At a time when the United States of America conducts aggressive wars in many countries around the globe, and the American imperialists are being equally detested by all classes of workers, professionals, and intellectuals, it is important to understand which parties are the perpetrators of the imperalistic American policy, and how the problem must be addressed.

The beginnings of modern American imperialism as we know it today, arose at the end of World War Two, when the American imperialists and their allies occupied the German nation, subjected its people to starvation and hardship, and deprived them of human dignity for the reason that they would not abandon their German identity or their way of life. The insidious plans of the American imperialists were supported by immense finance-capital, as well as key members of the American government, such as Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Morgenthau. In the second half of the 20th century, a similar pattern was repeated in Korea, as well as in the 21st century in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Kevin MacDonald, the acclaimed (and somewhat beleaguered) professor of psychology, has done excellent work on the origins of neo-conservatism, the current ideology which dominates American politics, so it will not be discussed in depth here. The fact remains though, that America is a state controlled by imperialist finance-capital, making it a “prison” of nations. What is also true is that because American society is a rootlessly cosmopolitan society with a degenerate culture, America is the enemy of all the peoples of the world, whether they are Christian or Moslem, White or Black, Western or Oriental; they are not liberators, but aggressive globalist imperialists whose aim is the destruction of all identities other than the one they wish to impose on others.

The majority of Americans today are still of European descent, even though demographics are quickly changing due to the situation on America’s southern border.  Many of the European-Americans herald and praise the bombing and destruction of foreign nations in the so-called war on terror.  People often criticize American imperialism as “white imperialism,” but it can just as easily be shown American imperialism is the imperialism of liberalism, which in itself entails diversity and multi-racialism, because what ultimately manifests itself as materialism is nearly intertwined with the racial dynamics of America.  For example, though many Trotskyists and third-worldists would claim that American imperialism is “white imperialism,” many countries affected by American imperialism are white themselves.  Furthermore — what about the Mexican who receives citizenship in exchange for serving in the imperialist army’s wars of aggression which benefit Israel, or those who invent a metaphysical “poverty draft” to pretend that those from among their own ethnic group or social class aren’t equally traitors for actively participating in imperialist wars? What about those who overwhelmingly helped elect Barack Obama, the Kenyan Zionist lackey, merely because of the color of his skin?

Though all segments of American society which profess support for the imperialist policies of their government need to equally distance themselves from the imperialist policy of their government, the largest burden does not lie on their shoulders.  The biggest peddlers of imperialism today are the globalist elites who control the American mass media, banking system, universities, and entertainment, and who continue to justify their suppression of the popular masses and their invasions of foreign countries through mass media.  It is this same imperialist clique which are the kingpins of degenerate American culture and the deplorable social situation which affects people of all races in the United States.  These individuals are the true supporters of imperialism, and its staunchest advocates.  I do not call them “American imperialists,” because in reality, America too is occupied by these same people who wish to use American blood and American resources as a springboard for their attacks on the rest of the world.

The lessons to learn here is that that America is a “prison of nations” which will only be dismantled by an active resistance to the the monstrous system of rootless cosmopolitanism.   Furthermore, it is in the self-interest of peoples all over the world to actively support their brothers and sisters in foreign lands on the front lines against the American imperialists today, particularly as they undergo armed struggle.  This includes those peoples living in the United States itself who are under occupation by the Washington-DC based regime.  Those in the various regions of the United States themselves must take it on themselves to initiate the revolutionary spirit against the globalist agenda and its propaganda presented to them by the powerful elites, and re-establish the spirit of national independence.

It is a known fact that there are many causes that are quite popular among the liberal bourgeoisie, who, in reality, have little understanding of the causes they are supporting.  In March of 2009, this especially came to be seen in Berekley, a city known for its liberal political views.  During that period, protesters gathered to mark the 50th anniversary of the an uprising against the policies of the Cultural Revolution in Tibet.  However wrong and anti-traditional the Cultural Revolution was, there was another visual oddity worthy of mention and criticism.  According to some local residents, prayer flags began to show up, scattered around this college town, clearly visible in public spaces.

To the supposedly culturally and socially aware, such a sight may not be strange or troubling in the least. Yet, if one examines the situation from an authentically honest vantage point, then there does seem to be something slightly problematic with such a display, for liberals have long sought to attach the Christian faith in the public sphere.  On the other end of the political spectrum, those in America who call themselves conservatives would certainly have been outraged had they been symbols of the Islamic faith.  After all, have not entire court cases been fought over the constitutionality of crèche scenes and crosses in public areas? If someone had put up a roadside shrine to the Virgin Mary like the ones seen in many countries of Latin America, or displayed a banner with the shahada, would these selectively “tolerant” individuals really think it so benign? Was this not a public sidewalk? And lastly, don’t practicioners of monotheism have a right not to be confronted by the talismanic gilded idols of Tibetan Buddhism?

This is not a denigration of the Tibetans, nor of their religion.  However, the very same people who have attempted to eliminate traces of monotheism now have no problem showing a more “spiritual” side by displaying the relics of an ancient religion.  To add to the irony, many such people cannot tell the meaning or function of such relics. They wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between a bodhisattva or buddha, the differences between the Sakya, Kagyu or Gelug sects, or how many levels there are in the bardo plain.  They just like the flags.  It gives them a false sense of self-confidence that they are socially aware, and care for others.  It’s “good karma”.  It is a symbol of their solidarity with the oppressed “colored” Tibetan people, and so on and so forth.  The Tibetans, though perhaps worthy of support from those who support self-determination seem to be getting quite a bit of support from people who never understood much about Tibetan history or religion in the politics.

In the modern world, where standardization is the norm, members of society are over-socialized.  This means that they are only marginally capable of adopting broadly acceptable principles, and applying such principles ad absurdum in order to accuse others of violating those principles.  Therefore, while supporting the “non-white” Tibetans is considered acceptable by the media or by pseudo-academics, supporting the right of Afrikaners to live in peace in South Africa, or supporting the right of the Palestinian people to preserve their ethnic rights is not acceptable, and hence the average American does not support it.

In a society which operates as a secular theocracy, the undifferentiated man is therefore able to use activism as an act of piety which helps him to repress his failure in the religious world.  However, unlike religion proper their social activism only engages in pathetic, narcissistic, and deluded attempts for selfish ends which ignore all current realities.  Social activism becomes their new form of spirituality and religion, and their priests become the evangelists of liberalism, who in their cult-like zeal, attempt to play the role of dilantette pseudo-intellectuals; prayers are replaced by catchy slogans, and morality is replaced by vague principles of secular democracy, liberalism, and egalitariansm.

Another manifestation of the corrupt pseudo-religion of liberalism

Such is the religious consciousness of so-called “modern man”: He is driven by a sense of rebellion and self-hatred to believe in the faith of his ancestors, and at the same time afraid that consigning all religion to the realm of superstition might offend others.  He thus picks and chooses, as if he were a glutton sitting at a buffet table.  From Christianity, he picks the phrase, “thou shalt not judge,” from neo-Paganism a respect from the environment, and from Buddhism a sense of nihilistic abandonment from pressing moral issues.  Tibetan Buddhism, to them, feels like a “good superstition,” because the progressive “modern man” might say, “The Dalai Lama doesn’t tell me what I can and can’t eat, or whom I can and can’t sleep.  The Dalai Lama is a man of peace, diversity and openmindedness,” or perhaps, “The Dalai Lama makes me feel good about myself.”

For G. K. Chesterton, a Christian apologist of the early 20th century, it is not possible to reconcile the primitive orthopraxy of idol worship with modernity, for if the ultimate answer is God, then the image of an anthropomorphic pantheon does disservice to man by leaving questions unanswered.  This is one of the great ironies of the well-meaning white liberal who has fallen into a multicultural daydream with the Tibetan culture: if the flag-waving crypto-pagans of Berekley are closed off to any sort of religious belief, what precisely are they doing in their quasireligious exercise?  Chesterton states that at the heart of man and his senses, is a desire to “sacramental idea” that makes itself felt throughout human existence.  The prayer flags become this new sacramental idea.

What we have in the Berkeley prayer flag display does a disservice both to the revealed faiths and to that which is noble in pagan religions. Who can know if the people displaying them remember the Christian faith of their ancestors, or a time when it was the message of Christ that gave the universe a sense of purpose and wonder? Like the nomadic consumer today, many modern souls go shopping for that wonder and purpose in other, more exotic, and more elite marketplaces, committing to nothing, and are ultimately left unfulfilled. That is because religious faith in any manifestation, requires a relationship that modern man finds himself less and less capable of maintaining.  In any form of religious devotion, whether it is Islam’s submission to Allah, the Christian veneration of saints, or Hinduism’s bhakti, one concedes to a higher power some sort of deference.  The “modern man,”  however, can only lament this desperate sense of inferiority and lack of self-confidence.

Election time is approaching in the United States of America, and along with it all the warm and fuzzy rhetoric about continuing commitments to democracy, freedom, and equality, so that nobody need question the intentions of any political candidate.  I probably won’t be voting in the 2012 election, probably not for whatever shill the Republicans will put out as a candidate, and certainly not for the Kenyan Zionist and winner of the world’s first affirmative action Nobel Peace Prize, but still, the election raises an important question.

Just what is the appeal of “democratic freedoms” and “universal suffrage” in today’s world to the globalist elite?  From a practical point of view, giving the common people the idea that they are choosing their leaders makes them feel as if they are in control, even when this is not the case.  In the case of American politics, where the two major parties are essentially the same in the spirit of their ideology, it serves to perpetuate the two-party itself, so that superficial solutions can be made merely by switching allegiances in the next election.  Also, the ideological and intellectual development of the masses, in the American democracy is hindered by the diversionary need of political parties to reinforce their existing ideologies and intellectual standards.

The so-called American democratic system is, in fact an artifact of the symptoms of disintegration and cultural and human regression, which relies heavily on a controlled media to operate. In America, democracy appeals to the ruling class, including the finance-capitalists, politicians, and media moguls because the people that are able to think for themselves are, in reality a small minority.  Under such a system, the ideological and cultural life of the people is also very poor because the people have their independent thinking paralyzed and are degenerating ideologically and culturally because they are poisoned by the false liberal-bourgeoisie ideologies touted by the media.  This creates the solution in which people rely on the controlled media to become active participants in a democracy.  In turn, the democracy legitimizes the controlled media and the ideas that it presents to the public, and at the same time, allows them to remain behind the scenes, evading responsibility for the cultural and ideological attacks on the general masses.

While the American imperialists might have found it convenient to enforce democracy by military might across the world, it is nearly impossible to do so domestically.  An “inclusive” democracy based on quantity rather than quality thus becomes positive for the real power-brokers, who can hide behind their appointed puppets to push social agendas, because the easily mislead Americans gain their perspectives from the media.  Whether in the news, or in movies, or in serials, people are likely to be influenced by the way they see characters interact with each other on screen, or by the tone of voice or visceral reactions of broadcasters.

To conclude, modern “democracy” is therefore a way by which the globalists wish to demean culture, knowledge and morality.  Whereas even in the classical democratic idea,  which was formed as an institution for protecting property rights, a semblance of culture might have flourished, today’s democracy is precisely for the destruction of the spiritual and political achievements created by traditional societies.

A rather insignificant blog exploded onto the international stage last week, as the supposedly “fair and balanced” Western media lamented over the circumstances of its author: a middle-aged lesbian blogger with American citizenship supposedly abducted in the early hours of the morning by intolerant Syrian thugs.  The story was so perfect that these agents of the mainstream media, such as MSNBC, the Huffington Post, Time Magazine, CBS, the Guardian, just to name a few, ran sympathetic articles speculating that “Amina” was in the clutches of militantly homophobic Islamists.  By contrast, the media, seemed to care little for 19-year old American citizen Furkan Dogan, who was murdered on the high seas by Israel, but that’s a different story.

But later suspicions began to arise that the photos of “Amina” might have really belonged to Jelena Lecic, a Croat living in England; and a few days later, Tom McMaster, was forced to admit that he was the author of the blog, and that nobody had been captured.  Of course, many people remained unrepentant.  One commenter on a popular American political forum said: “The point is not that the person Amina was not real, but rather that the blog brings light to the situation faced by the womyn and LGBTQI community in Syria”.

According to intelligence, MacMaster is a 40-year old master’s degree student at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, and his wife, Britta Froelicher, is a Ph.D. student.  Considering this, it’s rather odd that a married couple who are working towards university degrees to be able to travel to Jordan, Syria and Turkey, unless you are being paid to do so.  During the same time, the IDF shot dozens of peaceful protestors at the Golan Heights and the deaths of twenty of them were almost forgotten as the entire American public beat itself over the head over the fate of the fake Syrian lesbian.  This begs the question of who is really financing the MacMasters, and how an obscure blog catapulted to instant fame.

On a political note, there is one thing of interest.  The supposed persecution itself in turn gives legitimization to the revolt in Syria, which has been considered by some to be at least a regional rival to Israel under Bashar al-Assad.  Not only this, a US official stated:

“Syria has a more fundamental choice…to break its alignment with Iran, realign with the Gulf (monarchist dictatorship) countries and actually, potentially, open itself to an peace process.” —Michele Flournoy, US Undersecretary of Defense for Policy

One might wonder what kind of “peace process” Flournoy was talking about.  But regardless of political implications, the truth here is that the supposedly objective media in America loved this fairy tale because it was simply too convenient for them.  It played upon the sympathies of political correctness in America, and because their ultimate goal is to export such politically correct sensitivities to the Middle East.  In other words, the supposed persecution matches their expectations: a tolerant, victimized lesbian brave enough to start a blog so that the intolerant, backwards, hate-filled Muslims would be tolerant to homosexual perverts.  And it matches their expectations that gays and lesbians like her in the United States should be some kind of protected group, lest we all become like “them“.

But the deeper implication here is also that of post-Western cultural imperialism.  At a time when the U.S. imperialists are attempting to foment a color revolution in Iran, liberal Westerners are not merely content to sit back as their own countries degenerate into moral chaos.  They are keen on imposing the decadent way of life onto other nations, by any means necessary.  At this time, no other culture comes under more fire than Middle Eastern culture, since, to cultural liberals (of which neo-conservatism is a part), gender roles are an abomination, and the traditional family something which must be eradicated.  The same people who control the media and promote so-called tolerance for sexual deviants, also wish for intervention in the Middle East.  However, the fact is that, even if Bashar al-Assad is a dictator, and many people might agree to this, Syrians do not need gay rights, liberal “diversity,” Hollywood filth, rap music, or whatever cultural refuse that the globalist elites want to offer.