stock here, copied in full. Methinks Mathis shall soon be censored completely.

http://mileswmathis.com/jones3.pdf

http://mileswmathis.com/jones3.pdf

Alex Jones’ Second Fake Trial
First published September 17, 2022

In case you didn’t know, there is a second Jones trial for defamation against Sandy Hook parents in
Connecticut right now. That’s weird, right, since we see him in his newsroom every day, doing his
show.

How can he be in two places at once? Is he twins? Scary thought, eh?
He just lost the first and separate jury trial a couple of weeks ago, with a judgment against him for
$49.5 million. There were also previous Sandy Hook suits he (allegedly) lost in what Wikipedia admits
were default judgments, which also doesn’t make sense because he should have been able to request a
jury trial for any defamation case.

A jury should have had to find against him, but instead we are told it was a default judgment, which is entered by the judge, not the jury. No jury found against him.
In the second trial, we are told he has not defaulted, since the trial is ongoing. We have seen video of
that trial as well. Which means he should be there physically in court. And yet we see him everyday
on his show. Are we supposed to believe he is flying from Texas to Connecticut and back everyday, or
has he set up a duplicate studio adjacent to the courtroom?

I have dismissed both trials as fake, and we were given perfect proof of that today, when Jones himself
reported that the judge declared him guilty during courtroom proceedings—which is of course highly
illegal. Here is what she said to his attorney, after interrupting him for the millionth time during
questioning of a witness:
“If it’s not clear – wouldn’t be the first time – and you’ll move for an articulation, and I’ll
articulate when I’m directed to by the appellate court. I understand that there will be an
appeal, I assume-” Bellis explained before Pattis chimed in.
Whoops. If this were a real trial, a mistrial would have to be called right there, since the judge has just
exhibited extreme prejudice, prejudging the outcome before full testimony. If a real jury had been
sitting there, they would have all gasped at once. Jones’ attorney Pattis should have demanded a
mistrial immediately, but he didn’t. None of that happened, because—as I have been telling you—this
is not a real trial. It is not a “kangaroo court” either, since a kangaroo court is a real trial that is rigged.
This isn’t a real trial, it is a fake CIA trial run in some studio.
Another thing that doesn’t make any sense is that we see Jones commenting on his own trial everyday
on his site. That is also illegal. Parties in a lawsuit are not allowed to discuss the case outside the
courtroom until it is over. Why? Because it might influence the outcome. Jurors might go online and
see him making his case. He is supposed to be making his case in the courtroom, not on his site. If this
suit were real, the judge would immediately sequester the jury and put a gag order on Jones, to prevent
this from happening. That isn’t happening why? Because they want this fake trial to be publicized as
widely as possible, even by Jones himself, especially to Jones’ audience. The whole point of these fake
trials is to scare people like you and me into silence. It is a bluff. They want us to believe we are about
to be sued or otherwise prosecuted for talking or writing. We are supposed to believe we will be hit
with a $45 million judgment for giving an opinion. We are supposed to believe the First Amendment
no longer exists, I guess.
They did this first with Jim Fetzer, who allegedly had a large judgment against him on the same SandyHook event. No word on whether he has actually paid that. I believe he has claimed poverty, forcing
Pozner to seize his book copyrights. Fetzer allegedly appealed his case all the way to the Supreme
Court. Guffaw. Problem is, I looked up the Supreme Court case, and it also looks fake. The first clue
here is that Wikipedia’s page on Fetzer has no mention of this entire lawsuit, though you would think it
would be a big deal. Although there is a section on his “conspiracy theories”, there is not one word on
Sandy Hook, either his book or his trials. As for that document I just linked at supremecourt.gov, it has
the form of an appeal to the Supreme Court, but has no case number and publishes only the appendices.
I found another Supreme Court document dated August 31, 2022 (about two weeks ago) that is equally
fishy, since it isn’t written in the expected language. I guess we are supposed to believe Fetzer wrote it
himself, with no help from an attorney. That form is addressed to Justice Barrett, but Fetzer refiled it a
week later to Justice Gorsuch. He also must have filed a similar appeal on May 16, since that is the
date of the appendices linked above. I finally found it here, and it is not addressed to any specific
Justice. So it looks to me like Fetzer is making himself look stupid on purpose, peppering the Supreme
Court with multiple and poorly written appeals. He has become an Anti. First he questions the Sandy
Hook event, then blackwashes himself. It’s textbook. If you will remember, Fetzer tried to rope me
into this mess, asking for permission to use my research in his book on Sandy Hook. I said no, not
because I was afraid of a lawsuit, but because I didn’t want to be tarnished by association with Fetzer.
Good call, eh?
Anyway, on page 20 of the Aug. 31 document, we discover Fetzer’s outcome in Wisconsin was a
summary judgment without jury, which again is illegal. This document even admits that, since in such
cases the defendant is allowed to request a trial by jury. Fetzer brings up the 14th Amendment, which
concerns equal protection, and the fact that Wisconsin’s summary judgment method does not match that
of Texas, for example. We are supposed to believe no one in a libel case in Wisconsin has ever
obtained a trial by jury, I guess.
But the document admits what we already know:
Even though both Texas and Wisconsin have a right to trial by jury in their state constitutions it
is not protected equally in the summary judgment methodologies practiced in the two states.
The right to a trial by jury is in the Wisconsin state constitution.
That being true, there is no possibility Fetzer could have suffered a summary judgment and the failure
of two appeals. This whole storyline is impossible from the first word, so this Supreme Court
document should not exist.
As for language, I send you to page 21, where at the bottom we find this:
The Respondent, Mr. Pozner, has asserted that Dr. Fetzer has “zero” chance of obtaining a
Writ of Certiorari in this Court and prevailing on the 21 merits. The circuit court judge also
said Dr. Fetzer had a one-in-a-million chance: “I will give you this, and I don’t mean to be fip,
but I think you have maybe a one in a million chance of your certiorari being granted. Not
zero. One in a million. But the standard is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, so
one in a million doesn’t get you there,” (page 19 line 16).
Do you really think Pozner, after supposedly winning this case and two appeals, is going to piss off the
Supreme Court by saying something like that? Pozner and his attorneys were supposedly basing thoseodds on their belief that “the 7th Amendment right to trial by jury in common law matters does not
apply to the states.” Really? You see why I am telling you this document is some kind of joke, written
by some bozos in the Langley basements who have never been to law school or even read a law book.
The 7th Amendment doesn’t apply to the states? Who does it apply to, the Moon?
You will tell me Fetzer is the bozo and that anyone can appeal to the Supreme Court. All you have to
do is enter a document. Yes, but the documents refute themselves, not because they prove Fetzer is a
dodo, but because they prove the case could not have proceeded as we are told. Fetzer would never
have waived his right to a trial by jury, and we aren’t even expected to believe he did. We are expected
to believe he wasn’t offered that opportunity, and that neither appeals court noticed that. Of course the
Supreme Court will not hear this case, since I assume they know it isn’t even real. So we will be
expected to believe Fetzer was thrown into the poor house and his copyrights stolen by Pozner with no
jury ever finding against him. They want you to believe that is the fate awaiting you if you analyze,
research, or speak about any major news item. If you disbelieve any mainstream story or call any crisis
actor a crisis actor, you are potentially guilty of defamation.
The trouble was, I ignored the Fetzer trial, knowing it was fake, and it passed under the radar of most
people. So they had to try again with Jones. They needed a much more high profile fake, to hopefully
scare us all silent. But it won’t work with me and I suggest you don’t fall for it, either. Under the First
Amendment, you have a right to question things, including history and the news. You have a right to
do research and to state your findings. And you also have a right to state your conclusions based on
your findings, even if they appear to be wrong. Yes, under the First Amendment, you have a right to be
mistaken. You don’t have to be right about everything in order to talk or write. Nobody is right about
everything. If you were required to be right about everything, science would screech to a halt, since no
one could question current dogma for even a moment. For example, those in charge of Big Bang
theory could sue anyone who questioned it, claiming mental distress. All Nobel Prize winners could
sue anyone who questioned their theories, saying they were in anxiety of losing their status. All
political disagreement could also be squelched, and AOC could sue Tucker Carlson for saying she was
a nitwit. Tucker could then sue Jennifer Lawrence for saying he was a denizen of nightmares.
So you see how the Jones lawsuit ties into all that, since they really are pushing for that sort of
lockdown. Google, Facebook, and Twitter—at the behest of international government—have created a
unilateral version of history and truth, as if everything is now known. If you deviate from that line you
are accused of disinformation and censored. And you now see the turn of the screw: while Jones is
arguing against that sort of censorship on his show, he is taking part in this fake trial that gives it
precedent. In one story he is screaming against censorship, in the next he is a clownish victim of it.
The railer against crisis actors has become the premier crisis actor.*
That’s why I previously said using Jones in this project, in a pair of televised court cases, was very ill
advised. Especially with me lurking to point out all its flaws. It becomes way too easy to blow his
cover. Which is precisely why they just released his book, taking it to the top of the Amazon list and
so on. They need to create new cover and a diversion, to get eyes off the Sandy Hook failure and move
you on. It is hoped the book’s sales numbers will reshine Jones’ reputation, and get your mind off the
fact he just confirmed Sandy Hook as real. I don’t think it will work, since he might as well have
admitted 911 and the Moon landings were as advertised. He is spitting on his own choir, sort of like
Chomsky did after 911. Chomsky destroyed his reputation with that and will never get it back, and
Jones has just done the same thing with Sandy Hook. He is claiming to be between a rock and hard
place with Trump and the vaccines, but the rock Jones is foundering on right now isn’t Trump. It is
Sandy Hook.It occurs to me this all may be planned, with Jones ready to move on to something else after playing the
same role for three decades.* This Sandy Hook fail may be planned to bring Infowars down and allow
Jones to retire. It is probably hoped it will leave a big hole in the Truther movement, though I don’t
think it will. It will just give it more room to breathe. All those herded by Jones for decades will be
free to come over to me, where they can roam all they like, going much further down the rabbit hole
than Jones ever allowed them. He always made it seem like he was way out in front of everyone, but I
have made him look like another brick in the wall from the beginning. Although he sells himself as a
history buff and expert, he won’t touch 95% of my research, preferring to keep you roped in by partisan
politics and daily news. Maybe they hope to replace him by Rogan and others, who are even tamer and
bricker, but that won’t fly. Every pull on the reins from now on will just infuriate the horses more.
*Three days ago Jones admitted in his interview with Del Bigtree at Highwire that his family is stiff with CIA
and government agents (see minute 1:51:40). His maternal grandfather developed a secret weapon for the
Pentagon, his uncle was involved in Iran Contra and other secret flights, and “many other family members” as
well. Jones claims he didn’t know that until recently, but that isn’t really believable. So the question is, why are
we just hearing about it now?
He also admits in that interview that his goal is to semi-retire soon and only appear on air maybe one day a
week. So I predict they will soon spin this Sandy Hook after-event into that, while somehow damaging the
Truther movement at the same time.
He also admits that State Department bigwig Steve Pieczenik confirmed to him that Sandy Hook was a fake,
which of course reminds us that Jones and his attorneys never called any witnesses in any of his Sandy Hook
trials. Jones was in the perfect position to enter all the Sandy Hook evidence of a fake into the court record, but
didn’t even start. That is what you or I would have done, so why didn’t Jones and his attorneys? Why didn’t they
subpoena Pieczenik and hundreds of other researchers, having them read their findings into the court record?
Why didn’t Jones show the jury the film of Robbie Parker giving his notorious fake-crying speech? [I just did a
search for that, and the first thing that came up was ABCNews, which plays the tape with audio only, no video,
and cutting the intro where he gets into character. Proving they are hiding this behind a purple background.
Also notice that even on the ones with video, the only ones that have been left up have the first part covered by
voice over, to hide Robbie saying “just read from the card? OK!”] Why didn’t Jones show the jury the crazy
coroner making his speech, telling us the parents wouldn’t get to see their dead children? Why didn’t Jones enter
the story of Gene Rosen into the record, including the stuffed animals, etc? Why didn’t Jones mention the
admitted use of fake photos in the story, where one lady discovered her living daughter was being included in the
pictures of Sandy Hook dead? Why didn’t Jones mention the changing story about Lanza’s mother working at
the school, and of the dead principal giving a press conference, and of Adam Lanza carrying his brother’s ID,
and of the murder weapon being found in the trunk of the car, though it should have been found with Lanza
inside the school, and of Lanza’s father just happening to be the VP of GE Financial, and of the cars in the
parking lot all being parked in the same direction, and of the FBI reporting zero murders for Newtown, CT, for
2012 on their own site? Why didn’t Jones and his attorneys read into the court record the fake pictures of Emilie
Parker, with analysis by photo professionals? Why didn’t they tell the jury that no physician assistant by the
name of Robert Parker existed at that time in CT? Why didn’t they play Kaitlyn Roig’s interview with Diane
Sawyer, where she claimed there was a bookshelf in the school bathroom? Why didn’t they show the jury all the
websites about Sandy Hook memorials that went up before the event? Why didn’t they remind the jury of all the
drills going on in Newtown in the months leading up the event, some of them at that firehouse directly in front of
the school? Why didn’t they remind the juries of the strange actions of judges at the time, who put gag orders on
everyone, even putting a gag order on the car’s ID? Why didn’t they remind the jury that no forensics was done
at the school, the crime scene being illegally demolished soon thereafter (much like OKCity and 911). We also
have to wonder why Robbie Parker never sued anyone. Surely he suffered the most emotional distress of
anyone, since absolutely no one believed him. Why didn’t he sue Steve Pieczenik, who stated on-air at Infowarsthat Sandy Hook was a fake?
And in other fake news, Politico led reporting of numbers from the CDC claiming sexually transmitted
diseases are on a steep climb. Well, why not believe the CDC? Their Covid and vaccine numbers
were so good, after all.
Syphilis is supposed to be up 26% in 2021. That goes against all expectation, since—due to lockdowns
and other restrictions—we may assume far fewer people were hooking up with strangers. But wait, it
might be true, but only a misreading of data. We would expect a huge fall in numbers from 2019 to
2020, right. So 2020 was an anomaly, with very low numbers. Say syphilis fell 40% from 2019 to
2020, due to lockdowns. The lockdowns eased in 2021, allowing a 26% increase. But that would
mean we were still 14% down from 2019 to 2021. You see how that works?
We are told that 26% is the largest increase since 1953, but that doesn’t mean anything. The increase is
a short term anomaly due to lockdowns, not a long term trend. Which also puts the lie to the title:
‘Sharing’ Economy Continues To Spread: Americans With
STDs Jump 26% To Seven-Decade Highs
Again meaningless, due to population growth. Of course more people have syphilis now than in 1953:
the total population of the US is much larger. The population then was about 155 million then; now it
is 332 million, so we would expect 2.14 times as many people to have syphilis now, even with the same
rate. Due to population growth, we are going to have “record highs” in everything every year.
Everything is now at a “seven-decade high”.
As usual, this is just data pushing. The conclusion is actually upside-down to real data, which no doubt
shows falling rates of STDs, due to falling rates of sex, especially among strangers. So why flip data
on you and misreport this, even at Zerohedge? Population control. Same reason the government just
hit you with a deadly vaccine. Same reason they continue to accelerate the Men-are-Pigs and Woman-
are-Pigs programs, the MGTOW movement, and the split-the-sexes project. Same reason they want
everyone gay or trans. Same reason they overturned Roe v. Wade and put all the screaming women on
the streets with asinine signs like “vasectomies for all men”. Same reason they have put hormone
blockers and mimickers in the food, water, and air. Same reason fertility is dropping like a stone.
Same reason men are getting breasts. They want you afraid of sex, so they tell you STDs are on the
rise when they aren’t. They want you wearing masks and condoms at all times, even when driving
alone in the car.
The truth is, this is the safest time to have unprotected hetero sex in the history of the world. Why?
Many reasons, starting with the fact that fertility rates are so low. Many of you probably couldn’t have
a baby if you tried. If you are a man your sperm has been rendered worthless, due to what you eat,
what you bathe in, what you spray on your lawns, and what you use to polish your car. If you are a
woman your uterus is inhospitable, for similar reasons. And if you aren’t part of the 5% posting porn
videos, you are likely to be semi-frigid, with very few lifetime partners or none, which means your
odds of having or getting an STD are almost zero. If you are one of those people, you probably aren’t
hanging out with dangerous people, you are hanging out with people like yourself: clean as the drivensnow. So you can do whatever you like together, within reason. Use the rhythm method if you are in
your childbearing years and don’t want a child right now, otherwise go crazy. But whatever you choose
to do and whomever you choose to do it with, ignore the government and all its fake numbers. The
CDC now has zero credibility, along with the FDA and all other government agencies. Listen to them
at your own peril. If you follow their advice you will be guaranteed to be miserable, lonely, confused,
and unhealt

stock here:

World in Data would have you believe that there were less deaths in China than in a lightly populated county of Wisconsin.

Here is a link to the spreadsheet with all their data to 092622, today

https://app.box.com/s/j5w6gd83xftk5ddlqwwhmg3m70bjrzw7

stock here: Been working pretty consistent and hard. Every asset one has should be in workable and sellable condition. Your backup energy systems should be tested. If you have significant amounts of savings, do not worry so much about making more money. Instead, spend money on things that improve your life and position.

Capite?

stock here, a good compilation. Think of the absurdity of the videos from China of people dropping dead on the streets. And after that lie, why would any thinking person believe what comes after?

Zerohedge had a good article on the 4 phase methodology to install a totalitarian regime. It started with 1) Demoralize by repeated abuse.

An hour later, it looks like they deplatformed their own article. One of their authors got too close to the truth. We know for sure that Zerohedge is now and maybe for 5 or 6 years, been controlled opposition. When the chips are down they will carry the lies all the way.

stock here. It seems odd that Belgium wants to cripple itself on 50% of it’s electricity, while also at threat from a complete shutdown of Russian fossil fuels.

——————- If you don’t believe TPTB don’t have a long term plan and an even longer agenda, these actions should help you see what they are capable of doing. This definitely is no coincidence, these manufactured energy crises schemes are getting old. I suppose the parasites rely on the short term memory of humans, all their past reasons for an “energy crises“ have been proven to be pure bullshit and the technology for humanity to move past this toxic form of energy reliance has been completely subverted for their agenda. ——————-

https://www.sott.net/article/472474-First-nuclear-reactor-to-be-shut-down-in-Belgium

According to the Belgian law on nuclear phase-out, the Doel 3 nuclear reactor will stop operating on Friday after 40 years of activity.

In the 1960s, Belgium chose nuclear energy to produce a part of its electricity since it was no longer possible to meet the growing demand for energy with fossil fuels alone. Four nuclear reactors were thus built in Doel and three in Tihange.

The Doel 1 reactor started operating in early 1975, followed later that year by Doel 2. Doel 3 was launched in 1982, and Doel 4 was completed in mid-1985.

On Friday, Doel 3 will be disconnected from the electricity grid according to the nuclear phase-out law. This is the first time that a reactor is shut down in Belgium and comes while energy prices are soaring and ahead of a difficult winter.

“We have been preparing for this for four years,” said Peter Moens, the Site Director of the Doel Nuclear Power Plant.

The total power of the Doel power plant is 2,935 megawatts (MW), compared to 3,008 MW for Tihange. The two power plants together represent 50% of the country’s annual electricity consumption, equivalent to 42 billion kWh.

Seen on Died Suddenly News on Facebook. A group that self censors, purportedly in an attempt to not get banned.

I copied it, because I think they will remove it.

My Dad took a carrot and the next day when in the Emergency room with a serious heart problem. He asked the Doctor are you going to have to operate on me tomorrow? Doctor said, there will be no tomorrow, we are starting to prep you this minute.

I didn’t think there was any need to say anything about the carrot, as it was beyond obvious. His doctor should have firmly stated “no more Carrots” He took another carrot, and was back in the emergency room with debilitating back pain, to the point he told my brother “we got to fix this or death is a reasonable alternative”.

I brought up the dangers of the carrot and Spoke-S. He said “everyone is entitled to their own opinion”. After his third carrot and second advanced pacemaker with auto-defib, I brought over the printouts from VAERS of a set of cardiac problems and deaths, and neurological problems including horrible back pain, highlighting the salient points.

And I told him that I can help as long as he doesn’t continue to poison himself. I also made this study showing how the carrot is mildly protective, almost un-noticeable. But 3 or more carrots and the death rate goes way up. Ask if you want the source material and Excel.

stock here: I wasn’t going to spend much time on new Stats, after all, we do know close enough what is really going on. I started my meditation with the idea to roughly forecast the world population going forward based upon:

Increase in Death Rate

Exponential decrease in Birth Rate

and finally I threw in….More decrease in Birth Rate because so many of the “excess deaths” are in ages that should be fertile, men and women, and yes, I do know how to define that.

Source:

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/number-of-deaths-per-year

But when the death data was handed to me on a silver platter, it also occurred to me that we could compare current excess deaths to vaccination rates. Wouldn’t that be something that even a staunch blue piller would have a hard time rationalizing?

Scatter Chart

It took quite a bit of work to also get the vaccination status per country and then meld that into a single data set, as countries included were different at times, and different names or abbreviations. De Nada.

The chart below says it all. The horizontal axis is the number of shots injected per 100 people in that country. One would expect a much less death rate, the most robust countries being the best at getting jabs done, and also with better medical systems.

But that is not the case, the jabs barely show any decrease in death rate based on the trendline. But I did the chart in 2 pieces and melded them, to show the effect of more than 2 jabs. The more jabbed you are, the higher the chance that you are going to die.

Boom!

stock out

Stock here, Get ready to Rock and Roll!

I put out the alert for large earthquakes and ERUPTION ON MAUNA LOA in Hawaii (which is a tough call since the last one was in 1986, Kilauea, including the rift zone is often a pressure release that “protects” Mauna Loa from eruption. But the 2018 Volcanic Events may have closed off a port to the East Rift Zone, we don’t know. The 2018 Event was terminated by a large Indonesian quake, just like the start of the 2018 Hawaiian Events. So port closure is only speculation.

Large Earthquakes and Vulcanism often happens within a handful of days surrounding the Equinoxes, as the Earth Transitions from Sun and related Space Weather from Northern Earth Hemisphere to Southern Earth Hemisphere. And I finally today, after a few years of meaning to do this, came up with the answer of at least the dates at which the Earths transition up and down relative to the equator of the Sun also affects how the Solar activity of all sorts affects the Earth. More below, but here is the important summary.

I present the following data. First one from Sept 5th 2022

So please do your own research on the Interplanetary Magnetic
Fields / Flux transfer.

Also below is a wealth of information about the Earth’s travel path around the sun. What is barely known is that the Earth goes up and down in relation to the equator of the Sun by 7.5% each way. That’s a lot, only Pluto has a crazier orbit. And that makes all the difference in the world in whether sunspots Sunpots, Coronal Holes, CMEs, Filament launches……. on the North side of the sun, on the South side of the sun, have more effect on the Earth, especially in light of our weakened and weakening magnetic field / shield.

stock here, this was written 4.5 years ago. I would like to hold in my head a clear checklist of how the Democrat party is acting Quite Like a Communist part would. I’ll add more as clarity is gained.

Saying the democrat party has embraced communist tactics may sound
shocking and over-the-top to some. It’s not an easy thing to say, but facts are
facts, communist tactics and the Democrat Party are in lockstep with one
another now.

Unlike liberals, who threw out strong statements without
backing them up, I can actually back up my statements.  Communists use two prominent tactics to gain and keep power.  

Fact – Communists weaponized their intelligence agencies in
order to use them against their political opponents.

Fact – Communist shut down free speech of their political
opponents. Many times citing that their opponents are spreading hate and must be
shut down for the good of the country.

These two things are the MOST important things communists do
in order to maintain control and stay in power. Without these two things, communists
would have a hard time maintaining power.

Now let’s look at the Democratic Party in America currently.
The Democrats weaponized our intelligence agencies in order to use them against
their political opponents (Donald Trump and Conservatives). The Democrats are
constantly trying to shut down free speech of their political opponents as
well. (College Campuses and now Social Media) 

Facebook has proclaimed (On MAY DAY) that they will crackdown on hate
speech. There is no doubt that “hate
speech” on Facebook will mean conservative thought. Don’t believe me? Ask a liberal to name the hate speech in which
they engage in. What liberal position is
considered hateful? Now ask a liberal what conservative positions are
considered hateful. That liberal will run off every belief a conservative has.
There is no doubt that Facebook will only considered something as “hate speech” when it comes from a conservative point of view.

How come Democrats don’t have a problem with communist
tactics being used by their party? How come Democrats aren’t defending the
right of conservatives to speak their mind on Facebook? How come Democrats
don’t defend the rights of conservative speakers on college campuses? How come
Democrats don’t condemn the weaponization of the FBI and the DOJ against a
Republican presidential candidate? How come Democrats don’t mind FBI investigations
without a crime? How come Democrats don’t care about attorney-client privilege,
which clearly has been destroyed by Robert Mueller’s investigation?

Is the average democrat okay with their party acting like
communist? I hope not! But the evidence suggests otherwise. Democrats seem to
hate President Donald Trump so much, that if they need to embrace communism to
get rid of him, they’re willing to do it. In fact, the evidence shows, they’ve
already done it.

If you share this on facebook, how long will it take before someone on the left will say that THIS is hate speech?

Has the Democrat Party Embraced Communist Tactics?

stock here– It all started in July 2021, HERE.

Word got out, and I won’t say it is viral, but I think many know. For some it is just so horrible that they cannot wrap their head around it. Cognitive Dissonance!

Officials Won’t Let Independent Scientists Examine mRNA Vaccine Vials

A data leak suggests the real reason health officials don’t want individual vaccine vials examined by independent scientists is that the vials are all different — and the mRNA in the shots is not intact.

‘Stunning’: The Real Reason Health Officials Won’t Let Independent Scientists Examine mRNA Vaccine Vials

stock here. Hattip ACD on this one. I do believe that I was the first one to detect this “signal” of the horrific batches. And a big clincher was that each batch is about 3 pallets full. And they had to be kept to -90F, so logistically hard to handle. But the most toxic batches were shipped to dozens of locations, which is when it became clear to me that this was not just bad quality control, but a huge evil experiment. And of course if I knew it. THEY knew and continued to kill, it was a desired result. Around December 2021 it seemed like they were shipping less bad batches and probably just mostly spike S protein generators, which is pretty horrific by itself. But then they just truncated the VAERS records completely at some date in 2021

09/12/2022 / By Belle Carter / Comments

Bypass censorship by sharing this link:

Copy URL

ADVERTISEMENT

An investigation by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) revealed that certain lots of the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines linked to extremely high numbers of adverse reactions and deaths were still rolled out to the public.

The public health agency found that specific lot numbers of the COVID-19 vaccines connected to adverse reactions and deaths were already identified, but not withdrawn. They also found that four to five percent of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine batches were responsible for every death reported as an adverse reaction. Moreover, these fatal batches were widely distributed across the U.S., while the other benign lots were sent to just a few locations.

The CDC used data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System submitted until Oct. 15, 2021. It included all adverse reactions linked to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Adverse reactions linked to the flu vaccines were also included to serve as a control data set.

A total of 171,463 adverse reactions, 14,262 hospitalizations and 2,828 deaths were linked to 4,522 Pfizer lot numbers, while 188,998 adverse reactions, 10,225 hospitalizations and 2,603 deaths were linked to 5,510 Moderna lot numbers.

Ninety-six percent of the Pfizer vaccine lots had zero death reports, which meant that the 2,828 vaccine deaths linked to it came from four percent of the batches. Meanwhile, 95 percent of the Moderna vaccine lots had zero death reports, translating to 2,603 deaths associated with five percent of the batches.

Specific batches of the mRNA vaccines distributed between 13 and 50 states across the U.S. had an unusually high number of adverse event and death reports, compared to those distributed to 12 states or less. The CDC concluded that there were “concerning findings that warrant further investigation.”

Pfizer sweeping COVID-19 vaccine safety issues under the rug

While these reports could simply be blamed on quality control issues, a whistleblower from a Pfizer manufacturing facility said otherwise. She revealed that she was even fired by the company for stepping up and reporting the irregularities in the vaccine quality she found alarming.

Melissa McAtee, former quality auditor at the Kansas Pfizer plant, told “World View Report” host Brannon Howse last year that she noticed the vaccine was glowing under certain light. After alerting the company, McAtee said the issue was still ignored. (Related: Pfizer petitions court to dismiss whistleblower lawsuit because government was fully aware of fraud when agreeing to work with company.)

While Pfizer said 90 percent of the employees in the plant were vaccinated against the COVID-19 jabs, McAtee said that wasn’t the case.

“Supposedly half of the plant was not vaccinated or would walk out if they will be forced to submit to the vaccine mandate,” she said.

The former Big Pharma staff further stated the most important thing is for the people to get informed consent. “I care that people are informed and they know what is injected into their bodies,” McAtee said.

McAtee said Pfizer is being deceitful and leaving out information and also noted that the company engaged in secrecy, such as shutting down hallways and certain processes when they knew that the Food and Drug Administration would be coming to the plant.

Browse through BigPharmaNews.com for more about how Pfizer and Moderna are deceiving the people with their experimental vaccines.

Watch the video below that talks about the meaning of the COVID-19 vaccine lots.

https://www.brighteon.com/embed/2005f51e-f01b-49ce-b9ce-37fa079b391f

This video is from the Prevent Global Genocide channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

Whistleblower: Pfizer FORGED signatures of trial participants, falsified and fabricated trial data.

COVID vaccine researcher, whistleblower says he was offered $1 million bribe by Pfizer to keep quiet.

Matrixxx Grooove with Jeff and Shady: Whistleblower reveals Pfizer’s main goal is to weaponize the immune system to kill itself – Brighteon.TV.

Negligence, fraud, malice – shouldn’t we all be wiser to Pfizer?

stock here: submitted from ACD, and immediately below, Dr Paul Thomas’ website. This is not strictly about the fake bio-weapon “vaccine”, its about all vaccines. He dives into what I have long theorized…..aluminum is a deadly neurotoxin, so why put it into vaccines? Along with mercury as a “preservative” which seems utterly insane….and then they formulate a different structure of Mercury, give it a cute name, and then continue to inject children with Mercury.

9 September 2022  Can you spare two minutes for the children?

JIM STONE REPORTS:

A doctor hired an outside investigative firm to track covid vaxxed kids. Here are the results

Total hero doctor, an AWESOME two minute vid that is not only pure content, it is presented at the speed of light. You’ll want to watch this one twice.

NOT hour long clickbait. Gets to the point and provides the data in just over two minutes flat. That’s how it should be done, many stretch two minutes of data out for two hours which might be entertaining if the presenter is good, but it totally destroys the productivity of the viewer.

ACD:  Do not comply.

stock here: The Mad Jewess stated the above so simply, there is no need for complexity. In her article below, 2 men discuss the various high profile false flags. Sandy Hook prominent, and don’t forget the Alex Jones bullshit with that too. Controlled opposition often has very annoying voices or facial expressions. Those that like the point of view will give them a by, those that don’t will divide and hate.

Jim Fetzer Interviews Crisis Actor Harrison Hanks & Reviews “False Flags” & Bad Acting From Sandy Hook To Uvalde

stock here: this was inspirational. This guy has motive. Now he has effective strategies to bring real power to enact change that matters.

Less emphasis on defining the problem, and more emphasis on actions to actually take.

stock here: But the worst lots / batches were sent to Red States, but not the Blue Cities in Red States

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/kqp1ntoj7v/econTabReport.pdf

stock here. This Facebook page is growing rapidly. I suspect it will be closed down shortly.

stock here: This topic is certainly striking a chord.    To me the excess death from the jabs in all their forms has been obvious from the begining.   Here is a place where over 200,000 people are talking about the deaths in their family and friends after the jabs.

My estimate is that about 3 Million US citizens have already been killed by the Jabs.    I can’t call it murder, because it was self inflicted.    Although it was the greatest psy-op ever pulled by mankind, and on mankind, still….it is shameful about those that fell for this narrative that was #FaF Fishy as Fuck out of the gate.   

stock here: first posted the screen cap about 2 hours ago. Since then 1200 new members have been approved.

10 new members per minute, 1 every 6 seconds.

Death is going viral, so to speak.

And the prophetic guy below, describing how they are creating a slave class.

“So what we have to do is flatten the curve and avoid the peak demands…We will promise a mandatory target for reducing electricity use at peak hours.”

Sounds familiar. pic.twitter.com/r8NgNIXo0y

— James Melville (@JamesMelville) September 7, 2022

This commentary was dismissed as a wild conspiracy theory back in 2020. It now looks like a prophetic warning.pic.twitter.com/QUjAP0ZkYH

— James Melville (@JamesMelville) September 6, 2022

Russia releases this television advertisement wishing Europe ‘GOOD LUCK THIS WINTER’, as it shuts off Europe’s gas supply in response to their government’s ridiculous sanctions. pic.twitter.com/JsI2tWCuGG

— Truth on Toast (@ToastTruth1) September 6, 2022

stock here: you need to request membership, but it is simplistic. I guess that eliminates lots of the bots.

The number of stage 4 cancers that just suddenly appear is noted.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/234156495217035/?notif_id=1662522025105981&notif_t=group_r2j_approved&ref=notif

stock here: This is an interesting read about Fascism from someone who lived through the Italian Fascism including the eventual execution of Mussolini.

You can get the original article at the link below, and read in full if you give them an email address.

https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/?lp_txn_id=1376975

Ur-Fascism

Umberto Eco

Freedom and liberation are an unending task.

June 22, 1995 issue

In 1942, at the age of ten, I received the First Provincial Award of Ludi Juveniles (a voluntary, compulsory competition for young Italian Fascists—that is, for every young Italian). I elaborated with rhetorical skill on the subject “Should we die for the glory of Mussolini and the immortal destiny of Italy?” My answer was positive. I was a smart boy.

I spent two of my early years among the SS, Fascists, Republicans, and partisans shooting at one another, and I learned how to dodge bullets. It was good exercise.

In April 1945, the partisans took over in Milan. Two days later they arrived in the small town where I was living at the time. It was a moment of joy. The main square was crowded with people singing and waving flags, calling in loud voices for Mimo, the partisan leader of that area. A former maresciallo of the Carabinieri, Mimo joined the supporters of General Badoglio, Mussolini’s successor, and lost a leg during one of the first clashes with Mussolini’s remaining forces. Mimo showed up on the balcony of the city hall, pale, leaning on his crutch, and with one hand tried to calm the crowd. I was waiting for his speech because my whole childhood had been marked by the great historic speeches of Mussolini, whose most significant passages we memorized in school. Silence. Mimo spoke in a hoarse voice, barely audible. He said: “Citizens, friends. After so many painful sacrifices … here we are. Glory to those who have fallen for freedom.” And that was it. He went back inside. The crowd yelled, the partisans raised their guns and fired festive volleys. We kids hurried to pick up the shells, precious items, but I had also learned that freedom of speech means freedom from rhetoric.

A few days later I saw the first American soldiers. They were African Americans. The first Yankee I met was a black man, Joseph, who introduced me to the marvels of Dick Tracy and Li’l Abner. His comic books were brightly colored and smelled good.

One of the officers (Major or Captain Muddy) was a guest in the villa of a family whose two daughters were my schoolmates. I met him in their garden where some ladies, surrounding Captain Muddy, talked in tentative French. Captain Muddy knew some French, too. My first image of American liberators was thus—after so many palefaces in black shirts—that of a cultivated black man in a yellow-green uniform saying: “Oui, merci beaucoup, Madame, moi aussi j’aime le champagne…” Unfortunately there was no champagne, but Captain Muddy gave me my first piece of Wrigley’s Spearmint and I started chewing all day long. At night I put my wad in a water glass, so it would be fresh for the next day.

In May we heard that the war was over. Peace gave me a curious sensation. I had been told that permanent warfare was the normal condition for a young Italian. In the following months I discovered that the Resistance was not only a local phenomenon but a European one. I learned new, exciting words like réseau, maquis, armée secrète, Rote Kapelle, Warsaw ghetto. I saw the first photographs of the Holocaust, thus understanding the meaning before knowing the word. I realized what we were liberated from.

In my country today there are people who are wondering if the Resistance had a real military impact on the course of the war. For my generation this question is irrelevant: we immediately understood the moral and psychological meaning of the Resistance. For us it was a point of pride to know that we Europeans did not wait passively for liberation. And for the young Americans who were paying with their blood for our restored freedom it meant something to know that behind the firing lines there were Europeans paying their own debt in advance.

In my country today there are those who are saying that the myth of the Resistance was a Communist lie. It is true that the Communists exploited the Resistance as if it were their personal property, since they played a prime role in it; but I remember partisans with kerchiefs of different colors. Sticking close to the radio, I spent my nights—the windows closed, the blackout making the small space around the set a lone luminous halo—listening to the messages sent by the Voice of London to the partisans. They were cryptic and poetic at the same time (The sun also rises, The roses will bloom) and most of them were “messaggi per la Franchi.” Somebody whispered to me that Franchi was the leader of the most powerful clandestine network in northwestern Italy, a man of legendary courage. Franchi became my hero. Franchi (whose real name was Edgardo Sogno) was a monarchist, so strongly anti-Communist that after the war he joined very right-wing groups, and was charged with collaborating in a project for a reactionary coup d’état. Who cares? Sogno still remains the dream hero of my childhood. Liberation was a common deed for people of different colors.

Advertisement

In my country today there are some who say that the War of Liberation was a tragic period of division, and that all we need is national reconciliation. The memory of those terrible years should be repressed, refoulée, verdrängt. But Verdrängung causes neurosis. If reconciliation means compassion and respect for all those who fought their own war in good faith, to forgive does not mean to forget. I can even admit that Eichmann sincerely believed in his mission, but I cannot say, “OK, come back and do it again.” We are here to remember what happened and solemnly say that “They” must not do it again.

But who are They?

If we still think of the totalitarian governments that ruled Europe before the Second World War we can easily say that it would be difficult for them to reappear in the same form in different historical circumstances. If Mussolini’s fascism was based upon the idea of a charismatic ruler, on corporatism, on the utopia of the Imperial Fate of Rome, on an imperialistic will to conquer new territories, on an exacerbated nationalism, on the ideal of an entire nation regimented in black shirts, on the rejection of parliamentary democracy, on anti-Semitism, then I have no difficulty in acknowledging that today the Italian Alleanza Nazionale, born from the postwar Fascist Party, MSI, and certainly a right-wing party, has by now very little to do with the old fascism. In the same vein, even though I am much concerned about the various Nazi-like movements that have arisen here and there in Europe, including Russia, I do not think that Nazism, in its original form, is about to reappear as a nationwide movement.

Nevertheless, even though political regimes can be overthrown, and ideologies can be criticized and disowned, behind a regime and its ideology there is always a way of thinking and feeling, a group of cultural habits, of obscure instincts and unfathomable drives. Is there still another ghost stalking Europe (not to speak of other parts of the world)?

Ionesco once said that “only words count and the rest is mere chattering.” Linguistic habits are frequently important symptoms of underlying feelings. Thus it is worth asking why not only the Resistance but the Second World War was generally defined throughout the world as a struggle against fascism. If you reread Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls you will discover that Robert Jordan identifies his enemies with Fascists, even when he thinks of the Spanish Falangists. And for FDR, “The victory of the American people and their allies will be a victory against fascism and the dead hand of despotism it represents.”

During World War II, the Americans who took part in the Spanish war were called “premature anti-fascists”—meaning that fighting against Hitler in the Forties was a moral duty for every good American, but fighting against Franco too early, in the Thirties, smelled sour because it was mainly done by Communists and other leftists. … Why was an expression like fascist pig used by American radicals thirty years later to refer to a cop who did not approve of their smoking habits? Why didn’t they say: Cagoulard pig, Falangist pig, Ustashe pig, Quisling pig, Nazi pig?

Mein Kampf is a manifesto of a complete political program. Nazism had a theory of racism and of the Aryan chosen people, a precise notion of degenerate art, entartete Kunst, a philosophy of the will to power and of the Ubermensch. Nazism was decidedly anti-Christian and neo-pagan, while Stalin’s Diamat (the official version of Soviet Marxism) was blatantly materialistic and atheistic. If by totalitarianism one means a regime that subordinates every act of the individual to the state and to its ideology, then both Nazism and Stalinism were true totalitarian regimes.

Italian fascism was certainly a dictatorship, but it was not totally totalitarian, not because of its mildness but rather because of the philosophical weakness of its ideology. Contrary to common opinion, fascism in Italy had no special philosophy. The article on fascism signed by Mussolini in the Treccani Encyclopedia was written or basically inspired by Giovanni Gentile, but it reflected a late-Hegelian notion of the Absolute and Ethical State which was never fully realized by Mussolini. Mussolini did not have any philosophy: he had only rhetoric. He was a militant atheist at the beginning and later signed the Convention with the Church and welcomed the bishops who blessed the Fascist pennants. In his early anticlerical years, according to a likely legend, he once asked God, in order to prove His existence, to strike him down on the spot. Later, Mussolini always cited the name of God in his speeches, and did not mind being called the Man of Providence.

Advertisement

Italian fascism was the first right-wing dictatorship that took over a European country, and all similar movements later found a sort of archetype in Mussolini’s regime. Italian fascism was the first to establish a military liturgy, a folklore, even a way of dressing—far more influential, with its black shirts, than Armani, Benetton, or Versace would ever be. It was only in the Thirties that fascist movements appeared, with Mosley, in Great Britain, and in Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Yugoslavia, Spain, Portugal, Norway, and even in South America. It was Italian fascism that convinced many European liberal leaders that the new regime was carrying out interesting social reform, and that it was providing a mildly revolutionary alternative to the Communist threat.

Nevertheless, historical priority does not seem to me a sufficient reason to explain why the word fascism became a synecdoche, that is, a word that could be used for different totalitarian movements. This is not because fascism contained in itself, so to speak in their quintessential state, all the elements of any later form of totalitarianism. On the contrary, fascism had no quintessence. Fascism was a fuzzy totalitarianism, a collage of different philosophical and political ideas, a beehive of contradictions. Can one conceive of a truly totalitarian movement that was able to combine monarchy with revolution, the Royal Army with Mussolini’s personal milizia, the grant of privileges to the Church with state education extolling violence, absolute state control with a free market? The Fascist Party was born boasting that it brought a revolutionary new order; but it was financed by the most conservative among the landowners who expected from it a counter-revolution. At its beginning fascism was republican. Yet it survived for twenty years proclaiming its loyalty to the royal family, while the Duce (the unchallenged Maximal Leader) was arm-in-arm with the King, to whom he also offered the title of Emperor. But when the King fired Mussolini in 1943, the party reappeared two months later, with German support, under the standard of a “social” republic, recycling its old revolutionary script, now enriched with almost Jacobin overtones.

There was only a single Nazi architecture and a single Nazi art. If the Nazi architect was Albert Speer, there was no more room for Mies van der Rohe. Similarly, under Stalin’s rule, if Lamarck was right there was no room for Darwin. In Italy there were certainly fascist architects but close to their pseudo-Coliseums were many new buildings inspired by the modern rationalism of Gropius.

There was no fascist Zhdanov setting a strictly cultural line. In Italy there were two important art awards. The Premio Cremona was controlled by a fanatical and uncultivated Fascist, Roberto Farinacci, who encouraged art as propaganda. (I can remember paintings with such titles as Listening by Radio to the Duce’s Speech or States of Mind Created by Fascism.) The Premio Bergamo was sponsored by the cultivated and reasonably tolerant Fascist Giuseppe Bottai, who protected both the concept of art for art’s sake and the many kinds of avant-garde art that had been banned as corrupt and crypto-Communist in Germany.

The national poet was D’Annunzio, a dandy who in Germany or in Russia would have been sent to the firing squad. He was appointed as the bard of the regime because of his nationalism and his cult of heroism—which were in fact abundantly mixed up with influences of French fin de siècle decadence.

Take Futurism. One might think it would have been considered an instance of entartete Kunst, along with Expressionism, Cubism, and Surrealism. But the early Italian Futurists were nationalist; they favored Italian participation in the First World War for aesthetic reasons; they celebrated speed, violence, and risk, all of which somehow seemed to connect with the fascist cult of youth. While fascism identified itself with the Roman Empire and rediscovered rural traditions, Marinetti (who proclaimed that a car was more beautiful than the Victory of Samothrace, and wanted to kill even the moonlight) was nevertheless appointed as a member of the Italian Academy, which treated moonlight with great respect.

Many of the future partisans and of the future intellectuals of the Communist Party were educated by the GUF, the fascist university students’ association, which was supposed to be the cradle of the new fascist culture. These clubs became a sort of intellectual melting pot where new ideas circulated without any real ideological control. It was not that the men of the party were tolerant of radical thinking, but few of them had the intellectual equipment to control it.

During those twenty years, the poetry of Montale and other writers associated with the group called the Ermetici was a reaction to the bombastic style of the regime, and these poets were allowed to develop their literary protest from within what was seen as their ivory tower. The mood of the Ermetici poets was exactly the reverse of the fascist cult of optimism and heroism. The regime tolerated their blatant, even though socially imperceptible, dissent because the Fascists simply did not pay attention to such arcane language.

All this does not mean that Italian fascism was tolerant. Gramsci was put in prison until his death; the opposition leaders Giacomo Matteotti and the brothers Rosselli were assassinated; the free press was abolished, the labor unions were dismantled, and political dissenters were confined on remote islands. Legislative power became a mere fiction and the executive power (which controlled the judiciary as well as the mass media) directly issued new laws, among them laws calling for preservation of the race (the formal Italian gesture of support for what became the Holocaust).

The contradictory picture I describe was not the result of tolerance but of political and ideological discombobulation. But it was a rigid discombobulation, a structured confusion. Fascism was philosophically out of joint, but emotionally it was firmly fastened to some archetypal foundations.

So we come to my second point. There was only one Nazism. We cannot label Franco’s hyper-Catholic Falangism as Nazism, since Nazism is fundamentally pagan, polytheistic, and anti-Christian. But the fascist game can be played in many forms, and the name of the game does not change. The notion of fascism is not unlike Wittgenstein’s notion of a game. A game can be either competitive or not, it can require some special skill or none, it can or cannot involve money. Games are different activities that display only some “family resemblance,” as Wittgenstein put it. Consider the following sequence:

1 2 3 4

abc bcd cde def

Suppose there is a series of political groups in which group one is characterized by the features abc, group two by the features bcd, and so on. Group two is similar to group one since they have two features in common; for the same reasons three is similar to two and four is similar to three. Notice that three is also similar to one (they have in common the feature c). The most curious case is presented by four, obviously similar to three and two, but with no feature in common with one. However, owing to the uninterrupted series of decreasing similarities between one and four, there remains, by a sort of illusory transitivity, a family resemblance between four and one.

Fascism became an all-purpose term because one can eliminate from a fascist regime one or more features, and it will still be recognizable as fascist. Take away imperialism from fascism and you still have Franco and Salazar. Take away colonialism and you still have the Balkan fascism of the Ustashes. Add to the Italian fascism a radical anti-capitalism (which never much fascinated Mussolini) and you have Ezra Pound. Add a cult of Celtic mythology and the Grail mysticism (completely alien to official fascism) and you have one of the most respected fascist gurus, Julius Evola.

But in spite of this fuzziness, I think it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I would like to call Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism. These features cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.

1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition. Traditionalism is of course much older than fascism. Not only was it typical of counter-revolutionary Catholic thought after the French revolution, but it was born in the late Hellenistic era, as a reaction to classical Greek rationalism. In the Mediterranean basin, people of different religions (most of them indulgently accepted by the Roman Pantheon) started dreaming of a revelation received at the dawn of human history. This revelation, according to the traditionalist mystique, had remained for a long time concealed under the veil of forgotten languages—in Egyptian hieroglyphs, in the Celtic runes, in the scrolls of the little known religions of Asia.

This new culture had to be syncretistic. Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, “the combination of different forms of belief or practice”; such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and whenever they seem to say different or incompatible things it is only because all are alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth.

As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.

One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements. The most influential theoretical source of the theories of the new Italian right, Julius Evola, merged the Holy Grail with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, alchemy with the Holy Roman and Germanic Empire. The very fact that the Italian right, in order to show its open-mindedness, recently broadened its syllabus to include works by De Maistre, Guenon, and Gramsci, is a blatant proof of syncretism.

If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores, are labeled as New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge—that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.

2. Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism. Both Fascists and Nazis worshiped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon Blood and Earth (Blut und Boden). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life, but it mainly concerned the rejection of the Spirit of 1789 (and of 1776, of course). The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.

3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Goering’s alleged statement (“When I hear talk of culture I reach for my gun”) to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.

4. No syncretistic faith can withstand analytical criticism. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.

5. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.

6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration. That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. In our time, when the old “proletarians” are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority.

7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time inside and outside. In the US, a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson’s The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many others.

8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies. When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.

9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such a “final solution” implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.

10. Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak. Ur-Fascism can only advocate a popular elitism. Every citizen belongs to the best people of the world, the members of the party are the best among the citizens, every citizen can (or ought to) become a member of the party. But there cannot be patricians without plebeians. In fact, the Leader, knowing that his power was not delegated to him democratically but was conquered by force, also knows that his force is based upon the weakness of the masses; they are so weak as to need and deserve a ruler. Since the group is hierarchically organized (according to a military model), every subordinate leader despises his own underlings, and each of them despises his inferiors. This reinforces the sense of mass elitism.

11. In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero. In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. It is not by chance that a motto of the Falangists was Viva la Muerte (in English it should be translated as “Long Live Death!”). In non-fascist societies, the lay public is told that death is unpleasant but must be faced with dignity; believers are told that it is the painful way to reach a supernatural happiness. By contrast, the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.

12. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons—doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.

13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say. In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view—one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. To have a good instance of qualitative populism we no longer need the Piazza Venezia in Rome or the Nuremberg Stadium. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.

Because of its qualitative populism Ur-Fascism must be against “rotten” parliamentary governments. One of the first sentences uttered by Mussolini in the Italian parliament was “I could have transformed this deaf and gloomy place into a bivouac for my maniples”—“maniples” being a subdivision of the traditional Roman legion. As a matter of fact, he immediately found better housing for his maniples, but a little later he liquidated the parliament. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in 1984, as the official language of Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show.

On the morning of July 27, 1943, I was told that, according to radio reports, fascism had collapsed and Mussolini was under arrest. When my mother sent me out to buy the newspaper, I saw that the papers at the nearest newsstand had different titles. Moreover, after seeing the headlines, I realized that each newspaper said different things. I bought one of them, blindly, and read a message on the first page signed by five or six political parties—among them the Democrazia Cristiana, the Communist Party, the Socialist Party, the Partito d’Azione, and the Liberal Party.

Until then, I had believed that there was a single party in every country and that in Italy it was the Partito Nazionale Fascista. Now I was discovering that in my country several parties could exist at the same time. Since I was a clever boy, I immediately realized that so many parties could not have been born overnight, and they must have existed for some time as clandestine organizations.

The message on the front celebrated the end of the dictatorship and the return of freedom: freedom of speech, of press, of political association. These words, “freedom,” “dictatorship,” “liberty,”—I now read them for the first time in my life. I was reborn as a free Western man by virtue of these new words.

We must keep alert, so that the sense of these words will not be forgotten again. Ur-Fascism is still around us, sometimes in plainclothes. It would be so much easier, for us, if there appeared on the world scene somebody saying, “I want to reopen Auschwitz, I want the Black Shirts to parade again in the Italian squares.” Life is not that simple. Ur-Fascism can come back under the most innocent of disguises. Our duty is to uncover it and to point our finger at any of its new instances—every day, in every part of the world. Franklin Roosevelt’s words of November 4, 1938, are worth recalling: “I venture the challenging statement that if American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, fascism will grow in strength in our land.” Freedom and liberation are an unending task.

Let me finish with a poem by Franco Fortini:

Sulla spalletta del ponte
Le teste degli impiccati
Nell’acqua della fonte
La bava degli impiccati.

Sul lastrico del mercato
Le unghie dei fucilati
Sull’erba secca del prato
I denti dei fucilati.

Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi
La nostra carne non è più d’uomini
Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi
Il nostro cuore non è più d’uomini.

Ma noi s’è letto negli occhi dei morti
E sulla terra faremo libertà
Ma l’hanno stretta i pugni dei morti
La giustizia che si farà.* * *

(On the bridge’s parapet
The heads of the hanged
In the flowing rivulet
The spittle of the hanged.

On the cobbles in the market- places
The fingernails of those lined up and shot
On the dry grass in the open spaces
The broken teeth of those lined up and shot.

Biting the air, biting the stones
Our flesh is no longer human
Biting the air, biting the stones
Our hearts are no longer human.

But we have read into the eyes of the dead
And shall bring freedom on the earth
But clenched tight in the fists of the dead
Lies the justice to be served.)
—poem translated by Stephen Sartarelli

Copyright © by Umberto Eco

More by Umberto Eco

Let’s Not Allow Berlusconi’s Mondadori to Devour the Entire Rizzoli–Corriere Group

April 2, 2015 issue

Murder in Chicago

April 10, 1997 issue

A Case for Textual Harassment

June 9, 1994 issue

Umberto Eco

Umberto Eco is President of the Scuola Superiore di Studi Umanistici at the University of Bologna and author of many books, most recently 
How to Write a Thesis.

This Issue

June 22, 1995

Read Next J.M. Cameron Dorothy Day (1897–1980) January 22, 1981 issue Murray Kempton Dying for Life May 9, 1996 issue Hannah Arendt Hannah Arendt: An Interview October 26, 1978 issue The Editors Leonard Schapiro (1908–1983) December 22, 1983 issue Kirkus Reviews Short Review July 20, 1972 issue R. Scott Appleby and John T. McGreevy Catholics, Muslims, and the Mosque September 30, 2010 issue M.I. Finley Back to Atlantis December 4, 1969 issue J.F. Staal Cambodia: Sanskrit Inscriptions July 2, 1970 issue

Subscribe and save 50%!

Get immediate access to the current issue and over 25,000 articles from the archives, plus the NYR App.

See offers

Already a subscriber? Sign in

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Best of The New York Review, plus books, events, and other items of interest. Or, see all newsletter options here.

• https://www.google.com/recaptcha/api2/anchor?ar=1&k=6LfZfQ8aAAAAAAuh5C8xUUn_C__mO7k8Mze_md1Y&co=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnlib29rcy5jb206NDQz&hl=en&v=duyHVVR9Brf6N2GewjkPRfsA&theme=light&size=invisible&badge=bottomright&cb=m58k3pqvecog

About UsArchiveClassifiedsAdvertising

Help/FAQNewsletters Shop Books

© 1963-2022 NYREV, Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of ServicePrivacy StatementSubscription Customer ServiceSite by Athletics https://consentcdn.cookiebot.com/sdk/bc-v4.min.html

https://www.google.com/recaptcha/api2/bframe?hl=en&v=duyHVVR9Brf6N2GewjkPRfsA&k=6LfZfQ8aAAAAAAuh5C8xUUn_C__mO7k8Mze_md1Y

https://www.google.com/recaptcha/api2/bframe?hl=en&v=duyHVVR9Brf6N2GewjkPRfsA&k=6LfZfQ8aAAAAAAuh5C8xUUn_C__mO7k8Mze_md1Y

https://www.google.com/recaptcha/api2/bframe?hl=en&v=duyHVVR9Brf6N2GewjkPRfsA&k=6LfZfQ8aAAAAAAuh5C8xUUn_C__mO7k8Mze_md1Y