I have a feeling this is going to go really badly for me, but it has to be said. The dynamic must be explained.
Yesterday, on Good Friday, one of the high holy days of the Christian faith, the Biden Administration proclaimed Easter Sunday, March 31, 2024 *specifically* to be a "trans day of visibility." The official White House press release page shows an Easter Bunny by the White House, indicating they are fully aware that they are making this proclamation specifically about Easter Sunday, even though Easter is not specifically mentioned in the proclamation.
This isn't just an insult to the Christian faith, and indeed an intolerable one that proclaims a form of embodied Gnostic theosophy that misleads and destroys kids. It is entirely consistent with Woke Theosophy, as I've discussed elsewhere and may attach here as a thread, but it is more than that. It is also a deliberate provocation against Christians that must be understood.
A key principle of Woke activism is "your target's reaction is your real action." That derives from Saul Alinsky in Rules for Radicals and has been codified in the updated activism manual called Beautiful Trouble. They do these provocations intentionally, as I have discussed at length in the past, as a means of stoking a reaction they can use to their advantage.
On the reactionary side at present, it must be indicated that there are multiple overlapping active measures to drag faithful Christians into reactionary stances. One is the prevailing "Operation Christian Nationalism," which this same administration is framing as one of the most dangerous threats to "democracy" in the world today. Another is the more local and specific radicalization attempt during Holy Week that follows the Christian rhetoric of "Christ is King," which has been successfully tied to an antisemitic trope and active measure meant to drive a wedge between Christians and Jews and Christians and Christians. I have taken tremendous heat for exposing this active measure, as have many others, which is a testament to its status as an active measure.
This provocation, published yesterday, is overwhelmingly likely aiming to feed into those prevailing active measures ("ops") meant to drag Christians into a positions of fruitful reaction that the Regime can use to clamp down on them. Again, Christian reaction is their real action, and we know for certain that Christian circles are deeply infiltrated with a chest-beating and growing radicalism that is being baited toward and associated with a growing antisemitism. The responses to this post will almost certainly prove this out, btw. Your evil government wants this to happen. They are baiting you into it.
What should you do?
You should cleave to your faith with wisdom and discernment. You should celebrate your Christianity as loudly and publicly as you want, and you should do so aware that a reaction is being solicited from you. Pray for those caught up in the trans cult. Make your prayers visible. Welcome them to healing and communion, even if they're not ready to take it. Likewise, pray for these evil "leaders" that they repent of this wickedness. Pray also for those professing Christianity but not practicing it, seeking to lead Christians into error from within, that they repent and find forgiveness, peace, strength, and ultimately faith.
More than that, celebrate your faith openly and on terms that avoid the desired reaction of these enemies of both the church and our nations. Proclaim "He is risen" and celebrate your salvation through Him. Do not be afraid, but do not take the evil path that is being offered to you. I advise reading Matthew 10 in its entirety in this dangerous time in which your religion is targeted and in which you are being targeted and identified for this persecution, which is being set up through these provocations. It contains wisdom and guidance for times precisely like these.
Happy Easter, everyone, and may the Good News of your faith overpower the evil being done against it, not through chest-beating reaction and temptations to evil, but through the power of peace, repentance, and forgiveness that is at the heart of it, for all the people in all the nations of the world. Let not this weapon that has been forged against you prevail. Keep your faith, and keep you head. These are trying times. whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/…
I'll add some legs to this.
Yes, you are being baited, and yes, they know what they're doing. There are also ravening wolves in sheep's clothing around you urging you to take the bait. The Left infiltrates. Be discerning. Wise as serpents, gentle as doves. beautifultrouble.org/toolbox/tool/t…
As for the Woke Theosophy at the heart of this, here is a page from Paulo Freire's 1984 book The Politics of Education, in which he explains that from the Woke (Liberation Theology) perspective, Easter is dead unless it means being reborn in Woke critical consciousness.
Freire on the transformation that transition is a part of (since the print is small, breaking up the text to make it more readable):
"This new apprenticeship will violently break down the elitist concept of existence they had absorbed while being ideologized.
The sine qua non the apprenticeship demands is that, first of all, they [the awakened/Woke] really experience their own Easter, that they die as elitists so as to be resurrected on the side of the oppressed, that they be born again with the beings who were not allowed to be.
Such a process implies a renunciation of myths that are dear to them: the myth of their superiority, of their purity of soul, of their virtues, their wisdom, the myth that they save the poor, the myth of the neutrality of the church, of theology, education, science, technology, the myth of their own impartiality.
From these grow the other myths: of the inferiority of other people, of their spiritual and physical impurity. and of the absolute ignorance of the oppressed."
Continuing Freire's Marxist Theosophy of Easter, as above:
"This Easter, which results in the changing of consciousness, must be existentially experienced.
The real Easter is not commemorative rhetoric. It is praxis; it is historical involvement.
The old Easter of rhetoric is dead -- with no hope of resurrection. It is only in the authenticity of historical praxis that Easter becomes the death that makes life possible.
But the bourgeois world view, basically necrophiliac (death-loving) and therefore static, is unable to accept this supremely biophiliac (life-loving) experience of Easter.
The bourgeois mentality -- which is far more than just a convenient abstraction -- kills the profound historical dynamism of Easter and turns it into no more than a date on the calendar."
What he is saying here is that Christian Easter is dead unless it is Woke Easter. Being reborn into Woke critical consciousness (or "Christ Consciousness") is what Easter really means. This is a complete perversion of the Christian faith, and it lives vigorously at the heart of Woke.
"The lust to possess, a sign of the necrophiliac world view, rejects the deeper meaning of resurrection.
Why should I be interested in rebirth if I hold in my hands, as objects to be possessed, the torn body and soul of the oppressed?
I can only experience rebirth at the side of the oppressed by being born again, with them, in the process of liberation. I cannot turn such a rebirth into a means of owning the world, since it is essentially a means of transforming the world."
Freire is insisting there's a "deeper meaning of resurrection" than the true Christian understanding, and it must be experienced as a personal transformation. This is Gnostic heresy, very explicitly. It's also the foundation of Woke.
Freire's Woke Theosophical Easter sermon (4/4):
"If those who were once naive continue their new apprenticeship, they will come to understand that consciousness is not changed by lessons, lectures, and eloquent sermons but by the action of human beings on the world. Consciousness does not arbitrarily create reality, as they thought in their old naive days of subjectivist idealism."
Woke praxis, not faithful Christian belief, is the only way to experience this transformation. That's why trans people are venerated so much by this evil Gnostic cult. They are very personally living out the destruction of the cult's "transformational" beliefs and working to force the world to transform with them, in the name of virtues like empathy, acceptance, tolerance, and love. All of these are invoked by Biden's proclamation (pictured below). It is an evil religion, and the Biden Administration, likely following the United Nations, is promoting it in the most provoking and vile way imaginable.
PS: Some people are pointing out (in anger and with nastiness) that this recognition happens on March 31 "every year." That started with Biden in 2021, it is true, but the Administration would surely have known it would coincide with Easter this year (and again) then. No excuse.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Canada seems to be trying to set some kind of record for being a completely self-unaware Woke retard country, and this official parliamentary report on combating antifeminism is a great unintentionally hilarious but terrifying new example.
You can tell from the summary that this is going to be grade-A retardation where the feminists and masculinity scholars (lol) who wrote it cannot begin to fathom that what they're on about is 100% predictable backlash to their own feminist abuses of men, boys, society, and women.
I'm not going to go through it all here, but these recommendations are so stereotypically Woke that it's funny except that they're actually going to implement it and aim to criminalize totally normal things because they can't figure out that people hate being abused by them.
Some more ramblings of Russian anti-West, anti-American, weirdo Aleksandr Dugin, darling of the Woke Right, sounding surprisingly like JD Vance's economic policy (which Grok will confirm if asked):
"The true "third way" in economics found its classic embodiment in the works of Friedrich List, who formulated the principles of "economic autarchy of large spaces."
"This theory proceeds from the fact that the economic development of capitalist societies is uneven and from the logical consequence of economic colonization by the "richer" countries of the poorer ones; moreover, for the "rich" in such conditions "free trade" is beneficial, and for the "poor" on the contrary.
"From this, List concluded that at certain stages of the economic development of society, it is necessary to resort to protectionism, dirigism and customs restrictions, i.e. to limit the principle of "freedom of trade" at the international level, in order to achieve the level of national and state independence and strategic power.
["Dirigism" refers to an economic system in opposition to laissez-faire in which the state takes an active and directive role in shaping and guiding the economy, rather than limiting itself to a purely regulatory or hands-off approach within a market economy.]
"In other words, it was obvious to List that the economy should be subordinated to national interests, and that any appeal to the "autonomous logic of the market" is only a cover for the economic (and subsequently political) expansion of rich states to the detriment of the poorer, and the subsequent enslavement of the latter.
"This approach immediately sets clear boundaries in which the "market" principle should operate, and in which the "socialist" one.
"It is interesting that Rathenau, the author of the German "economic miracle," and Witte, Lenin, and even Keynes formulated their economic principles on the basis of the doctrine of Friedrich List, although they used a language that was closer to or purely capitalist, or communist vocabulary, that the economy should be subordinated to national interests, and that any appeal to the "autonomous logic of the market" is only a cover for the economic (and subsequently political) expansion of rich states to the detriment of the poorer, and the subsequent enslavement of the latter."
CC: @PhilWMagness
After describing the theory a little, our behated weirdo continues, ominously given the context:
"It is very interesting that it was the Friedrich List model that was used by historically developed capitalist countries in times of crisis. Thus, even the United States, the radical defenders of the principle of "free trade", periodically resorted to protectionist measures and state subsidies to the industrial sector when periods of "economic depression" began.
"It was precisely such a period that was the stage of implementation of the New Deal, when the Americans almost literally reproduced the principles of List, although they submitted them in a relaxed version of Keynes, the author of the theory of "economic insulation", which, in general, is nothing but a new name for the theory of "economic autarky of large spaces ".
"By the way, List himself lived in the United States for a long time and observed the process of capitalist construction in the early phases. Based on these observations, he formulated the basic principles of his theory in relation to Germany. But, of course, the most ambitious results were given by the implementation of List's doctrine in National Socialist Germany, when his ideas were implemented totally and without any liberal or Marxist amendments."
Sounds very Woke Right overall, including the idea of a new New Deal, the favortism of FDR who implemented it, and all the rest. The Woke Right's rejection of Keynes here and a certain revisionist tendency that shows up in that last sentence in Dugin is blatantly concerning.
For further context, Dugin began this discussion (in The Foundations of Geopolitics) by criticizing the application of Hayek to the Russian context in the post-USSR period (which is what he's technically writing about here). All our favorite Woke Right weirdos also criticize Hayek rather strangely and specifically, claiming he is the falsely "conservative" wing of the same liberal (or neoliberal) project that gives us Woke and Communism.
Very interesting, indeed.
CC: @PhilWMagness
It gets a little worse. Remember, this is Dugin writing in 1997 for the Russian context, but our question is why is this the American post-liberal vision today in these United States of America:
"It is this version of the "third way" economy that is the only alternative in today's Russia, which is opposed at the same time to rampant liberalism and restorationist projects of neo-communists who do not want to seriously correct outdated and proved ineffective dogmas. If it were not for the instantly emerging associations with the Hitler regime, one could call this project "socialism of the national type.""
Rather than foregrounding identity politics, it will push:
1) Affordability (Marxist materialism); 2) Anti-corruption (ironic but an excuse to go after Trump); 3) Anti-Israel (pro-Palestine).
It will be warm to political violence.
The identity politics won't go away, but it won't be foregrounded any longer. It will definitely play supporting roles. They won't lead with it, though.
They'll find much superficial alignment with the Woke Right and Woke-ish "Libertarians" on their three key issues and violence
The agreement will only be superficial and occasionally strategic to block actual patriots. Like with every issue upon which they align, Woke Left (2.0) and Woke Right will come at the issues from different angles, e.g. pro-Palestine vs anti-Israel. Applies to all issues.
From my Woke Encyclopedia, an explanation of the "friend-enemy distinction" of Carl Schmitt, which is the Woke political logic. Link at the end!🧵
(1/13) The friend-enemy distinction refers to the cornerstone object of the political and judicial philosophy of a German theorist named Carl Schmitt, who wrote a number of works of right-wing political philosophy and thought before becoming such an enthusiastic Nazi in 1933, just after Adolf Hitler took power, that he earned the informal title “the Crown Jurist of the Third Reich.”
Though most of his significant political thinking was done both before and after he was a Nazi, during the years when he was a part of Hitler’s National Socialist movement and Party, he contributed strongly to the legal theory that justified the Nazi “total state,” including writing the 1933 piece that gets rendered in English as “The Legal Basis for the Total State,” which is significantly based upon the friend-enemy distinction.
Friend-enemy distinction:
(2/13) Schmitt’s thought is primarily of interest on the Woke Right, where he is a favored thinker and model political mind. He is vigorously forwarded for a handful of his political concepts, perhaps most visibly his “friend-enemy distinction” as the essential criterion of what makes politics political. This idea is first presented and developed in full detail in his 1927/32 book The Concept of the Political.
Friend-enemy distinction:
(3/13) For Schmitt, what makes the politics political is the distinction between (public) friend and (public) enemy, where enemies are defined as those who are interested in destroying one’s way of life and friends are defined as those who are willing to band together in its defense.
Schmitt specifically compares the essential nature of this distinction in politics to the distinction between good and evil in morality, beautiful and ugly in aesthetics, and profitable versus non-profitable in economics.
That is, politics is only political to the degree that it recognizes the possibility of factions that exist in mutual enmity underwritten by the potentially existential threat of violence. Of course, that means that Schmitt believes the essential criterion of politics is war, which he reveals also in part by making his point by completing the identity contained in von Clausewitz’s famous remark that “war is politics by other means.”
All radical movements find themselves in a pinch: they can only really advance when people don't know their true intentions, but they can only really advance by going public with what they're doing. It's an intrinsic dilemma that only rare figures in rare circumstances can win.
Mamdani is a good example of a rare figure (extremely good at presenting himself disingenuously while looking real) in rare circumstances (terrible primary opponent, then running against a terrible combination of Cuomo/Sliwa, then still not winning by huge margins).
The primary reason NYC got Mamdani isn't something to do with the electorate, the climate, or anything else. Mamdani, with tons of weird money, ran a very strong campaign (rare figure) in very weird circumstances, most of which were candidate-specific, not conditional.