The United Communist States of America

Admittedly, all the states aren’t Communist, yet, and that’s if you consider the little communes of individuals left among us who understand that all governments are evil and dictatorial by nature. These people (myself included) would like to live in peace—left the fuck alone by the government and interlopers to raise our children and families the way we see fit. We want true free market enterprise and private ownership of our bodies, our futures and aspirations and control of our means of production of goods and services.

We do not need people who do not share our values telling us how we ought to live and proffering superimposed rules and laws we ought to abide by. We will police ourselves and we do not need state sanctioned psychopaths to “protect and serve”.

Yet, here we are. We are literally under a Communist dictatorship. Tucker Carlson has a lot to say on it.

I remember telling you folks, last year, on January 7th, that America had finally fallen on January 6th, and it was now successfully under a Communist dictatorship. Since then, I have been reminding you readers, every so often, that the Communist takeover is underway and they are still putting up new drapes and furniture.

Biden is literally now saying that people who do not support him are a security threat to the country. This is a strategy devised and taught by all Communist dictators. This is taught and found in their own manuals, textbooks and in their schools.

“Venceremos!”

The Communist program for revolution in America has always been divided into two phases—violent and nonviolent. Guess which one has been most successful? If you guessed nonviolent, then you’re right on the money!

The strategy for violence is what we have experienced recently, nationwide, and to be honest, it hasn’t really been rampant. The sowing of dissent among the populace to keep them divided and at each other’s throats wrought chaos and mass confusion. Take race issues, for instance. While we all can speak to facts, truths and stereotypes of each race, particularly blacks, here in America and just about anywhere else around the world where they may be, these factoids are used to exploit and keep all of us divided. In the United States of America, the actual issue is, and has always been, CLASSISM. Racism is the low-hanging fruit that is tossed around every so often, to stir up the emotions and retardation of normies to get them violent and keep them in constant fear of each other. When mass hysteria and panic abounds, out comes a band of heroes (the Communists–)ews and women) to offer a solution, taking over the government and seizing the apparatus of power. Problem. Reaction. Solution.

The nonviolent phase of a Communist Revolution is the most dangerous of the two. During this phase, there is a call for the gradual transition of the government into a Communist regime. This is done “peacefully” and legally under the banner of Socialism. As I have stated in another article—Socialism is merely the stage and step in between capitalism and communism and achieved through emotional and psychological manipulation. You cannot discuss Socialism and Communism without discussing women and their nature—destruction.

The Communists have conditioned many of us to think that a Communist Revolution can only come about via the overthrowing of a government through force and violence. Yet, the equating of violence with revolution is terribly incorrect. Violence may or may not appear in such a process, as they have avidly shown us for the past 2 years. Some of you may go back as far as to highlight the political climate under Trump’s presidency as an example of how long the Communists have been at it. Still, political violence was at a minimum even though the political climate bore the suspicions of a mass violent conflict occurring “any moment now”, and its presence or absence is not a determining feature of the definition of Communist Revolution.

In America, all of this is being done while the Constitution stands and is in effect. This should give pause to many as to call them to realize that perhaps the Communists means and goals aren’t violent, but peaceful; that they might overthrow the government without force or violence. They have effectively assumed control and power over the Constitution, where they disregard and discard it when it suits them, and use it to score political points against their enemies, when convenient. A current case in point would be the Abortion issue, which truly isn’t an issue (murder is murder and human life begins at conception). Here, we see women wanting the right to kill their babies without consequences and escape the consequences of poor decision making and irresponsibility. So, the freedoms listed in the Constitution, which are only a reminder of the freedoms we have (and do not have), are being used by the Communists in power to stir up the emotions of women against men. Women (natural Communists) and the Communists in power, on one hand, are conveniently resorting to the Constitution to support their position on abortion, claiming that they have a right to bodily autonomy, which mostly, they do, but not to murder. Yet, with the mask and vaccine mandates, they were vehemently against those who claimed their right to bodily autonomy—”My body. My choice.” They even labeled those who refused to wear masks and take the )ew juice as murderers.

What has taken place as a result; the Communists in power now have legal precedence. They need only to refer to the recent occurrences—where women and their feminized male cohorts forced and cajoled everyone around the world to wear masks and take vaccines, nullifying “My Body. My Choice”. From now on, emergency ethics will override certain rights and liberties afforded to us under the Constitution. In particular, it will nullify our right to bear arms and take out the government and their moronic officials. This is the goal of the Communists and so far, their efforts have been legal and tremendously peaceful and successful.

(It is worth noting that “My body My choice” isn’t anything new, and it certainly isn’t the genius and sentiments of any woman, but of men, for men truly understand freedom and what it entails and have always been the pallbearers of it. Masculine men have always fought for freedom and against tyranny. The Communists have only of late, co-opted masculine values into their repertoire, spun it around, spat it out and have it to their agents of chaos—women. This is what all women do. They take everything that men invent and create and attempt to mimic men by putting in their “feminine touch, ” destroying the thing itself, eventually. This is the Female Animus at play.)

The Communists in control of the United States will never come out and speak in plain English; telling us exactly what it is they are doing and are about to do. No, they rely on euphemisms and crude concepts and elaborate phraseology to explain away all criticisms, justifying their insanity and vile machinations in the interim. Just debate a woman or a )ew and you will see what I mean. Both parties will come up with justifications for the most bizarre and stomach-turning things. The same is being done and seen with America’s new “Truth Czar”, Nina Jankowisc, whose sole purpose is to fight “disinformation”.

Majority of us have met and dealt with a cunt like this before, because most of us grew up in families. This means most of us have lived under socialism/communism—soft Socialism/Communism. The family setting and dynamics promote and uphold socialist/communist ideals. Your mother, like it or not, was that cunt, or your older sister, if you had one. Dad (if he hasn’t been supplanted by the mother and the state) was supposed to be the checks and balances, but was relegated to the workhorse provider role. I had a wonderful childhood with two outstanding parents, yet it was my dad who kept my mom (as educated as she is) from destroying the unit. This was primarily how most, if not all, of the families I knew growing up were. Of course, this is no longer the case with many families, where both mom and dad have to work to provide, which compounds the socialist/communist dynamics of the family even further; top-down economics become even more stringent and controlling.

Parents play the role of government in all family settings, where they ration out the meals, dictate rules to abide by, as well as appoint the prefect of the family—usually an older sibling. They tell you what time to get up and what time to go to bed, what you can do and what you cannot do. They may force you to wear hand-me-downs, or do unpleasant things that you may not want to do. Freedom of speech, depending on the type of parents one may be cursed or blessed with, is, mostly, dictated by them. They are also the arbiters of truth and morality and their hypocrisy (Do as I say, Not as I do), confusing and angering as it is, is backed by force. They implement curfews, too, albeit for good reasons, of which I will get into next.

The school system is, mostly, very similar to the family setting. It is quite a weird thing where it almost acts like an extension of the family, or most assume that it is or want it to be. Here, many children are dropped off and subjected to the dictates of strangers who themselves assume the roles of the parents in absence. They too, tell you what to do and what not to do, what to say and what not to say, they mete out punishments and rewards. They, like parents in the home, are the arbiters of right and wrong, what is truth and false and the wellspring of hypocrisy. The saving grace is that there is still a meritorious factor in schools; something that is absent, or at most, tacit, in the family setting. Of course, over the decades, schools have become less and less meritorious as everyone gets a star and is “equal”. In the home, it is taboo to show favor, even when warranted, and favoritism, while poorly concealed, is deemed a poor child-rearing strategy. Most of us who have been on the bitter end of favoritism dislike it, because we would like to be treated “equally”, revealing the inherent egalitarian sentiments of the family setting that are socialist. More importantly, most of us who have been on the bitter end of favoritism dislike it, because we would like to be treated “SPECIALLY”, beyond our merits! This is the essence and the inherent sentiments of Socialism/Communism. This is the human condition and the crux of the war between “the haves and have-nots”.

Now, is socialism and communism inherent to human beings? I do not think so, but it is a good question and a subject to explore. I will say, however, that many of us merely want to be left alone up to our own devices when it is convenient for us. This means many of us, too, want others to do things for us, decide for us and take on most of the risks on our behalf. This, ironically, is how most of us feel cared for. Hence, government interventionism.

The family setting (where mother and father are present, active participants), being inherently socialist/communist, isn’t necessarily a bad thing, for children need structure and the input of both parents. So far, we have proven this to be the best format to raise decent children and produce a high trust society. For example, as mentioned earlier, parents setting curfews for their crazy, wild teens is quite similar to, if not, no different at all, to communist governments mandating lockdowns. However, parents do this to implement structure and discipline as well as to keep their children safe. Governments hijack or is ceded this parental role and will use emergency ethics (to keep the children and everyone else safe) in order to gain more power and control of the populace. I am sure there are a multitude of examples that can show the similarities between the family setting and communist governments, but the difference (the issue) between government and the family setting then becomes a question of, “when do we grow up?” When do we grow up and become independent and fully capable of functioning outside of the auspices and control of our parents? “When are we allowed to grow up” MOM?!

For many, after they have left the home, the dictates of their parents, particularly their mothers, still bombard them. They become stunted in their maturation because of the continuous meddlesome nature of their parents (mom). It applies to the government, too. The only difference is, they expect the government to act this way—like a parent—like mommy. For women, they expect the government to be a surrogate father. While parents (mom) may have a genuine care and concern that can and often create a disaster if not properly managed, the other does not give a fuck about you and me and anybody else, but power! The government, especially its members, merely desire to mommy everyone and everything and they use women in this capacity in public life to achieve this goal. Women in public life are a terrible idea for society for this exact reason. If the children are not prepared to graduate from the family setting, a neoteny ensues, and this certainly harms children and wider society because single-mother homes create and promote a dependency on and blind obeisance to the government. Certain rigors—logic, reason, independence and freedom—are values that are lost when a father is not in the home.

When children of single-mother parented homes go out into the real world, there is a disillusionment that occurs, where they expect wider society to be exactly like their family setting, by extension. Satisfying this expectation is exactly what the communists are trying to achieve with their egalitarian and socialist ideals, where the government assumes, or resumes, the role of the parent—the provider and protector and the dictator.

This is typical of people who are narcissistic, which is to be accredited with moral virtue in the absence of the work necessary to attain it.