiltrators, there has occurred a silent, gradual, but nonetheless colossal, paradigm shift.

And no sufficient alarm, even now. At least, about whence the attack is coming. After all, an overwhelming majority (including, sadly, America’s political and economic elite) swallowed the bait of “collapsible communism” and of the “great investment prospects in the East” thirty years ago. America’s suspected “victory of the Cold War” was prematurely carved in stone; Gorbachev, and then Yeltsin, were hailed as honest democrats (rather than understood as unchanged communists). America and the West got quickly caught up in the overall lie of a “defunkt USSR” and a “defunkt” communist bloc. Nothing could have been further from the truth. The communist world even massively expanded its global influence post-1991, precisely because the West saw no communist threat any more! (Enter: South Africa; Venezuela; Nicaragua; the Congo; Nepal – not to mention the EEC’s odd transformation into a much more centralised political union, only weeks after the “demise” of the Soviet Union). One who certainly must have been in the know was President Clinton, a man far less “moderate” than it seemed. Both his predecessor and his successor, the two Bushes, appeared to conveniently see and hear no evil. In fact, Bush the Younger even notoriously said at his first meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin – less than three months prior to the Moscow-directed false-flag attack of 9/11 – that he had been able “to get a sense of his [i.e., Putin’s] soul.” Bush the Father, on Christmas Day 1991 when Gorbachev declared the Soviet Union dissolved, celebrated the event as “a victory for democracy and freedom”. How wrong he was! It’s been a continuous process of sinking ever deeper into an ocean of lies and deceit. And here we are: The communists, Barack Obama not the least among them, had been organising and preparing for this present moment for a long time. Their vision of “fundamentally transforming the United States” (as expressed by Obama in a campaign speech shortly before the 2008 presidential election) has more than ever become a very realistic possibility.

Unmatched Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn warned in his 1984 reference work, New Lies for Old:

The communist bloc, with its recent accretions in Africa and South-East Asia, is already strong. European-backed Soviet influence and American-backed Chinese influence could lead to new Third World acquisitions at an accelerating pace. Before long, the communist strategists might be persuaded that the balance had swung irreversibly in their favor. In that event they might well decide on a Sino-Soviet “reconciliation.” The scissors strategy [i.e., the fake Sino-Soviet split that began after 1960] would give way to the strategy of “one clenched fist.”

At that point the shift in the political and military balance would be plain for all to see. Convergence [of East and West] would not be between two equal parties, but would be on terms dictated by the communist bloc. The argument for accommodation with the overwhelming strength of communism would be virtually unanswerable. Pressures would build up for changes in the American political and economic system on the lines indicated in Sakharov’s treatise. Traditional conservatives would be isolated and driven toward extremism. They might become the victims of a new McCarthyism of the left. The Soviet dissidents who are now extolled as heroes of the resistance to Soviet communism would play an active part in arguing for convergence. Their present supporters would be confronted with a choice of forsaking their idols or acknowledging the legitimacy of the new Soviet regime. […]

In the new worldwide communist federation the present different brands of communism would disappear, to be replaced by a uniform, rigorous brand of Leninism. The process would be painful. Concessions made in the name of economic and political reform would be withdrawn. Religious and intellectual dissent would be suppressed. Nationalism and all other forms of genuine opposition would be crushed. Those who had taken advantage of détente to establish friendly Western contacts would be rebuked or persecuted like those Soviet officers who worked with the allies during the Second World War. In new communist states – for example, in France, Italy, and the Third World – the “alienated classes” would be reeducated. Show trials of “imperialist agents” would be staged. Action would be taken against nationalist and social democratic leaders, party activists, former civil servants, officers, and priests. The last vestiges of private enterprise and ownership would be obliterated. Nationalization of industry, finance, and agriculture would be completed. In fact, all the totalitarian features familiar from the early stages of the Soviet revolution and the postwar Stalinist years in Eastern Europe might be expected to reappear, especially in those countries newly won for communism. Unchallenged and unchallengeable, a true communist monolith would dominate the world.

Also in 1984, Yuri Bezmenov, another interesting Soviet defector, reminded America of nearing disaster:

The next stage [after years and decades of  (1) demoralisation and  (2) destabilisation], of course, is crisis. It may take only up to six weeks to bring a country to the verge of crisis, you can see it in Central America now. – And after crisis, with a violent change of power structure and economy, you have, so-called, the period of ‘normalisation’; it may last indefinitely. ‘Normalisation’ is a cynical expression borrowed from Soviet propaganda: when the Soviet tanks moved into Czechoslovakia in ’68, Comrade Brezhnev said, ‘Now the situation in brotherly Czechoslovakia is normalised.’ This is what will happen in the United States if you allow all these schmucks to bring the country to crisis, to promise people all kind of goodies and the paradise on earth, to destabilise your economy, to eliminate the priniciple of free market competition, and to put a big-brother government in Washington, DC,  with benevolent dictators like Walter Mondale who will promise looots of things, never mind whether the promises are fulfilled or not; he will go to Moscow to kiss the bottoms of new generation of Soviet assassins, never mind, he will create false illusions that the situation is under control. Situation is not under control. Situation is disgustingly out of control! Most of the American politicians, media, and educational system trains another generation of people who think they are living at a peace time. False! United States is in a state of war; undeclared, total war against the basic principles and the foundations of this system! And the initiator of this war is not Comrade Andropov, of course. It’s the system; however ridiculous it may sound: the World Communist System, or the World Communist Conspiracy! Whether I scare some people or not, I don’t give a hoot; if you are not scared by now, nothing can scare you! – But, you don’t have to be paranoid about it. – What actually happens now that, unlike myself, you have literally several years to live on, unless the United States wake up. The time bomb is ticking. With every second – tick, tick – the disaster is coming closer and closer. Unlike myself, you will have nowhere to defect to – unless you want to live in Antarctica with penguins. This is it; this is the last country of freedom and possibility. 

J. R. Nyquist, who in this author’s opinion is America’s most profound political analyst today, wrote in his 1998 groundbreaking book, Origins of the Fourth World War:

During the 1940s Joseph A. Schumpeter characterized the typical American attitude toward Soviet Russia: “Let Russia swallow one or two more countries, what of it? Let her be well supplied with everything she needs and she will cease to frown. After twenty years the Russians will be just as democratic and pacific as are we – and think and feel just as do we. Besides, Stalin will be dead by then.”

Each decade, however, has found us rolled back by communist takeovers in places like Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, China, Angola, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Tibet, Afghanistan, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and now, more recently, Zaire; and by the infallible progress of men like Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, and – dare we say? – Nelson Mandela. Soviet socialism ebbs and flows unlike anything we’ve seen before. Take for example the year 1941, when Hitler decimated the Red Army. Yet the Red Army rose phoenix-like out of the ashes. One recalls Lenin’s political and military disasters, like the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and the Soviet invasion of Poland. We remember Khrushchev’s harebrained scheming, and his break with Maoist China. But each Soviet disaster is transformed, over time, into victory; e.g., the collapse of Brest-Litovsk, the communization of Poland, and finally, a new coziness with China. The Soviet talent for resurgence must be taken into account. To find a resilience as great as this, there is only the example set by the Romans after Cannae. But is Russia, like Rome, destined for world empire? We cannot be sure. All we know is that Russia, whatever comparisons we incline to, proves to be a special entity following a law of development all its own. Perhaps Schumpeter was on to something when he wrote: “The Russian century once started may run its course almost of itself.” Why? Because Russian foreign policy has purpose, energy, style, depth; while American foreign policy is rambling, sentimental, and shallow. This gives tremendous advantage to Russia and very little to America. The American people want prosperity, not imperial burdens. At heart we are isolationists. Therefore, the most dangerous event of all is this recent and apparent collapse of the Soviet Empire. For should the Soviet Union, as phoenix, once again rise out of the ashes, we shall be compelled to rise out of ashes of our own.

And what are the various analysts and commentators saying today, as the situation is ever more spiralling out of control?

J. R. Nyquist (To the Americans Who Are on Their Knees, June 4, 2020):

We are near the end of the Republic. A revolution has begun and no decisive counter-revolutionary actions have been ordered. Why has this happened? Because we have been psychologically and linguistically disarmed.

For example: — The oath of allegiance of federal officials is to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic; but if we refuse to acknowledge the existence of enemies, if we cannot name our enemies, no defense will be possible. And this is the one thing, above all, that has been forbidden: We are not allowed to name our enemies.

Trevor Loudon (Cities Burn, but None Dare Call It Communist Insurrection, June 6, 2020):

In the past few days, several cities have seen chaotic rioting. Cars and buildings have been torched, looting is rampant and even the Third Police Precinct in Minneapolis was burned as officers abandoned the building. More is to come.

The protests ostensibly began because of the death of George Floyd during an arrest. Systemic racism and police brutality, leftist pundits argue, is to blame.

Some leftists are claiming, as they did during the Occupy Wall Street movement, that the protests have been hijacked by a violent element intent on discrediting the movement.

Conservative commentators, on the other hand, speak of frustration and rage, of a reaction to the claustrophobia of weeks on end lockdown.

They all miss the mark.

The violence since the police-involved death of George Floyd in Minneapolis is a communist-inspired insurrection — nothing more, nothing less.

Cliff Kincaid (The Law and Order President Is Failing America, June 11, 2020):

Millions of people depending on Trump’s Twitter feed for the blunt truth are now getting a lot of empty threats.

As this column is being written, Trump has sent out another “Law and Order” Tweet demanding that the authorities in Washington State and the city of Seattle restore law and order. In defiance, they told him to return to his White House bunker. Trump looks weak.

Trump threatened to restore law and order through the Insurrection Act and when his own Secretary of Defense Mark Esper undercut him, he backed off. Who is in charge anyway? Now, Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark A. Milley has in effect denounced Trump for including him in that photo-op in front of the church. Why does Milley still have a job? This seems like a “Seven Days in May” scenario where the top brass revolt against their Commander-in-Chief.

In the movie, the president wins. In real life, who knows?

Tucker Carlson, Fox News, June 5, 2020: The Cultural Revolution has come to America (8 min.):


Glenn Beck, June 11, 2020: CULTURAL REVOLUTION: America’s new religious devotion to race wars, division & silencing dissenters:


But you can also take it straight from the horse’s mouth:


What does this all leave us with? Communism is about to have its great and murderous day of harvest. Two things we should now focus on: On the spiritual level: repentance and prayer. On the practical level: preparation. The rest we have to leave up to our God and Lord, in Whose hands only our entire fate rests (for better or worse). Psalm 34 may give us the strength and unwavering faith necessary for the days ahead: 

I will bless the Lord at all times: his praise shall continually be in my mouth. My soul shall make her boast in the Lord: the humble shall hear thereof, and be glad. O magnify the Lord with me, and let us exalt his name together. I sought the Lord, and he heard me, and delivered me from all my fears. They looked unto him, and were lightened: and their faces were not ashamed. This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him, and saved him out of all his troubles. The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them. O taste and see that the Lord is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him. O fear the Lord, ye his saints: for there is no want to them that fear him. The young lions do lack, and suffer hunger: but they that seek the Lord shall not want any good thing. Come, ye children, hearken unto me: I will teach you the fear of the LordWhat man is he that desireth life, and loveth many days, that he may see good? Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from speaking guile. Depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it. The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and his ears are open unto their cry. The face of the Lord is against them that do evil, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth. The righteous cry, and the Lord heareth, and delivereth them out of all their troubles. The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit. Many are the afflictions of the righteous: but the Lord delivereth him out of them all. He keepeth all his bones: not one of them is broken. Evil shall slay the wicked: and they that hate the righteous shall be desolate. The Lord redeemeth the soul of his servants: and none of them that trust in him shall be desolate.




Compiled by the Contemplative Observer 2020



SARS-Coronavirus 2: Humanity’s Crown of Thorns?

Aelbrecht-Bouts-Christ Crowned with Thorns_T636806648794340364

Aelbert Bouts (1451/54 – 1549): Christ Crowned with Thorns, 1495.


And there followed him a great company of people, and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him. But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your childrenFor, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us. For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry? (Luke 23:27-31, KJV)


Christ Himself is the green wood here (which doesn’t burn that easily). We are the dry wood, waiting to be consumed by the flames of unseen hate and destruction. Thus, Christ’s passion will become our passion. His crown of thorns (a.k.a. Corona Christi) will be ours. And isn’t it peculiar that this huge crisis particularly the free world finds itself in by seeing no alternative to locking down its economies, that this crisis has been caused by a new (almost certainly engineered) viral pathogen that belongs to the family of Corona viruses? Whether we are aware of it or not, whether we like it or not, we are on the way to our own Golgotha, to our own crucifixion. Again, there will be no mercy or help from worldly entities, nor will there be help coming from the priesthood, which chose fifty-plus years ago – akin to Iscariot – to follow the world rather than Christ. Again, there will be unspeakable agony and suffering, not to speak of humiliation and ridicule. And again, the criminals will have free rein, while the saintly will be brutally ploughed under. It’s coming, and the pandemic (that hasn’t originated from a “seafood market”, but from the Wuhan Institute of Virology) is only the beginning.

Exactly a century ago, the world saw clearer than ever before what this revolutionary ideology of atheistic, egalitarian communism was capable of. The communists, in their insane class hatred, viewed the “old classes” as mere stumbling blocks that had to be eliminated by use of the fiercest terror imaginable in order to give way for “socialist progress”. The diabolical cruelties committed by the Bolshevists even surpassed the worst crimes against humanity during the French Revolution. Here are, pars pro toto, some accounts of the nightmare that occurred at the time:

In fact, each Che-Ka [i.e., local secret police, imposing the Red Terror on the population] seems to have had its speciality in torture. Kharkov, for instance, under Saenko, went in primarily for scalpings and hand flayings; and in Voronezh the person to be tortured was first stripped naked, and then thrust into a nail-studded barrel, and rolled about in it, or else branded on the forehead with a five-pointed star, or, if a member of the clergy, “crowned” with barbed wire. As for the Che-Kas of Tsaritsin and Kamishin, it was their custom to saw their victims’ bones apart, whilst Poltava and Kremenchoug made it their special rule to impale clergy (once, on the latter place, where a ruffian named Grishka was in command, eighteen monks were transfixed in a single day). Also, inhabitants have testified that Grishka would burn at the stake any peasant who had been prominent in a rebellion, and sit on a chair to enjoy the spectacle. The Che-Ka of Ekaterinoslav, again, went in for crucifixion and death by stoning, and the Che-Ka of Odessa for putting officers to death by chaining them to planks, and slowly, very slowly, pushing them into furnaces, or else tearing their bodies on a capstan wheel, or else immersing them in a boiler of water heated to simmering point, and then flinging them into the sea, before finally consigning them to the flames again. [Sergey Petrovich Melgounov. The Red Terror in Russia. First published in 1924. London-New York: Edward Harle Ltd., 2008. p. 95.]

In this district [i.e., in Tambov Province] the peasants had a particular veneration for an ikon of the Vishinskaya Madonna; and when influenza broke out in the district, a solemn procession was held in the ikon’s honour, and a celebrating of Mass. And, on the Bolshevists seizing both ikon and clergy, and the peasants learning later that the Che-Ka had insulted the ikon, and “dragged it about the floor”, they set forth to “rescue Our Lady”, with women and children and the aged and everyone else joining the throng. And then the Che-Ka turned machine-guns upon them, and mowed them down in rows as, “with terrible eyes which saw nothing”, they moved forward over the bodies of dying and dead, and mothers, flinging themselves before their children, cried: “O Holy Virgin and Defender, bless us as gladly we lay down our lives for thee!” [Ibid., p. 74.]

The carp enjoys being seethed in cream, and the bourgeois being slain by a Power which is stern, and ready to kill him… Even though our souls may revolt from the task, let us use strong measures, and bring the bourgeoisie to their senses, seeing that we need but shoot a few dozen of the fools, of the wastrels, and make the rest clean the streets, and set their womenfolk to scour out Red Guard barracks (though even this is too great an honour for them!), for the bourgeoisie to realise that our Government is a Government come to stay, and that it is useless to look for help from Englishmen or Hottentots. [Ibid., p. 27., taken from a Bolshevist newspaper article.]

As we now look over to present-day communist China (or even Russia, which too has remained communist), we can see the same type of blood-chilling cruelty as in the old days under Lenin, Stalin, or Mao. Nothing has changed. Only the perceptions in the West have been manipulated. After all, communism “died” in 1989/91 – allegedly. In reality, the “collapse of communism” was a long-premeditated manoeuvre, executed with the greatest exactitude and in perfect coordination throughout the communist bloc. The West was duped and put to sleep; the societies within the communist countries were cynically betrayed. But the time has now come to recover from the illusion of Russia and China being the West’s friends. In fact, they have remained its deadliest enemies, working as ever towards communist world dominion. What is happening at present, including the long process during the last two, even three decades that has led to the current state of affairs, doesn’t need much explanation any more. Everybody can now see the threats and the attempts to blackmail and coerce the West. We have entered the early stages of World War III, with Russia and China, alleged rivals since the “Sino-Soviet split” of the 1960s, now having “reconciled” and switched to a joint, overt policy of “one clenched fist”, which was all exactly predicted by premier Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn in his 1984 reference work, New Lies for Old: The Communist Strategy of Deception and Disinformation. Golitsyn wrote:

Its [i.e., the Sino-Soviet split’s] overall objective can be defined briefly as the exploitation of the scissors strategy to hasten the achievement of long-range communist goals. Duality in Sino-Soviet polemics is used to mask the nature of the goals and the degree of coordination in the communist effort to achieve them. The feigned disunity of the communist world promotes real disunity in the noncommunist world. Each blade of the communist pair of scissors makes the other more effective. The militancy of one nation helps the activist detente diplomacy of the other. Mutual charges of hegemonism help to create the right climate for one or the other to negotiate agreements with the West. False alignments, formed with third parties by each side against the other, make it easier to achieve specific communist goals, such as the acquistion of advanced technology or the negotiation of arms control agreements or communist penetration of the Arab and African states. In Western eyes the military, political, economic, and ideological threat from world communism appears diminished. In consequence Western determination to resist the advance of communism is undermined. At a later stage the communist strategists are left with the option of terminating the split and adopting the strategy of “one clenched fist”. [p. 182.]

There are a number of strategic options at the disposal of the communist strategists that can be used in various combinations to achieve their ultimate objectives. It would be impossible to list them all but five likely interconnected options are as follows:

• A closer alignment of an independent socialist Europe with the Soviet bloc and a parrallel alignment of the United States with China. Japan, depending on whether it remains conservative or moves toward socialism, might join either combination.

• A joint drive by the Soviet bloc and a socialist Europe to seek allies in the Third World against the United States and China.

• In the military field, an intensive effort to achieve US nuclear disarmament.

• In the ideological and political field, East-West convergence on communist terms.

• The creation of a world federation of  communist states.

In each of these the scissors strategy will play its part; probably, as the final stroke, the scissors blades will close. The element of apparent duality in Soviet and Chinese policies will disappear. The hitherto concealed coordination between them will become visible and predominant. The Soviets and the Chinese will be officially reconciled. Thus the scissors strategy will develop logically into the “strategy of one clenched fist” to provide the foundation and driving force of a communist world federation. [p. 337 f.]


After successful use of the scissors strategy in the early stages of the final phase of policy to assist communist strategy in Europe and the Third World and over disarmament, a Sino-Soviet reconciliation could be expected. It is contemplated and implied by the long-range policy and by strategic disinformation on the split.

The communist bloc, with its accretions in Africa and South-East Asia, is already strong. European-backed Soviet influence and American-backed Chinese influence could lead to new Third World acquistions at an accelerating pace. Before long, the communist strategists might be persuaded that the balance had swung irreversibly in their favor. In that event they might well decide on a Sino-Soviet “reconciliation.” The scissors strategy would give way to the strategy of “one clenched fist.” At that point the shift in the political and military balance would be plain for all to see. Convergence would not be between two equal parties, but would be on terms dicated by the communist bloc. The argument for accommodation with the overwhelming strength of communism would be virtually unanswerable. Pressures would build up for changes in the American political and economic system on the lines indicated in Sakharov’s treatise. Traditional conservatives would be isolated and driven toward extremism. They might become the victims of a new McCarthyism of the left. The Soviet dissidents who are now extolled as heroes of the resistance to Soviet communism would play an active part in arguing for convergence. Their present supporters would be confronted with a choice of forsaking their idols or acknowledging the legitimacy of the new Soviet regime.

The Worldwide Communist Federation:

Integration of the communist bloc would follow the lines envisaged by Lenin when the Third Communist International was founded. That is to say, the Soviet Union and China would not absorb one another or other communist states. All the countries of the European and Asiatic communist zones, together with new communist states in Europe and the Third World, would join a supranational economic and political communist federation. Soviet-Albanian, Soviet-Yugoslav, and Soviet-Romanian disputes and differences would be resolved in the wake, or possibly in advance of, Sino-Soviet reconciliation. The political, economic, military, diplomatic, and ideological cooperation between all the communist states, at present partially concealed, would become clearly visible. There might even be public acknowledgement that the splits and disputes were long-term disinformation operations that had successfully deceived the “imperialist” powers. The effect on Western morale can be imagined.

In the new worldwide communist federation the present different brands of communism would disappear, to be replaced by a uniform, rigorous brand of Leninism. The process would be painful. Concessions made in the name of economic and political reform would be withdrawn. Religious and intellectual dissent would be suppressed. Nationalism and all other forms of genuine opposition would be crushed. Those who had taken advantage of detente to establish friendly Western contacts would be rebuked or persecuted like those Soviet officers who worked with the allies during the Second World War. In new communist states – for example, in France, Italy, and the Third World – the “alienated classes” would be reeducated. Show trials of “imperialist agents” would be staged. Action would be taken against nationalist and social democratic leaders, party activists, former civil servants, officers, and priests. The last vestiges of private enterprise and ownership would be obliterated. Nationalization of industry, finance, and agriculture would be completed. In fact, all the totalitarian features familiar from the early stages of the Soviet revolution and the postwar Stalinist years in Eastern Europe might be expected to reappear, especially in those countries newly won for communism. Unchallenged and unchallengeable, a true communist monolith would dominate the world. [pp. 345-347.]

And here is what outstanding American geopolitical analyst J. R. Nyquist wrote more than twenty years ago in his immensely prophetic 1998 book, Origins of the Fourth World War (Chapter 16: War and Its Aftermath, Note Nr. 2, p. 213):

Numerous are the pigs, squealing and wallowing, grunting and snorting, enjoying these, our last days – like the last days of Sodom and Gomorrah. And who will deny that we deserve what is coming? For aren’t we all Benedict Arnolds – hiding, keeping our mouths shut, blending into the crowd?

Who me?

Yes, YOU. All of you. Benedict Arnolds. Selling your country for a few years of fun. Traitors, betrayers, Judases! The fact of nuclear war has been before your eyes for fifty years. But you did not want to acknowledge your responsibility, your citizenship; you did not want to exert any effort, make any sacrifices, give up any so-called “freedom.” So you became traitors.

“I didn’t know,” is what you’ll say when the missile war begins. But it was your responsibility to know. The fact is: You didn’t want to know. The fact is: You wanted to collect your thirty years of peace and plenty, so you betrayed your country.

The same author, in a co-authored book of 2015 titled, The New Tactics of Global War: Reflections on the Changing Balance of Power in the Final Days of Peace (that was written in the form of a conversation between the three authors), stated this:

… I don’t see this going on for another 10 years. At the most, it might last another six years. Yet history is full of surprises. Things could keep crawling along as they have, or there could be a sudden explosion. But once we enter the phase of economic collapse, things will begin to happen automatically. The Russians and Chinese are committed to following their plan, because if they do not follow it, their own governments are at risk of falling. When the world begins to crumble they won’t be able to cope without a war. To be honest, I thought this was going to unfold in the wake of the 2008 crash. But an economic collapse did not occur at the time. We held it off. [p. 134.]

As things stand, the West cannot ignore any longer the decades of strategic blunder that have taken it to the brink of virtual extinction. Henry Kissinger, the duplicitous architect of the strengthening of communist China, is already in his late nineties, but as sharp as ever. Somebody should have the courage to confront him over the devastating consequences of  his China policies fourty-plus years ago (as, in fact, everything points to Kissinger having worked for the other side).

Notre Dame fire

The more traditionally-minded Catholics immediately took the fire of Notre Dame de Paris last year (arson or not) as a powerful sign, as a warning. It was only the most prominent event in a long series of horrifying attacks against churches throughout France, but it made headlines all over the world. That ominous evening, groups of faithful were standing on the banks of the river Seine, singing with the utmost devotion Marian hymns! Secularised France had a brief moment that showed its real, pre-revolutionary heritage. And those engaged in such singing and praying, staring at the foremost important Catholic church after St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome standing in flames, seemed to grasp the apocalyptic meaning of it. Yes, we have entered the apocalypse. And the merciless barbarians in Moscow and Beijing, who are experts in mass extermination and enslavement, have now opened their long-desired “World October”. Suitably, April 22, 2020 will be their evil icon Vladimir Lenin’s 150th birthday. It all fits together perfectly. Quite symbolically, the most prominent relic that was stored in Notre Dame cathedral, Christ’s crown of thorns, was saved! Obviously, it will still play a role in the events soon to come, and it remains a sign not only of Christ’s passion, but of the nearing passion of Christendom as a whole (or whatever is left of it).

These were this author’s brief reflections on where we stand, written on Good Friday of 2020 Anno Domini. We have only entered this terrible tunnel of darkness, that will lead us beyond doubt to full-scale tribulation and chastisement – and, according to prophecy, to a deluge of fire. May this fire, when it comes, cleanse our souls and send the men of the Red Star, unless they convert, back where they came from: to the bottomless pit of hell…

As for Americans who have kept an ability to “read” celestial signs, please don’t ignore the two total solar eclipses over the North American continent of August 21, 2017 and April 8, 2024. Together, they form the shape of a cross, or an X, that seems to “cross out” the United States. And isn’t a total solar eclipse, too, a sign of the Passion of Christ, with the sun’s corona mirroring the Corona Christi?

American eclipses, 2017 and 2024

As, remember, the communist goal has always been primarily the total annihilation of America, without which the whole of the rest of the world would have to submit to a Soviet-Chinese communist diktat. At the same time, America as a society being the “great obstacle” for communist world victory, it is also as a territory a treasure second to none which the communists desire to possess.

Let us pray, and let us repent! With Christ crucified on this Good Friday, we should look reality in the eye and prepare for what may or may not turn out as our own crucifixion. Which shouldn’t keep us from being prepared and willing to fight. In the end, however, what counts is to be prepared to return to one’s Creator and to His heavenly kingdom. As, only there we will be able to encounter truly a Church without spot or wrinkle: the Mystical Body of Christ properly so called.

In closing, may the following from the Book of Revelation (Rev. 21:1-8) serve us as a source of hope and encouragement:

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.





© The Contemplative Observer 2020