Join or die: Left and Right Unite!

What's the difference between a paleoconservative, classical liberal, and libertarian? Answer: very little.


However, the establishment has manipulated public opinion to support their own agenda for too long. Nowadays, you've got the hawkish neocons (fake conservatives) supporting the Warfare State, and the "liberals" (fake liberals, socialists hijacked that word!) supporting the Welfare State.

The agenda of the establishment always tends towards big government, because that's how tyrants operate - they need funds for their takeover, so they hike taxes; and they need a common enemy to sap the will of the people to resist domestic tyranny, so they start wars. Which also allow them to hike taxes for 'patriotic' reasons.

So on one side we have the agenda of tyranny - big government and war ('order out of chaos'), and on the other we have the agenda of liberty - limited government and peace. The latter is generally what the people want, unless they've been propagandised to believe that big government or pre-emptive warfare is a necessary evil.

The establishment can't push through their agenda openly because it's so unpopular. So, they take TWO or more political parties and insert parts of their agenda into each. This is manifest in America as the warfare state Republicans and the welfare state Democrats. In Britain, however, we have transcended that (as the US is doing too) and basically have three parties that openly support socialism, because enough people have been propagandised that capitalism is bad.

Really a better example of how left and right are played off against each other comes from America, since that is where the divide is strongest.

The controlled left talk about peace and civil liberties, while growing a huge welfare state and going after citizens' right to bear arms (no resisting our tyranny!)

The controlled right appeal to the traditional values (fiscal, social, etc) of conservatives, Christians, and gun owners, while starting wars and ranking up the National Debt more than their counterparts.

But even that is a false distinction, and can be demonstrated with a couple of examples:

A criticism of Clinton was his nation-building military policy, so Bush ran with the policy of "no nation-building"! Well that went well didn't it! Then when people were tired with Bush's wars, they turned to Obama to provide peace, and guess what? Nope.

Also, despite being a supposed conservative, Bush jr oversaw a tripling in the size of government.

The next phase (according to the logic of the Hegelian Dialectic), after the false left-right conflict is concluded, is that everyone who was brainwashed by this "paradigm" will support an agenda of Communitarianism - like, for example, that outlined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights that I had fun tearing apart a while ago.

Britain has already made this "Common Purpose" transition. (Common Purpose is basically a 'training' organisation that brainwashes young leaders for the future, btw.) Now all the major parties in the UK support globalisation and surrendering sovereignty, high taxes, environmental action by government, profit being a dirty word, guns being for criminals and uniformed jackboots only, etc etc.


I write this so that perhaps my American readers, if they're not already, can be aware of the Hegelian logical process being forced on them by their two-party dictatorship, and if you want to know the end result of this process of conditioning, look no further than Communitarian Britain. We are a democracy, where fifty-one percent of the people can vote to remove the rights of the other forty-nine, to paraphrase Jefferson, and where the majority of people disapprove of liberty, whether they know it or not.

That isn't what I mean when I call for left and right to unite - I mean around the idea of freedom of course!

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson