1) Beneath the waterline, there is open warfare in the Catholic Church. Long overdue. Against P Francis and the US Bishops (for example of DC) there are Bishops Vigano and Scheider.
2) B. Vigano finally advanced the call to cancel Vatican II. B. Schneider opts for line-item-veto of offending docs. Regardless, there is a rapidly forming consensus among discerning Catholics that Vatican II was designed to derail the Church - and it did.
3) Neither Bishop is part of any fringe Catholic group - except the "fringe" Catholics who thinks the Pope, Bishops, Priests and Church should be, well, Catholic. When does the sensus fidelium stand up and say NO! It's been done (many times) before.
3) Both because the native population of England is English (who tend to be white), and because the UK PC chattering class tends to be uncommonly strident (from a US POV) - always self-assured and smiling - the cultural level negation of Eng nat'l ident creates a stark contrast.
4) Rather than openly attack English identify, which arises from what the Romans called a natio, and the Greeks called an Ethos, they simply convert all ethnic English into "white" and make all customs indicators of racism.
5) The then use the competing cultural values of the hordes of mass-wave immigrants to match up against those "racist" English customs and negate them. Of course, the narrative is rigged so that all defenses of English identify are per se racism.
1) That's a pretty good definition of mass line. The Key Findings of "ReRemembering" provides a gloss -unconstrainedanalytics.org/report-re-reme…
P. 98 of ReRemembering "Maoist Concept of Political Warfare" says that -
"MASS LINE: Organizing an alternative society through the construction . . .
2) . . . of clandestine infrastructure, that is, a counter-state. In dialec- tical terms, if the state is thesis, then the counter-state is its anti-state. Local socio-economic grievances and aspirations are addressed by cadres, . . .
3) . . . who then connect solutions to the party’s political mecha- nism. As with all political action, appeal to perceived needs (not only grievances but also hopes and aspirations) are sought in order to win allegiance for the purpose of mobilization.
1) Sometimes you have to start asking the questions you never, not for a minute, thought would have to be raised. We have the far left saying they want to bring America down this year, we know that. We know they plan to lead with the Neo-Marxist weaponization of race, . . .
2) . . . We've seen comments by Mattis, and also a senior general of the USAF, that then sent a cascade of statements from AF officers and NCOs in line. . .
3) Now we have this cryptically written statement from the Army -
The Minnesota Gov, AG, and Minneapolis Mayor all virtue signaled approval of rioting as as the expression of the oppressed (Marxism). They ARE the elected sworn officers required to protect Minnesotans and their property. My promised blog on Minnesota
2) I read of the retired African-American MPLS Fireman who bought a bar that was burned down and he has no insurance. What I've subsequently been told is that destruction from riots take on force majeure characteristics.
3) There is the story of the teen-age girl who had her boyfriend at the house. She became panicked that her boyfriend leave safely because "protesters" were throwing rock from the overpass on I-694.
Political Warfare brought home. The interesting thing about privatizing intelligence is that you don’t need a FISA warrant to collect against Americans. This is not new, if fact it’s been building.
(2/5) In 2013, the Obama administration lifted the “anti-propaganda law that prevented the U.S. Govt . . . from providing programming to American audiences.”
(3/5) In 2017, the Obama admin “loosened privacy rules” so NSA could collect on U.S. cit, share derogatory information on the incoming Trump team, pro-Trump supporters, and people deemed odious to the deep state –
(1/14) Reading histories of movements like the French Revolution, the rise of communism, fascism or Nazism, there is always the section that identifies those things leading to the breakdowns that were missed in their own time but universally recognized later.
(2/14) Why wait 25 years to discuss then what history tells us we should recognize today? One reason is that circumstances as they exist today don’t always lead to worst case outcomes that seem obvious in hindsight. Current indicators suggest a heightened vigilance today:
(3/14) A) As raised in “The Dominant Narrative,” the president has been enveloped by narratives his senior epidemiological cadre and national public health institutions promote. unconstrainedanalytics.org/narrative-domi…