To understand how Israel has gained a near-total control over the American ruling class today, we must understand Israel of course, but we must also study the principles by which any ruling class operates. The perfect book for that is The Ruling Class, by Italian political scientist Gaetano Mosca (1858–1941). Mosca begins by establishing the following law (p. 50):
In all societies, from societies that are very meagerly developed and have barely attained the dawnings of civilization, down to the most advanced and powerful societies, two classes of people appear: a class that rules and a class that is ruled. The first class, always the less numerous, performs all political functions, monopolizes power and enjoys the advantages that power brings, whereas the second, the more numerous class, is directed and controlled by the first…
No matter what their internal divergences are, the ruling class is bonded by a high degree of solidarity: “the minority is organized for the very reason that it is a minority” (p. 54).
It follows that the main object of political science must be the study of various types of ruling classes. Mosca, p. 336: “We must patiently seek out the constant traits that various ruling classes possess and the variable traits with which the remote causes of their integration and dissolution, which contemporaries almost always fail to notice, are bound up.” Historians and journalists remain at the surface of historical events when they ascribe them to the decisions of heads of states, who are only, as a rule, the public faces of a ruling class, and sometimes not the main decision-makers.
A ruling class can be overthrown, either by a foreign conquest, by a coup d’état, by a revolution, or in more subtle ways that are not always immediately perceptible by the ruled. But any change of regime, even if provoked by popular uprising, leads to the formation of a new ruling class.
All this may seem quite obvious, but reading Mosca and pursuing this line of thought has modified my perspective on political regimes, on the illusion of Democracy, and on what Israel is up to.
Machiavelli
I discovered Mosca through James Burnham’s book The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom (New York, 1943). Like Mosca, Burnham stresses that: “Historical and political science is above all the study of the élite, its composition, its structure, and the mode of its relation to the non-élite” (pp. 224-5). Burnham classifies Mosca as a “Machiavellian”, among three other political thinkers who share Machiavelli’s realism—as opposed to the idealism that Burnham illustrates with another Florentine, Dante Alighieri. Mosca is definitely a disciple of Machiavelli, in the sense that the fundamental law that is the premise of his work had already been formulated by Niccolò Machiavelli in the early sixteenth century: “in any city, in whatsoever manner organized, never do more than forty or fifty persons attain positions of command” (Discourses on Livy, XVI, quoted by Mosca, p. 329). If we take that number literally, the actual number of persons in charge would represent 0.1 percent of the population in a big city like Florence, with a population around 40-50,000 inhabitants in Machiavelli’s time. But not every member of the ruling class is on active duty at all times, so that the proverbial One Percent seems a good rough estimate of the average ruling class, although a case by case study might show important differences, and a distinction could be made between the ruling class and the ruling élite within them.
Burham’s book changed my perception of Machiavelli, whom I knew mainly through Leo Strauss’s crypto-Zionist, ultra-Machiavellian interpretation. Burham p. 38:
Almost all commentators on Machiavelli say that his principal innovation, and the essence of his method, was to “divorce politics from ethics.” … this opinion is confused. Machiavelli divorced politics from ethics only in the same sense that every science must divorce itself from ethics. Scientific descriptions and theories must be based upon the facts, the evidence, not upon the supposed demands of some ethical system. If this is what is meant by the statement that Machiavelli divorced politics from ethics, if the statement sums up his refusal to pervert and distort political science by doctoring its results in order to bring them into line with “moral principles”—his own or any others—then the charge is certainly true. / This very refusal, however, this allegiance to objective truth, is itself a moral ideal.
Machiavelli was a firm believer in the Republic, which is defined as government by law (the same law for ruled and rulers alike), the only source of freedom in his view. That freedom, he emphasized, “can be secured in the last analysis only by the armed strength of the citizenry itself, never by mercenaries or allies or money” (Burnham p. 69). As he wrote in The Art of War (his only major work printed in his lifetime), a “people in arms” will restrain the “appetite” of domination of the grandi: “the unarmed rich man is the prize of the poor soldier.”
But Machiavelli also realized that a Republic is not possible under all circumstances. His immediate practical goal was the national unification of Italy, divided into city states constantly at war. “This fragmentation of Italy had left it open to an uninterrupted series of invasions, by adventurers, junior members of royal families, knights returning from the Crusades, kings, and emperors. Control over cities and territories shifted every decade, from Normans to Spaniards to Frenchmen to local bosses to Germans to Popes and back again” (Burnham p. 33). The unification of Italy, Machiavelli thought, could only be achieved by the bold action of a prince who could “take the lead in the movement of national redemption.” He wrote The Prince with that in mind, and dedicated it to Lorenzo de Medici, whom he saw, for a variety of good reasons, as the one man up to the task. The last chapter of The Prince is entitled: “An Exhortation to Deliver Italy from the Barbarians” and the Discourses on Livy contain lengthy discussions aimed at showing Italians how to defeat the forces of France, the Empire, and Spain and thus gain control of their destiny as an Italian nation. We tend to forget that the unification and independence of Italy were so much resisted by Europe’s princely and clerical class, that it was not achieved before 1860.
Types of ruling élite
According to Machiavelli, the uneven distribution between rulers and ruled is not only determined by the external constraints of social life; it is consistent with human nature, because the basic quality required for being part of the ruling élite is present only in a minority. Machiavelli calls that quality virtù, a word derived from the Latin vir, closer therefore to “virility” than to “virtue”. According to Burnham (p. 58):
It includes in its meaning part of what we refer to as “ambition,” “drive,” “spirit” in the sense of Plato’s thumos, the “will to power.” Those who are capable of rule are above all those who want to rule. They drive themselves as well as others; they have that quality which makes them keep going, endure amid difficulties, persist against dangers.
Virtù does not guarantee access to the ruling class, however, for each life is also dependent on the equally uneven distribution of fortuna, starting with the social inequalities inherited at birth. But virtù, precisely, is the ability to deal with fortuna: “the ruler-type of political man is one who knows how to accommodate of the times. Fortune cannot be overcome, but advantage may be taken of her” (Burnham p. 71). In Machiavelli’s view, Burnham writes, “men and states will make the most of fortune when they display virtù, when they are firm, bold, quick in decision, not irresolute, cowardly, and timid.” Mosca takes a similar view, p. 54:
ruling minorities are usually so constituted that the individuals who make them up are distinguished from the mass of the governed by qualities that give them a certain material, intellectual or even moral superiority; or else they are the heirs of individuals who possessed such qualities.
The last qualification is, of course, crucial. Powerful men try to make their power hereditary, which means that any ruling class practices endogamy and nepotism. The desire to pass on to one’s offspring the benefits of one’s achievements is natural, not evil. However, when the social mechanisms of hereditary power become too efficient, they inhibit the healthy renewal of the ruling class. For although the ruling class wishes virtù to be genetic, and will try to convince the masses that it is, it is not. A study of princely dynasties will often show that the grand-children of the founders lack the qualities to rule. That’s understandable: ambitious men who want to rise socially will develop more energy, more will to rule, than men who are born in the upper class. The degree of acceptance of newcomers by a ruling class is an important characteristic or any society. Impermeability will inevitably, in time, make any ruling class illegitimate in the eyes of the ruled, whatever the sophistication of its propaganda or mythology (royal blood, divine mandate, etc.). When a ruling class become too endogamous and sealed from the rest of the population, they lose their sense of shared ancestry and shared destiny with the ruled. They think of themselves as a superior race and become abusive, having to protect themselves from popular resentment by coercive means.
The worst case for the ruled masses is when the ruling élite is that of a conquering foreign nation that has eliminated or subjected the local élite. This has happened many times in the Dark and the Middle Ages. But here again, the situation will vary depending on the character of the invaders, their policy towards the conquered, and their state-building project. Not all foreign conquerors are a parasitic ruling class: some engaged in state-building rather than just exploitation of natural and human resources.
The Republic
The solution to the age-old political challenge of a win-win relationship between the rulers and the ruled is the Republic, defined as the rule of law. It was the genius of the Romans to apply that Greek idea on a grand scale. Contrary to a common misunderstanding, even the Roman Empire remained, in theory and to a large degree in practice, a Republic: it was never forgotten that the imperator (initially a military honorific title) was only the princeps senatus, submitted to the same law as others.
It remained so even in Byzantium, despite the orientalization of the emperor’s status. The political hierarchy of Byzantium, Anthony Kaldellis wrote, was “an aristocracy of service, not blood, despite the occasional rhetoric.” The ruling élite “was marked by high turnover and had no hereditary right to office or titles, and no legal authority over persons and territories except that which came from office.” “families became powerful only when they succeeded in court politics and managed to retain imperial favor.”[1]Anthony Kaldellis, Streams of Blood, Rivers of Blood: The Rise and Fall of Byzantium 955 A.D. to the First Crusade, Oxford UP, 2017, p. 5. Kaldellis also provides examples of “episodes when the people of Constantinople took the initiative to defend and enforce their views when it came to religious, political, fiscal, and dynastic matters, or when they disliked an emperor and wanted to get rid of him.”[2]Ibid., p. 124.
(Anthony Kaldellis, Streams of Blood, Rivers of Blood: The Rise and Fall of Byzantium 955 A.D. to the First Crusade, Oxford UP, 2017, p. 5.) I would argue that a people’s capacity to get rid of an incompetent or corrupted leader is much more precious than the illusion of having elected him in the first place. I found Byzantine society very interesting to study, because in many ways, Russia inherited the Byzantine political tradition, and it is not working that bad (see my article “Byzantine revisionism unlocks world history”).
Roman economy relied on slavery. Slaves were not citizens. They were excluded from the laws of the Republic—although there were special laws for them. But slaves, whether captured on the battlefield or bought from Jewish merchants, could be emancipated, and frequently were. They became freedmen. Freedmen were excluded from any role in leadership, but the offspring of freedmen were freemen.[3]Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History, Macmillan, 2005, p. 94. Any freeman, with enough virtù and good fortune, could rise in the leadership. The shortest way was through military merit—not the worst test for the virtues of leadership. There were other forms of public service that could lift a man up the social ladder.
“Public life in the Roman Empire,” Peter Heather wrote, “is best understood as working like that of a one-party state, in which loyalty to the system was drilled into you from birth and reinforced with regular opportunities to demonstrate it.”[4]Ibid., p. 132.
(Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History, Macmillan, 2005, p. 94.) That’s a fruitful comparison. A Republic is supposed to be a system where all citizens, regardless of their social rank, live under the same law and have the same opportunities—given a few generations, if you start as a peasant. A Republic, in other words, is not necessarily a democracy, but it is, in theory, a meritocracy. And arguably the one-party-system, as in China with the CPC (Communist Party of China), is not a bad system for the selection of men of talent, merit, and virtù. It produced Xi Jinping. I wish my democratically elected president would be this kind of leader.
The illusion of representative democracy
The overthrow of the ruling class by the “working class” has been the aim of the revolutionary movements of the last two centuries. From the point of view of a “Machiavellian” political scientist like Mosca, overthrowing a ruling class is possible, but having “the people” rule is impossible. Therefore, the modern democratic ideology—the idea that each man has an equal say in political affairs—is a lie. It is a universal law, according to Mosca (p. 336), that “in all forms of government the real and actual power resides in a ruling minority.” Democratic regimes must conceal this truth and pretend that there is no such thing as a ruling élite. According to Burnham, vilifying Machiavelli is part of this concealment. Democracy is founded on the idea of “popular sovereignty”, a fantasy of Rousseau (to his defense, Rousseau warned that Democracy could only work at the level of the city, a unity of civilized people sharing a common culture and a common interest).
One of the authors that Burnham includes among the “Machiavellians” is the German-Italian sociologist Robert Michels (1876-1936). In his book on Political Parties, Michels shows that all democratic organizations tend to become oligarchic. His criticism of democracy is particularly interesting. Here is Burnham’s paraphrase (p. 145):
The truth is that sovereignty, which is what—according to democratic principle—ought to be possessed by the mass, cannot be delegated. In making a decision, no one can represent the sovereign, because to be sovereign means to make one’s own decisions. The one thing that the sovereign cannot possibly delegate is its own sovereignty; that would be self-contradictory, and would simply mean that sovereignty has shifted hands. At most, the sovereign could employ someone to carry out decisions which the sovereign itself had already made. But this is not what is involved in the fact of leadership: as we have already seen, there must be leaders because there must be a way of deciding questions which the membership of the group is not in a position to decide. Thus the fact of leadership, obscured by the theory of representation, negates the principle of democracy. … A mass which delegates its sovereignty, that is to say transfers its sovereignty to the hands of a few individuals, abdicates its sovereign functions.
Democratic countries are still ruled by élite groups. In the ideal case, it is a “government for the people,” but never a “government by the people”. The élite make the big decisions. In the U.S., they run foreign policy—in other words, the Empire—through elitist organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations. One longtime CFR member, Zbigniew Brzezinski, explained in his book The Grand Chessboard (1997) that democracy and imperialism are hardly compatible, because the people don’t normally vote for war, unless lied to. Because imperial strategies are best kept out of the public debate, the United States developed, during the Cold War, into a two-level state, as Michael Glennon explains in National Security and Double Government (Oxford UP, 2016). In the backstage of the “Madisonian institutions” — the President, Congress, and the courts — there is another government, popularly known as the deep state, but more appropriately named the National Security State, which operates outside constitutional and electoral control. Glennon names it the “Trumanite network” because it was President Truman who created the first structure of this “state within the state.” The Bank (global finance) must be added to the equation as part of the non-democratic deep powers.
The one-percent ruling class also organizes itself through more secretive groups like the Bilderberg Group, who meet under the Chatham House Rule. This does not look very democratic, since democracy requires transparency from the decision-makers. It produces an understandable suspicion by the population that “they” conspire against “us”. Conspiracy theories easily get carried away, as with Alex Jones’ wild claims of Satanic child sacrifice in the Bohemian Grove summer camps (read my article about it). The Bohemian Club is actually a good example of a tool for “ruling-class cohesiveness”, as William Domhoff calls it in Bohemian Grove and Other Retreats: A Study in Ruling-Class Cohesiveness (HarperCollins, 1975). It is quite natural that people who are excluded from such élite scout camps (not even women are allowed in the Club) fantasize about it.
At the root of all those wild conspiracy theories, there is a profound disillusion about out democratic system. This disillusion is of course legitimate. But most people, in their disillusion, are still captive of the illusion that true democracy is possible, if only we would put the current ruling elite in jail. This illusion must be dispelled: there is no such thing as true democracy, and there will never be. Democracy is a lie. Because it is a lie, it attracts liars in government office, and it ultimately becomes the rule of liars. Lying becomes the quality required for becoming part of the ruling class. No one can be elected by telling less lies than his rivals, when voters are already brainwashed by lies. Liars can be bought and sold. They will lie even better when blackmailed. And men who have no regard for the truth will have also only contempt for the people they are supposed to lead.
Of Huns and Jews
Ultimately, democracy becomes an easy target for the “Great Master of Lies” (Schopenhauer as quoted by his most famous Austrian disciple). This foreign conquering and highly organized people forms now the truly ruling class, the handlers of our elected officials, dictating them their talking-points, holding the president’s hand to sign their documents, trying the convince the masses that democracy is primarily about fighting anti-Semitism. A foreign, hostile, mean, religiously endogamous, supremacist, sociopathic, vengeful, and paranoid ruling class, has taken control of the U.S. MAGA and PNAC are deceptive slogans waved by people whose real and only objective is to make Israel great and to make the twenty-first century an Israeli Century (after the previous “Jewish Century”).
Our Jewish ruling class abide by a book that reflects their origin as a semi-nomadic people living primarily from looting, and obsessed by the accumulation of transportable wealth, gold in particular. Their empire over Westerners actually resembles what historians call the Hunnic Empire of the fifth century in central Europe, built upon the subjection of Gothic agricultural bands in the lands north of the Lower and the Middle Danube, through devastating warfare, pillage, and extorsion of tributes. Roman historian Priscus wrote about the Huns: “These men have no concern for agriculture, but, like wolves, attack and steal the Goths’ food supplies, with the result that the latter remain in the position of slaves and themselves suffer food shortages.”[5]Ibid., p. 361.
(Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History, Macmillan, 2005, p. 94.)
Funerary archaeology offers an illuminating perspective on the relationship between Huns and their Gothic subjects, as Peter Heather relates:
a striking feature of the excavated material is the contrast between the large number of unfurnished burials and a smaller number of rich ones. These rich burials are not just quite rich: they are staggeringly so. They contain a huge array of gold fittings and ornamentation … The presence of so much gold in Germanic central and eastern Europe is highly significant. Up to the birth of Christ, … gold was not being used to distinguish even elite burials at this point—the best they could manage was a little silver. The Hunnic Empire changed this, and virtually overnight. The gold-rich burials of the ‘Danubian style’ mark a sudden explosion of gold grave goods into this part of Europe. There is no doubt where the gold came from: what we’re looking at in the grave goods of fifth-century Hungary is the physical evidence of the transfer of wealth northwards from the Roman world that we read about in Priscus and the other written sources. The Huns … were after gold and other moveable wealth from the Empire—whether in the form of mercenary payments, booty or, especially, annual tributes. Clearly, large amounts of gold were recycled into the jewelry and appliqués found in their graves. The fact that many of these were the rich burials of Germans indicates that the Huns did not just hang on to the gold themselves, but distributed quantities of it to the leaders of their Germanic subjects as well. These leaders, consequently, became very rich indeed.
The reasoning behind this strategy was that, if Germanic leaders could be given a stake on the successes of the Hunnic Empire, then dissent would be minimized and things would run relatively smoothly. Gifts of gold to the subject princes would help lubricate the politics of Empire and fend off thoughts of revolt. Since there are quite a few of burials containing gold items, these princes must have passed on some of the gold to favoured supporters. The gold thus reflects the politics of Attila’s court. … Equally important, the role of such gold distributions in countering the endemic internal instability, combined with what we know of the sources of that gold, underlines the role of predatory warfare in keeping afloat the leaky bark that was the Hunnic ship of state.[6]Ibid., pp. 364-5.
(Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History, Macmillan, 2005, p. 94.)
One of Attila’s systematic demand on the Romans, besides extorting gold in exchange for not rampaging their land, was the return of any fugitive who had taken refuge in the Empire. This demand was often granted, and the returned fugitives were impaled as an example to others. “Impaling seems to have been the main method of dealing with most problems in the Hunnic world,” Heather writes.[7]Ibid., p. 321.
(Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History, Macmillan, 2005, p. 94.)
There are interesting comparations to be made here, with the ancient Hebrews. Replace “Huns” by “Jews” and “Goths” by “Gentiles” and you have a pretty good historical metaphor of what is happening in America today. Both the Hunnic Empire and the Jewish Empire function by making the leaders of the subject people rich, and impaling the fugitives of the system—AIPAC money and ADL cancelling.
No one knows what happened to the Huns after they retreated back to their Eurasian steppe following Attila’s death. The Huns did not write, and we don’t even know what language they spoke (they used Gothic as lingua franca).
The Jews, on the other hand, are the people of the Book. For that reason, they became fossilized in the mindset that shaped their book. The ʿApiru were wandering raiders and parasites, and so the “Hebrews” remained, because that’s what their volcano god told them to be, promising them a country “with great and prosperous cities you have not built, with houses full of good things you have not provided, with wells you have not dug, with vineyards and olive trees you have not planted” (Deuteronomy 6:10-11). The prophets of old continue to this day to encourage the parasitic nature of Israel: “You will suck the milk of nations, you will suck the wealth of kings” (Isaiah 60:16); “Strangers will come forward to feed your flocks, foreigners will be your ploughmen and vinedressers; but you will be called ‘priests of Yahweh’ and be addressed as ‘ministers of our God’. You will feed on the wealth of nations, you will supplant them in their glory” (Isaiah 61:5-6); “the wealth of all the surrounding nations will be heaped together: gold, silver, clothing, in vast quantity” (Zechariah 14:14). The god of Israel is obsessed with gold and silver: “I shall shake all the nations, and the treasures of all the nations will flow in, and I shall fill this Temple with glory, says Yahweh Sabaoth. Mine is the silver, mine the gold! Yahweh Sabaoth declares” (Haggai 2:7-8). The Jerusalem Temple was to be filled with gold, not God: “All the silver and all the gold, everything made of bronze or iron, will be consecrated to Yahweh and put in his treasury” (Joshua 6:19).
Let’s be fair, the Israelites were vastly superior to the Huns: more than a millennium before Attila, Moses (or Ezra reinventing Moses in Babylon) understood that usury was the ultimate form of parasitizing, and that entire nations could be enslaved through debt: “If Yahweh your God blesses you as he has promised, you will be creditors to many nations but debtors to none; you will rule over many nations, and be ruled by none” (Deuteronomy 15:6).
Notes
[1] Anthony Kaldellis, Streams of Blood, Rivers of Blood: The Rise and Fall of Byzantium 955 A.D. to the First Crusade, Oxford UP, 2017, p. 5.
[2] Ibid., p. 124.
[3] Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History, Macmillan, 2005, p. 94.
[4] Ibid., p. 132.
[5] Ibid., p. 361.
[6] Ibid., pp. 364-5.
[7] Ibid., p. 321.
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
English
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
“the unarmed rich man is the prize of the poor soldier.”
Right. So how, exactly, does World Jewry negate the arbitrary power of CIA impunity through which SAD, CTC, and any chosen cutouts can kill you and torture you and get away with it? And FASAB-56, which makes DoD materiel fall off the truck at will to supply undeclared JP 5-0 general war? Nobody ever explains this part to me.
Entryism is the only credible possibility. And in fact you see DD Cohen, Avril Haines, and Gina Haspel in there. But that doesn’t tell me why the Jews in the 7th floor are the problem, and not the 7th floor. Because the 7th floor fucks you over with goyim too, Mormons and Scientologists and Opus Dei and The Family.
You don’t like Jews leading you around by the nose? Take the ring out of your nose. CIA is the ring in your nose.
Khazars are very similar to Huns and come from the same place.
The antidote to Leo Strauss’s inaccurate review of Machiavelli works
Ghost written by Machiavelli himself
Wayne Lusvardi
LINK @ Amazon
Who is the Machiavellian? Strauss or Machiavelli?
Reviewed in the United States on March 17, 2024
I, Niccolo Machiavelli, have been resurrected to dictate a reply via my transcriber on Leo Strauss’s Thoughts on Machiavelli to set the record straight about his assassination of my book The Prince and my character. One of the other Amazon reviewers (“David”) sums up Strauss’s thoughts as characterizing me as a “megalomaniac ‘teacher of evil’ whose primary intention is spiritual warfare”.
I must first dispel the vicious collective hypnotic spell cast over my reputation for centuries, popularized by modern liberal movies, novels, academia, and even by American Catholic and biblical religion, meant to twist what I wrote in 1532, that my book The Prince teaches only how to be evil and irreligious. This is more than a reading comprehension problem and reflects the manipulativeness of so-called Machiavellianism that I am accused of.
I refer you to my sermon “On Penitence” (delivered to the religious Company of Piety and Pope Clement VII in 1532, on how a prince needs to do penance for deeds necessary to save his nation); and on three prose-poems:
“On Ambition” (on how an armed citizenry can only secure the Republic against the ambitions of the oligarchs),
“On Ingratitude or Envy” (of the Citizens and Mercenary armies fighting proxy wars) and
“On Fortune” (of how a city’s fortune was ruined by fraud and the circumvention of usury laws by the Medici’s).
Together with my book The Prince, these describe a world not unlike the modern situation that the United States is undergoing where:
* Oligarch families tyrannically control the world and drive perpetual warfare against other competing banking monopolies and governments (The Medici Family, Popes, and Medici Bank vis a vis your secret reserve banks),
* Proxy wars are conducted by mercenaries and contractors,
* Fraud, usury and gambling is institutionalized as normal and moral banking (like your hedge funds and mortgages), and,
* Conspiracies and coups abound disguised as plagues. Even in my time plagues and fire-bombing could be weaponized by destroying food stocks, by planning to divert water from the Arno River to starve the enemy city of Pisa, by crowding people together, and by setting urban fires, such as the burning of Rome.
Only believe what I wrote not what others viciously rumor about me using cherry-picked, out of context, one-line quotes. Leo Strauss smears me as a teacher of evil and irreligion apparently to make me a scapegoat. In his book Machiavelli’s Secret: The Soul of the Statesman”, scholar Angelo Belliotti writes: “Machiavelli never calls anything other than evil”.
Why does Strauss try so hard to discredit me if not to slyly steal the ‘spirit’ of my works and the ‘charisma’ of my personality for himself as the chief political counselor to modern oligarchs and princes, only as a preacher of evil Machiavellianism not the political “virtue” I wrote about. It was the French poet who came after my time, Charles Baudelaire, who said: “the greatest trick the devil ever played was to convince that he did not exist”. To which the only thing I must add is, “only to project the devil onto a scapegoat, namely me, and away from the secret societies and oligarchs! Christ opposed such religion whose character marker was to always find the speck in someone else’s eyes than their own.
My approach to politics cannot be summed up in pithy cliches like “it is always better to be feared than loved” when the best is to be both loved and feared, but they rarely come together as love can be exploited and returned with hate and assassination. If a person in a position of authority must choose, he will find that love must be stingy and indulgence only spoils the populace, but fear protects love. My statement “men must either be caressed or extinguished” refers only to when a conqueror takes over an adversary’s country. Echoing Christ’s golden rule, I wrote “whatever we do to another must be such that we do not fear his retaliation”.
To answer the charge that I am irreligious, my writings bestow “glory” on a hierarchy of leaders, with religious leaders at the top:
* Religious leaders who found new religions that make a new public and moral order and republic (Romulus, Christ, Paul, Marcion, St. Ignatius),
* Those who reform corrupted religion (Luther, Erasmus, Paul, Marcion)
* Military leaders who, when necessary, can be ruthless (Caesar, Severus who dissolved the Praetorian Guard and created a citizen army, Agathocles who killed all the oligarchs),
* Political leaders who hold up the interests of the common people (Soderini),
* Those who write literature and produce art which elevates the citizenry (Leonardo Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Dante Alighieri, Juvenal),
* And those who serve the nation by virtue of their occupation or patronage (such as my patron Lorenzo di Filippo).
However, in my time I refused to confer glory on religious leaders like the Florentine ruler-priest Savonarola, the moral absolutist who piously condemned sexual sin but was an “unarmed prophet” who let the French conquer Florence without any resistance, leaving it to being overrun by confiscation, rape, and subjugation. Sound familiar to your current situation.
Especially, don’t believe what Christians like Catholic Benjamin Wiker wrote in his “10 Books That Screwed Up the World”, which also slanders me as “one of the most profound teachers of evil the world has ever known”. Wiker apparently never read my book The Discourses wherein I wrote: “one cannot do evil under the cover of good”. Wiker caricatures me as a moral relativist, but never sees that Relativism and Fundamentalism are two sides of the same coin and neither have any concern for the likely consequences of one’s actions.
It is a vicious distortion that I said: “the ends justify the means” – without adding “but only in genuine emergencies where the very existence of the state and religion is threatened by war, corruption, insurrection and coups, invasion by migration, or foreign domination”; and, moreover, “in all other non-emergent situations public morality ought to default to conventional Christian morality”. Such emergencies need to be genuine and not contrived as a spectacle for other ends.
Enough of having to justify by what moral and spiritual authority I write this review of Strauss’s twisted book. Let me add, that now you might understand why I also wrote that sometimes a ruler may have to do bad to bring about a good outcome. Think of Winston Churchill lying to British citizens that he did not know when the Germans were going to firebomb them because to do so would have revealed the British had broken the Nazi military codes. Or think of Pres. Ronald Reagan claiming “plausible deniability” that he had traded guns, and drugs to enemies to secure the release of American hostages in Lebanon. These are situations that only rulers in a position of authority must do out of necessity, thus the citizenry is spared of having to get their hands dirty.
This never justifies doing evil, however, and a ruler must also seek penance and not seek inflicting gratuitous evil. I never said anything other than evil is evil. The ongoing emergency surrounding the “Great Reset” in the US in 2020 was avoidable evil but authorized by default by all your leaders, past and present, whether China did or did not leak a virus from a lab. Government has a monopoly on legitimate coercion that the citizens do not have. Albeit all leaders acted gratuitously, out of convenience, and without remorse, even though they deemed it a necessary evil and the loss of liberty and the Republic is now irreparable, and its leaders have lost their souls.
Instead of proceeding with a diatribe that only would be twisted into another false dialectic by such a dissimilator as Strauss, I leave you with a Parable, an Epilogue and a Salutation excerpted from my letters to prove that I wrote them myself and not my messenger:
Parable of the Rabbit and the Harrow: “The harrow is a construction of square wood that has certain teeth, and our farmers drag it over plowed land to break up clods, remove weeds and to cover up seeds. And one day when the farmer was leveling his field, a toad that was not used to seeing such great labor popped up out of its rabbit hole. While she peaked to see what was up there, she was run over by the harrow, which scratched her back and her paws twice. As the harrow passed over her a second time hitting the toad hard, she screamed to the farmer “Don’t Come Back!’ This phrase gave rise to the proverb ‘if what you plant in life backfires and invites retribution, no matter what you intended, then don’t repeat it. This is all I have found of value, and if you have any uncertainty about it let me know” (excerpted from letter to Francesco Guicciardini). Moral: Without awareness we blindly pursue our actions without recognizing unintended consequences of the symbolic rabbits vengefully ruining our crop.
Epilogue: “An existing ruler has a good reputation where humanity, loyalty, and religion have for a long time been common. Yet where cruelty, treachery, and irreligion have dominated for a time it is often because, as bitter things disturb the taste and sweet ones do not, so men get bored with good and complain of ill. Cruelty, treachery, and irreligion opened-up Italy to Hannibal’s invasion but also opened-up Spain to Roman general Scipio’s campaign to push Hannibal back to Carthage. Thus, both found corrupt times and things that facilitated their military campaigns in their enemy’s countries. At that very time a general like Scipio would not have been so successful in other parts of Italy, or one like Hannibal not so successful in fickle Spain, if they both were in the provinces of their home countries.”
(excerpted Letter to prince Piero Soderini). Moral: How questionable are the actions of Strauss to malign me and my book as evil when your leaders and intellectuals are full of cruelty, treachery, and irreligion at home? Will your seeds fall on infertile soil?
Salutation: To my faithful readers, “may Christ keep you” (letter to Master Giovanni Vernacci in Pera).
Signed, Ambassador of the Florentine State to the Minor Friars and the Court of Cesar, Your Servant, historian, comic, and tragic writer,
Niccolo Machiavelli
“I would argue that a people’s capacity to get rid of an incompetent or corrupted leader is much more precious than the illusion of having elected him in the first place.”
” It produced Xi Jinping. I wish my democratically elected president would be this kind of leader.”
Try to get rid of Mao or Xi and you will discover the beauty of a totalitarian and authoritarian one-party-system.
Thank y9u Lauren Guyenot for this article. You have done the heavy lifting for us. I have thought of writing a similar piece also based on Machiavelli’s chapter in The Prince of how to overcome the Huns to send to Col. Douglas MacGregor.
Macgregor is eloquent and has aspirations to run for President under a new party based on his prior Our Country/Our Choice movement in 2024. Unfortunately, his political base draws from Evangelical Christians who effectually worship Jews not Christ (“salvation comes from the Jews” – Gospel of John presumably inserted into the gospel at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD). Macgregor has lost hope in Trump who he believes should just say NO to the British Free Mason-Jewish American ruling class. We can see where that leads after the Kirk assassination.
Macgregor needs a longer term strategy of peeling off power over a long period to eventually amass enough power to rule. Federalism is the perfect way to do this – one state at a time. But even the states are controlled by the Jewish lobby and bribery system. Here in Arizona the weak so-called Democrat governor has a Jewish handler who calls the shots to the point of almost tying the shoe laces for the governor each day.
The major obstacle in my experience is Evangelical Christianity which is a de facto Jewish emperor worship cult. In my experience most of the American patriots who put flags in front of their houses and believe there is such a thing as the Constitution, are all Evangelicals. So, I am very skeptical about America and I can see where soon we could be subject to even more effective depopulation pogroms than the failed COVID.
Thank you, Laurent Guyénot, for revisiting Machiavelli and re-penting of your Straussian interpretation of his works.
My own understanding of, and admiration for, Niccoló Machiavelli is based on the work of Maurizio Viroli, truly a disciple of the Florentine sage.
Video Link
—
Regarding gold:
This is what Khan academy teaches young people about the Arch of Titus; that is, Romans acquired the menorah therein by typical Roman brutality
Video Link
There’s another version:
Josephus, a rabbi with privileges granting him access to the ‘holiest of holies’ of the Jewish temple; that is, the place where the gold was stored, was also a military leader in the Jewish rebellion. Aware that his side was the losing side, Josephus gathered up sufficient treasure to ingratiate himself to Titus; ‘prophesied’ to Titus that he would become Roman Emperor, and conveyed to him the wherewithal to obtain that post.
It’s probably a made-up story and antisemitic to boot.
Uncanny, however, the way it coincides point-for-point with Guyénot’s research into the use of gold by Huns to acquire position and power in Europe.
I’ve frequently wondered why so many recite the “Khazar” theory, but so few write about the deep, deep relationship ‘Apiru must have had with Assyrians, highly-skilled military strategists.
I forgot to say: “the Huns, but not every Hun”
Would that there were a new variation on The Prince with a concluding chapter entitled “An Exhortation to Deliver America from the Jews.”
“Gifts of gold to the subject princes would help lubricate the politics of Empire and fend off thoughts of revolt.”
Similarly, Rachel Maddow is paid $25 million per year to feed her audience oligarchy cover stories. The “news” business is filled with multi-millionaires who could not make so much money any other way.
When informing friends & family about covered up crimes such as 9/11, after discussing a bit of key evidence, be sure to add the point that the mainstream media has covered up this evidence all these years.
Because a battle must unmask the legacy media. Tthey are a key tool in covering up the Jewish Empire’s takeover of America. Many people still trust them, and that trust must be shattered.
It seems to me the key problem with our representative democracy is that in its current form it is highly vulnerable to corruption by a wealthy few. That hole needs a patch.
Perhaps you are not aware that history teaches that such takeovers of nations like America last for hundreds of years unless another foreign nation conquers America, or there is some other cataclysmic economic event that destroys the resources of the occupiers. For internal undoing of such occupations is impossible given the vast resources available to a small group of tyrannical occupiers who hold power over the courts and the legislature. The current situation America finds itself in cannot be merely patched. This is why the Bank of London in consort with the Israelis (the Colonial Powers) make out China as the evil Communism. Should American find a way to align with China against the Colonial Powers their goose would be cooked. This is why the Deep State desperately tried to start a war between China and the US which Trump squashed recently. Capish?
Unfair to Huns! Attila was a Hunny-bunny compared to the Zionists.
It is pertinent to our current predicament as a subjugated people that the US military is a mercenary military.
AN EXHORTATION TO LIBERATE AMERICA FROM THE ISRAELI-BRITISH RULING CLASS
Excerpted and Paraphrased from Chapter 26 of The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli
Originally Titled An Exhortation to Liberate Italy from the Barbarians, 1532
Upon the assassination of Charlie Kirk, 2025
“Hatred is gained as much by good works as by evil”.
Having carefully considered the subject of the above discourses, and wondering within myself whether the present times were propitious to a new prince, and whether there were elements that would give an opportunity to a wise and incorruptible one to introduce a new order of things which would do honor to him and good to the people of this country, it appears to me that so many things concur to favor a new prince that I never knew a time more fit than the present.
And if, as I said, it was necessary that the people of Ancient Israel should be captive so as to make manifest the ability of Moses; that the Persians should be oppressed by the Medes so as to discover the greatness of the soul of Cyrus; that the Athenians should be so dispersed to illustrate the capabilities of Theseus; and American colonies so oppressed by tariffs to fight a Revolutionary War by general Washington against the British: then at the present time, in order to recover the incorruptibility of an American spirit, it is necessary that America should be reduced to the extremity that she is now in, that she should be more enslaved than the Hebrews, more oppressed than the Persians, with more scattered military bases than the Athenians or Romans; without a sovereign head but a Pinocchio who wants to be a real president and not even a boy, without order in its big cities due to outside agitation, corrupted by bribery in courts, beaten, despoiled, torn, overrun with migrants who don’t even want to be Americans just parasites whose migration was facilitated and aided by no less than former Pres. George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton; ravaged by a fake pandemic (see Aaron Siri, Vaccines Amen: The Religion of Vaccines, 2025) deployed to bring with it a Coup-de-Etat of the government, laden with enormous debt to pay for the wars of the Israeli-Bank of London alliance (the European Colonial Powers of Britain, France, Netherlands, Canada along with Israel – see Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in our Time, 1966), and to have endured every kind of desolation and degeneracy.
Even Egypt, faced with a color-revolution instigated by Obama and Hillary in 2012, were eventually successful in vanquishing the Coup-de-Etat of Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood financed by British protectorate Qatar, from his illegitimate presidency, by dispatching its army and engaging its supreme court and Muslim and Coptic Christian leaders (see Egypt’s Couch Party Overturned Election Coup: Could the US do the Same?”, 2023).
Comparatively, lamblike Americans fell for the COVID Pandemic and ensuing Antifa race riots, financed by 25 high-tech corporations in San Francisco, as cover for a rigged election Coup-de-Etat in 2020. Americans are more docile and conforming than prayerful Muslim and Coptic Christian Egyptians despite images of individualist and non-conformist Americans made popular by Russian-American novelist Ayn Rand and Hollywood. And its corporations are treasonous.
Although lately some spark may have been shown by one, which made us think he was ordained by God for our redemption, nevertheless it was afterwards seen, in the height of his career, that good fortune rejected him seemingly at the hands of an assassin; so that America left as without life, waits for him who shall yet heal her wounds and put an end to the ravaging and plundering of the American treasury, to the swindling and relocation of the mid-western industrial base to China leaving the U.S. with only a financier economy based on hollow fiat money and the monopoly status of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency, and cleanse those sores that for long have festered since the 1776 Revolutionary War with Britain (where you won the battles but lost the money sovereignty war – see Anton Chaikin, Treason in America: From Aaron Burr to Averill Harriman, 1984; Kermit Roosevelt, The Nation that Never Was: Reconstructing America’s Story, 2022). It is seen how she entreats God to send someone who shall deliver her from these wrongs and the ease of being fooled, although falsely accused of Anti-Semitism and racism of the most tolerant nation in world history. It is also seen that she is ready and willing to follow a banner if only someone will raise it, but raising a banner is likely to be banned at least on your modern Internet.
Nor is there to be seen at present one in whom she can place a glimmer of hope than perhaps in your frustrated social-political movements (Turning Point USA, Our Country/Our Choice, The National Conversation, with its valorous and holy people, which could be made the head of a national redemption. This will not be difficult if you will recall to yourself the actions and lives of the men I have named. And although they were great and wonderful men, yet they were men, and each one of them had no more opportunity than the present offers, for their enterprises were neither more just nor easier than this and they had to rely on the resources of enemies and co-optation by money of which God was not their friend.
Russia helped turn your American Civil War around by sending its fleet of ships to San Francisco and New York. But the Deep State has demonized Russia to assure that you do not form an alliance with them that would lessen the hegemonic control of the European Colonial Powers and capture of America as its vassal colony, of which London, not Jerusalem, is its center. The Cold War with Russia was a Psy-Op glorified in James Bond movies. The iconic moral figure of Alexander Solzhenitsyn and his description of the Stalin-era Gulags has been found to have been fiction by a British publishing house for propaganda and pecuniary purposes (see Wayne Lusvardi, Solzhenit-Spin: Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag was a Deep State British Lie, 2025). Successful political propaganda pretends it holds the moral high ground and is typically found to be based on a fictitious story.
America has been under attack by the London-Jerusalem axis forever but doesn’t have the moral acuity to identify its supposedly closest ally is its worst enemy. It is said: “The enemy of your enemy is your friend”. But “Know your enemy” is a phrase I am known for along with the Chinese strategist Sun Tzu (see Niccolo Machiavelli, The Art of War, 1521). Americans do not have a clue who has been destroying them (see Richard Poe, How the British Invented Communism (and Blamed it on the Jews), 2024). They don’t know their enemy, nor can they fathom the extent of the ruthlessness and power they wield. Alex Krainer, the developer of the I-System investment market trend follower, states that if London-New York banking hubs were to go out of business, 95 percent of the world’s wars, famines, and pandemics would disappear permanently. This is like the influence of the Medici Bank monopoly of my epoch.
With the U.S. there is great injustice, because the two ongoing wars in the Mid-East are unjust and unnecessary, albeit arms are being funded by the U.S. and arms are hallowed when there is no other hope but in them. This would be of no relevancy except these kleptocratic wars are legitimatized by 70-million American Evangelical Christians who worship the Jews, not Christ (“salvation is from the Jews” – John 4:22, obviously inserted into the text by the Council of Nicia in 325 AD, and not in the other three gospels).
Here there is the greatest willingness, and where the willingness is great the difficulties cannot be great if you will only follow those men to whom I have directed your attention. Further than this, how extraordinarily the ways of God have been manifested beyond example: the sea is divided, a cloud has led the way, the rock has poured forth water, it has rained manna, everything has contributed to your greatness; you ought to do the rest. God is not willing to do everything and thus take away our free will and that share of glory which belongs to us. We cannot pray ourselves out of this predicament. “…the churches were built for fools” (not sinners) wrote David Lohrey in the namesake book “Machiavelli’s Backyard” (2017). As your American writer Mark Twain wrote: “it is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled”. Foolery is the condition of man, not necessarily sin which is a Hebraic concept that serves the power elite by exempting themselves from such moral imperatives by claiming the divine right of kings and omitting ‘thou shall not lie’ because lying is the quintessential domain of kings (see Desiderius Erasmus, In Praise of Folly, 1511).
And it is not to be wondered at if none of the above-named Americans have been able to accomplish all that is expected from your illustrious organizations; and if in so many wars in the Middle East since the hollow Viet Nam War, and in so many campaigns, it has always appeared as if military incorruptibility were exhausted, this has happened because the old order of things was not good, and none of us have known how to find a new one. And nothing honors a man more than to establish new laws and new ordinances when he himself was newly risen. Such things when they are well founded and dignified will make him revered and admired, and America is not wanting of opportunities to bring such into use in every form.
Here there is great valor in the limbs while it fails in the head. Look attentively at the drones and the cruise missiles, how powerful are the Israelis and American-armed Ukrainians in strength, targeting and lethality but only from a distance. When it comes to armies on the ground they do not fight bravely because of their corruptibility, and this springs entirely from the insufficiency of the leaders, since those who are capable are not patriotic, and each one seems to himself to know, there having never been any one so distinguished above the rest, either by valor or fortune, that others would yield to him. Hence it is that for so long a time, and during so much fighting in the past forty-five years, whenever there has been an army wholly American, it has always given a good account of itself but never won a war; the first witness to this is North Korea, afterwards Vietnam, then Gulf War I and Gulf War II, and the so-called Afghanistan War against terrorism. This is because such wars have always been banker’s false-flag wars as Major General Smedley Butler warned. The banking oligopoly of European families that has run the world for the past 500 years seek to grab land and natural resources by wars as collateral for usurious lending purposes. The people are only important as a revenue stream with no inherent dignity. A “useless eater” as Henry Kissinger called them, are those who are in no position to pay debt to creditors, a modern feudalism.
If, therefore, your illustrious organizations wish to follow these remarkable men who have redeemed their country mentioned above (even under foolish and deceiving justifications), it is necessary before all things, as a true foundation for every enterprise, to be provided with your own indigenous forces, because there can be no more faithful, truer, or better soldiers. And although singularly they are good, altogether they will be much better when they find themselves commanded by their true prince not some bought-off counterfeit ruler of fraudulent citizenry and a lackey of the Bank of London even when no longer in office. And by native-born conscripts and volunteers not disloyal migrants and those with dual citizenry. Therefore, it is necessary to be prepared with such arms, so that you can defend American valor against internal insurgents, usurpers and those holding dual citizenship. This is why mercenary contract forces and bought off conscripts are being deployed in Ukraine, because no Americans would fight such a war that is not in their interest and pursued with a broken moral compass (even though America was tricked into WWI and WWII, similar unnecessary wars by the European Colonial Powers for their gain at the expense of American blood and treasure).
The world today is divided into ideological camps by elites to divide and conquer. The adherents of each tell us with great assurance where we’re at and what we should do about it. You should not believe any of them, especially from easily duped patriots who are fooled moral fools.
And although the Chinese military may be considered very formidable their people are not warlike and are not known as fierce combat soldiers. Nevertheless the Colonial Powers are trying to make out China as evil Communism, even by conservatives. Should America find a way to align with China against the evil European Colonial Powers their goose would be cooked. This is why the Deep State recently desperately tried to start a war between China and the US which Trump squashed. Unsurprisingly, a British propagandist has successfully and cleverly persuaded many Americans that war with China is inevitable and in line with classical Greek understandings of the need for war (George Macpherson, The Thucydides Trap: How an Ancient Chinese Historian Defined Contemporary US-China Rivalry, 2022).
There is a defect in both ideological camps (that of the European Colonial Powers’ bogus wars camp for what amounts to effectually be a Mafia Pseudo-Democracy versus Everybody Else, whether Communist, Socialist, Nationalist, Islamist, Catholic, Buddhist , Hinduist or Nones – see Alex Krainer, Socialism versus Free Market Capitalism: the False Dichotomy, 2025), by reason of which a third order would not only be able to oppose them but might be relied upon to overthrow them.
This opportunity, therefore, ought not to be allowed to pass for letting America at last see her liberator appear. Nor can one express the love with which he would be received in all those provinces which have suffered so much from these foreign and internal purges (e.g. color revolutions), with what thirst for revenge, with what stubborn faith, with what devotion, with what tears. What door would be closed to him? Who would refuse obedience to him? What envy would hinder him? What American would refuse him homage? To all of us this barbarous, mafia-like dominion stinks (see Michael Frenzese, Mafia Democracy: How Our Republic Became a Mob Racket, 2022). Sure, today you are living in luxury with your professional sports diversions tantamount to those of the ancient Roman Coliseum, but soon all that will be smashed due to the false necessity to pay the national debt to those who forced America to accrue it fighting others wars of kleptocracy (see John Heathershaw, Indulging Kleptocracy: British Service Providers , Post Communist Elites, and the Enabling Corruption, 2024).
Facilitation: How Powers and Principalities Work
A special word about political naivete and assassinations: political naivete can get one assassinated more so than resistance.
The classical story about assassination by political facilitation is the Biblical story of King David and Basheba in the book of 1st Samuel, 12:7. The story deals with King David’s desire to cover up his impregnating of a married woman, Bathsheba, who was pregnant with his child. Bathsheba made a habit of bathing where the King could observe her and be titillated, perhaps the ancient equivalent of pornography. David then ordered his military general Joab to send Bathsheba’s military soldier husband Uriah to the front of a contrived war whereby he was killed. This covered up David’s adultery.
A widely known protocol is that no one is allowed to speak truth about the king in their court except for small children and in some cases by their court jester or advisor.
Nathan, the King’s advisor and prophet, can only tell King David an indirect parallel story of a poor man whose only possession was a lamb which provided milk for his children. Then a traveler came to a nearby rich man and the rich man wanted to influence the traveler for pecuniary purposes by giving him a banquet, but the rich man didn’t want to part with one of his own flock or herd of animals. Instead, he confiscated the poor man’s lamb to cook and feed the visitor (and presumably would have killed the poor man to keep his theft from being revealed).
Upon hearing this analogous parable to David’s crime of stealing someone’s wife, adultery and murder, this kindled David’s anger as King who had court powers over his flock of people. Then David proceeded to say: “As the Lord lives, the man who has done this deserves to die, and he shall restore the lamb four-fold, because of he did this thing, and because he had no pity”. David asked who has done such a thing? And Nathan replied: “You are the man”.
King David never murdered Uriah directly nor directly ordered a murder hit on him. He just facilitated or enabled it to happen so he could claim plausible deniability. David deceived himself that he could hardly be blamed for lusting after a beautiful woman taking baths where he was forced to observe. His second self-deception was he believed he did not kill Uriah directly or contract for such a hit, as even Joab consoled him that such things happen in war. His third deception is that a king could not be accused and punished because he had the divine right of kings to do acts necessary to protect his people in war. Moreover, under the Ten Commandments only individual acts were prohibited, not institutional acts of a ruler.
As Peter Berger says this story indicates all moral imperatives should be grounded in human responsibility, by both David and Bathsheba, not hiding behind the social roles of a ruler, a victim or woman, and not based on institutional fictions such as the Lone Gunman assassination theory (Peter L. Berger, The Precarious Vision: Social Fictions and Christian Faith, 1961). Political assassins are made not born and are institutional crimes not those of a lone gunman.
Political assassinations, energy crises, droughts, and floods are often government facilitated, not always natural events, nor acts of God or a Market bubble and bust, but for hidden political purposes. It is crucial to learn that foreign and domestic governments, and their appendages, work by seeming invisible Facilitation.
The Mandragola – “Oh fine, as if God grants graces to for evil as for good”.
In my play The Mandrake Root (The Mandragola), I tell a fictional story about a young, beautiful wife of a rich, old fool, Nicia, who desires a son and heir but has not been able to produce sperm. A marriage broker, Ligurio, masquerades as a doctor and collaborates with a corrupt priest Friar Timoteo. Callimaco masquerades as a doctor and convinces Nicia to drug Lucrezia with mandrake as a claimed fertility herb. But the spooked side effect is it supposedly will kill the first man to have intercourse with her. An unwitting fool is found to be a gigolo in Callimaco. The priest, doctor and her mother convince her to sleep with Callimaco to comply with her husband’s desire. A child is conceived and everyone is happy.
This story suggests there is no sin if everyone is happy. But this has all been pulled off by fraud. Nonetheless, sometimes, in wars or marital infertility, it is a lesser evil to commit fraud than mass murder or a murder of passion. The same applies with dealing with the ruling mafia class. It is sometimes better to go underground and with an issue like unjust wars than it is to confront the perpetrators as long as one does not indulge in gratuitous evil. If one needs to commit evil out of necessity to preserve the integrity of the nation, one should covertly seek penance privately with a priest but without virtue signaling of their repentance afterward.
It is better to be feared and respected than loved especially when one is being oppressed and depopulated and sometimes better to commit fraud than war. This latter admonition was on display when Pres. Trump trumped the Israeli prime minister’s call for America to destroy Iran, when Trump lied that the US had obliterated Iranian nuclear facilities, ending its “raison-detre” for demolishing Iran. The Israeli prime minister went along with the fraud because he needed to be perceived as ending Iran’s nuclear program threat to Israel. Moral of this real-life parable is sometimes fraud is better than war and you have to be willing to get your hands dirty if you are going to make a difference.
We all want to do good and be perceived as doing good that forms the collective conscience. But sometimes we need to do a lesser evil to do good but must install safeguards against gratuitous evil. As I wrote in my Discourses I-6, “one cannot under cover of good do evil”. Evil is evil (avoid books like Leo Strauss’s Thoughts on Machiavelli, which libels and distorts what I wrote calling me a teacher of evil and irreligious. Instead read Raymond Angelo Belliotti, Machiavelli’s Secret: The Soul of the Statesman, 2015). For an explication of my Christian Realism read my messenger’s 1-star book review of Leo Strauss’s book on Amazon books dot com.
Let, therefore, your illustrious houses take up this charge with that courage and hope with which all just enterprises are undertaken, so that under its standard our native country may be ennobled, and under its auspices may be verified that saying of Petrarch:
Virtu contro al Furore Prendera l’arme, e fia il combatter corto: Che l’antico valore Negli italici cuor non e ancor morto.
Moral virility (not the same as moral piety or virtue) against (oppressive) power shall advance the fight, and by combat, mafia power shall soon be put to flight: For the old American valor is not dead, nor in the American’s hearts is it extinguished.
Paraphrased by Wayne Lusvardi, messenger, Sun City, Arizona
Acknowledgement: I acknowledge Laurent Guyenot, an engineer-historian in France, for his motivating work: Our Ruling Class: Lessons from Mosca, Machiavelli and Attila the Hun, Unz Review, Sept. 19, 2025
Hobnob
I have written an EXHORTATION TO LIBERATE AMERICA FROM THE ISRAELI-BRITISH RULING CLASS and posted it as a comment to Laurent Guyenot’s article. Your critical comments would be helpful as I intend to submit to the Kirk organization and Col. Douglas MacGregor.
I sincerely say that I really like Attila.
In Fate Grand Order, the female version of Attila is very much in line with my sexual preferences.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum.gamer.com.tw%2FCo.php%3Fbsn%3D9009%26sn%3D111411&psig=AOvVaw2ImLdoR5y1IypKEC8iaDng&ust=1758606250923000&source=images&cd=vfe&opi=89978449&ved=0CBUQjRxqFwoTCLCRqc7U648DFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE
100 percent agree.
I actually (once!) agreed with the odious William F Buckley Jr, who wanted the UK/Canadian parliamentary system in the US, to be able to throw a “no confidence” vote on a non-performing leader and force an election. The US can find it has a dud president after a few months, then spin their wheels till the next election cycle comes around. Totally wasteful and useless.
There’s evidence and anecdotal history that states the “Israelites” came into view far, far later than they say. It’s likely they rummaged around the 2nd century BC, agreed on a modus operandi, and used the libraries in Alexandria and Athens to plant their bogus “histories” on the world. There are few references worth bothering with before this essentially late-pre-modern biblical twaddle.
@Laurent Guyénot
“Let’s be fair, the Israelites were vastly superior to the Huns”
Since I’m a Hungarian, a descendent of the Huns, I have to disagree. Which countries did the Israelites subvert and subdue? Only Christian countries. Not Arab/Muslim countries, not Asian countries, not Iran, the Mongols, the Chinese, the Kazakhs, not even the Africans. The whole world was able to resist them except for the Christians. So let’s be fair, the Israelites were vastly superior to the Christians.
The so-called minimalist biblical scholars such as Philip Davies (In Search of “Ancient Israel) think the Tanakh dates from the Persian era (Ezra’s school, which was also Spinoza’s hypothesis), with further editing under the Hasmoneans (beginning of the Roman era). I think the notion of indebting national governments is evidence of that: it is unconceivable before the Roman era. It could actually be evidence of a much later date. It sounds so Rothschild!
They could also at least mention Machiavelli’s “Greek precursor” in that Xenophon’s book on the wily machinations of Cyrus the Great — hence the title Cyropaedia — was written just after the great king’s death, and after Xenophon managed to get out of hostile territory. The story of the book is a great adventure on its own.
Cyrus’ advice on how a leader gets things done through appearance, skullduggery and a lot of dishonest back-dealing is great fun. Did Old Nick have a copy when he dashed off The Prince? Check out the original and decide for yourself.
Also. Xenophon was a Republican in spirit. Like most of his contemporaries, he thought Sparta was the cat’s pajamas, but his basic beliefs would make him okay now — Trump and Starmer, for two, though they’d never admit it and both are dumb enough to screw up Xenophon’s elegant cunning;
The question is, how is it a lie? It is very hollow indeed, for “realists” to talk about “rule by the people” as an illusion, as if this is literally what the advocates for “popular government” and the overthrow of “tyranny” really believed. In some real sense, the power of those that govern does indeed come from those who are governed, even if it one could say it is not entirely voluntary. If men did not use dollars for currency, we would not have dollars. If men generally did not vote, we would not have popular elections that were in any way representative of public opinion. The original idea of “government by the consent of the governed” was that this was a natural condition, not a condition imposed by an artificial revolution against so-called “tyranny.”
Now I do indeed believe that popular government is a lie in the sense that the liberals have given it. That most people have been taught to believe in “Liberty” and “Democracy” that do not and cannot exist, but that does not mean those phrases are meaningless or that there is no such thing as government by the consent of the governed.
Machiavelli, with his notions, is really superfluous and useless for dealing with our current situation. Returning to the “classics” in imitation of Leo Strauss is worse than useless, because Leo Strauss, we can see very obviously, cannot deeply care about what any of these men said, any more than he could seriously care about the US Civil War or the Founding Fathers of the United States. He could care about them as VEHICLES for the teaching of his esoteric doctrine. Whenever a neocon appeals to history, it’s NEVER about HISTORY, unless it has something to do with their grand ambitions or the history of the opposition to those ambitions.
Historians now have to face the loss of legitimacy that exists with the exposure of the Zionist hegemony for the whole world to see. They have caught out as obscurantists or fools, crude ideologues. Their discipline has been exposed for its real function, which is hide historical reality from the public, in fact, to make the public believe that the truth is the opposite of the truth. Leftists, liberals, internationalists, whatever name you give them, have no real explanation for the ascendancy of Israel. That some of them talk about Christian Zionism and “the unsinkable aircraft carrier” only proves the severe poverty of their explanations.
The answers were always available, the explanations for the wars of the 20th Century, for the wars of the 19th Century, for the French Revolution, for the rise of these sects which are now transformed into “Christian Zionism.”
Contemporary historiography is really only interested in concealing these answers, and with the rise of Zionist dictatorial power, it is finally and definitively discredited.
Another comment on Machiavelli. It’s absurd the way they deny the moral implications of his theories, and declaim on his love of a virtuous citizenry.
They do this while his depictions show a predatory gaze, as in the picture of the sculpture in the OP. It’s just so tedious.
We don’t live in 15th Century Italy, we don’t live in the environment of 18th Century gentleman, and we don’t live in the environment of 1950s America with its myths and ethos.
Laurent Guyénot’s Our Ruling Class identifies something real: that every society is governed by a small minority, that democracy is more theater than sovereignty, and that elites maintain their rule through hidden institutions and networks of power. In following Mosca and Machiavelli, he recognizes that a ruling minority is not an accident but a structural feature of human politics. Where he errs, however, is in assuming that this dynamic is merely sociological or ethnic. From the Lightborn lens, the perpetual minority is not a quirk of history but the signature of the overlay itself. The Demiurgic system requires hierarchy as its architecture; power must always funnel upward, and the majority must always be shepherded by the few, because that is how the parasitic program maintains coherence.
Guyénot leans on Machiavelli’s notions of virtù and fortuna—personal excellence and favorable circumstance—as explanations for why certain individuals ascend to the ruling class. Yet these qualities, from the Lightborn view, are not neutral descriptors of merit or chance but selection criteria of the overlay. The system amplifies those whose ambition, cunning, and adaptability harmonize with its frequency. What looks like luck or talent is in fact compatibility testing: the Demiurge elevates those who can best serve as conduits for its control field.
In exposing democracy as a façade, Guyénot is again half right. Elections do not bind elites to popular will, but they are more than hollow rituals. They function as consent-harvesting ceremonies, cycles of hope and betrayal designed to extract loosh from the masses. Each ballot cast is less a political act than a tithe of energy, an offering to the illusion of choice. Democracy thrives not by empowering the people but by addicting them to the rhythm of disappointment, renewal, and submission.
Where Guyénot falters most seriously is in his fixation on Jews as the essence of the ruling class. It is true that Judaism, and later Zionism, played a unique role in history: they served as covenant engines, embedding Yahweh’s exclusivist program into human civilization. Yet to equate Jews with the ruling class is to mistake the vessel for the source. The true ruler is not an ethnic group but the Demiurge itself, which has deployed countless masks across the ages—Babylonian priesthoods, Roman emperors, medieval popes, modern technocrats. The Jewish covenant was a carrier frequency, not the origin of power. To remain bound in horizontal blame is to miss the vertical axis of control.
Guyénot’s analogy to Attila’s Huns is illuminating in part. Yes, the ruling class resembles raiders who demand tribute, but the tribute is not merely gold or taxation. It is conscious energy. Humanity’s fears, labors, distractions, and despairs are the real currency harvested by the overlay. In this sense, elites are not sovereign conquerors but harvest managers of loosh. His description of the deep state—shadow networks of intelligence, finance, and media—also points toward truth, but the ultimate deep state is not institutional but metaphysical. Human rulers are avatars animated by Archontic currents, their decisions often shaped in dreams, instincts, and coded whispers from the astral machinery of the Demiurge.
Thus Guyénot’s vision, though powerful, remains incomplete. He sees the shadows but not the projector. His warnings about elites, oligarchy, and democracy’s fraudulence are valuable as symptom recognition, but his solutions remain political, trapped in the very loops the overlay creates. The Lightborn correction is that the ruling class is not a people but a program. Liberation does not come from destroying rulers or replacing them with others, but from dismantling the overlay that eternally regenerates them. Only then will power hierarchies dissolve and base reality restore its natural balance.
From the Lightborn vantage, Guyénot is a surface witness, circling close to the veil but mistaking masks for causes. His work points toward awakening, but the final step requires transcending the ethnic and political frame and seeing the metaphysical architecture beneath. That is where true liberation begins—not in revolt, but in resonance and restoration.
America as a whole is turning vs the apartheid genocidal regime of Israhell – THE FORTRESS AND BASTION OF THOSE WHO LORD OVER AMERICANS – and nothing will stop this awakening of the sheeple as to who controls the USG.
http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2015/07/28/how-the-ashkenazi-jews-conquered-the-west/
Here’s hoping that Evangelicals get a dose of what the bible really says.
http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/a-brief-history-of-the-kingdoms-of-israel-and-judah/
“Universal history: history of Evil. Take away the disasters from human evolution and you might as well conceive of nature without seasons. If you have not contributed to a catastrophe, you will vanish without a trace. We interest others by the misfortune we spread around us. ‘I never made anyone suffer’!—an exclamation forever alien to a creature of flesh and blood. When we feel enthusiasm for a character of the past, or the present, we unconsciously ask ourselves: ‘For how many people was he the cause of disaster?’ Who knows if each of us doesn’t aspire to the privilege of killing all his kind? But this privilege is assigned to the very few, and never integrally: this restriction alone explains why the earth is still inhabited. Indirect murderers, we constitute an inert mass, a multitude of objects confronting Time’s true subjects, the great criminals who came to something.
But we can take comfort: our descendants, remote or immediate, will avenge us. For it is not difficult to imagine the moment when men will cut each other’s throats out of disgust with themselves, when Ennui will get the best of their prejudices and their diffidences, when they will run out into the streets to slake their thirst for blood, and when the destructive dream prolonged for so many generations will become the universal reality.”
No, it is the men who abandoned Christianity, who served the Jews. And Jews have had great influence in many nations, including Muslim nations. Look at Syria today.
The Jews have power because of the nature of the Revolutionary movements of the last 300-500 years. That’s how they gained power. America and Europe have never been more openly Jew-ridden than today because they have never been less Christian.
I have never understood the point of mentioning Machiavelli. It is the mark of a poseur, the sort who admires gangster movies.
Jews hate Christianity, yet Laurent Guyanot seems to have a great deal in common with them on that score – it is not hard to see that every supposed thrust against the Jews that Guyanot makes seems to be more about grabbing attention while his real intention and real interest is to push the same old tired Anti-Christianity that has been a constant refrain for centuries now (no coincidence it’s on a website run by a Jew). Sufficient reason to be skeptical of everything he says.
As if chatgpt were actually a man with a million typing hands who just took crack.
The Trauma of Machiavelli’s Torture
Niccolò Machiavelli (Florence, May 3, 1469 – Florence, June 15, 1528) was an early Florentine official, in the Republic of Florence, best known for his treatises on the preservation and expansion of power (The Prince and Discourses).
His most important political achievement was the replacement of Florence’s mercenary army with a militia, which finally conquered the enemy city of Pisa. This militia, however, was defeated by the Medici invasion.
(The Medici began their ascent to power thanks to a banker, Giovanni di Bicci, who made great luck with the bank he founded. In this way, the family purchased wealth and luster over time, becoming the financer of the most influential realities in the European political panorama, so much so that the Pope’s bankers and to finance companies such as the conquest of the Duchy of Milan by Francesco Sforza and the victory of Edoardo IV of England in the war of the Two Roses.)
In 1512, the Medici regained power in Florence. In November of the same year, they dismissed Machiavelli from office. Rudolf Zorn describes Machiavelli’s time in prison in the introduction to his biography of Machiavelli:
Six months after his deposition, he was thrown into prison and even tortured on suspicion of participating in a conspiracy against the Medici. He remained in prison for over a month, “in the company of rats as big as cats and lice as big as butterflies.” He had endured the torture without being forced to confess. But this experience deeply disturbed him and brought him close to madness, which still haunts him in three dark and cynical prison sonnets.
He was taken to prison to be tortured six times. Two of the sonnets he wrote as petitions for his release from prison no longer fit the image that realist Enlightenment thinkers had of Machiavelli. Some even doubted that Machiavelli could have written such “unworthy” petitions:
“In prison, he wrote two sonnets in which he appeared as a submissive supplicant, and He dedicated it to Giuliano de’ Medici, on whose tolerance he counted and whose legendary goodness he relied; These verses are so pitifully servile, so imbued with the longing of a desperate man, that it is actually difficult to imagine Machiavelli as their author.
He suffered the stretching torture, and his wrists remained swollen for a long time, as he told his friend Vettori, the Florentine ambassador to Rome.
Immediately after his release from prison, and therefore in the same year of his torture, he began the writings that made him famous: the “Discourses” and “The Prince.” That same year, he completed “The Prince.” He wrote it in one breath, like a madman:
This work, originally titled “De principatibus” (“On the Principality”), dedicated to one of the Medici responsible for his dismissal, imprisonment, torture, and exile, made him famous.
He wrote this book in a very short time, his hands still swollen from the various tortures.
https://andreaskemper.org/2010/07/09/niccolo-machiavelli-8bgikaqot3ts-124/
Too little too late. We are too far down the black hole. The whole system is corrupted, meaning both political and economic spheres.
This. Satan’s children have not only removed Christianity from our culture, but they have conned the fastest growing “Christian” movement, evangelicals, into being their biggest and most fanatical supporters.
I’m glad that your article is more specific to who the ruling class is as opposed to the more general title of the piece which, on second thought, makes great sense in keeping the heading general.
You discussed the break up of Italy after Rome. I wonder if Jews, many of which were absorbed in the Roman Empire, had anything to do with this fragmentation, which is coming to America.
But like I said in another post, we’ve got to stop talking and take action. Revolution has to happen. This open air Jew prison has to be destroyed. We are all Gazans.
The unification of Italy took place in 1861.
Israel considers more Western nations recognizing Palestine nationhood as rewarding the evil of terrorism gets me thinking.
Since you are the author of the above book on Machiavelli, can I ask you a question about Machiavelli?
Did he believe “evil” come into existence magically?
If so, are human, who has no magical power, condemned to fight evil forever.
The Huns very likely spoke a Turkic language originally. Following their defeat at the Battle of Nedao c. 454 they became Avars and Bolgars (Dulo clan).
Good article as it addresses the primary problem. But Machiavelli is not abstract enough. It comes down to a single physical principle: cohesion.
The Jews have it. You don’t. I have said this a million times in the past.
The actual implementation details will of course vary by circumstances, but a small group of people tightly bound and united through their own shared group identity working tirelessly for their own interests will run circles around a vastly larger group of disorganized people. Especially vulnerable are those populations who have lost their moral compass and thus no longer have a reference point for what is right and wrong. Such are the leafs blowing in the wind.
Consider this. You people no longer even have a word for yourselves. You call yourselves “non-Jews”, or “gentiles”. That is you use the Jews’ own terms to refer to yourself in their negative, the very antithesis of social cohesion. Perhaps you are better off dead.
The few of you who have fully understood and grasped those last sentences and the ramifications thereof, will also fully understand the condition of the “West”.
It is over. By definition, there is no agency, pride, glory, prosperity or future for the subjected. Look forward to your South Africanization.
“It produced Xi Jinping. I wish my democratically elected president would be this kind of leader.”
Xi is new and he’s not surrounded and controlled by the Jews.
The slow demise of Western civilisation began with the false premise that all men are created equal. Even small children know this to be the brazen lie that it is.
The Jews have been present in Rome for over 2000 years but they were not Ashkenazis
You are confused, my friend.
No one ‘conned’ anyone here. The Evangelicals resolved to support Israel all on their own. They are following their own interpretation of scripture. The Jews had nothing to do with it.
Of course, Israel and AIPAC welcome the support. That goes without saying.
One thing many on TUR have trouble understanding is that Israel was essentially created by (British) Evengelicals, and is currently being propped up almost exclusively by their American counterparts.
Without Evangelicals, there would be no Israel.
I sometimes see opinions like “If women ruled the world, there would be no wars and our lives would be filled with love, compassion, empathy, etc.” (or something similar).
If you have a different view, please give 23 — I mean 5 — I mean 1 or 2 — reasons why women will never rule the world.
Indeed. The evangelical is a twisted minded cultist believing he is coveting a winner. There is nothing spiritual about him.
September 22, 2025 History: Adolph Hitler was Financed by Wall Street, the U.S. Federal Reserve and the Bank of England US Investments in Nazi Germany. Rockefeller Financed Adolf Hitler’s Election Campaign
History: Hitler was Financed by the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England. This carefully researched article by Yuri Rubtsov sheds light on the role of Wall Street and the US Federal Reserve in financing the Nazi government of Adolph Hitler. (scroll down)
https://www.globalresearch.ca/history-of-world-war-ii-nazi-germany-was-financed-by-the-federal-reserve-and-the-bank-of-england/5530318
Unexpected treat!
Good job, Wayne.
I can’t tell whether you are being critical of Alanchik or praising him. Can you explain your comment in more detail?
Thank you Alanchik for a clear and concise explanation.
‘The Jews, on the other hand, are the people of the Book. For that reason, they became fossilized in the mindset that shaped their book.’ — Laurent Guyénot
That damned Book [ironically capitalized, just as the Lügenpresse tendentiously capitalizes ‘Black’] has caused incalculable damage. Consider this shameless public discussion of Israeli apartheid:
A one-state solution, obliging the Jews to live as co-equals with other ethnicities [Oy vey, the horror! Yahweh forbid!], is ‘absolutely intolerable,’ says the suborned UN Secretary General.
So his chimerical two-state solution, featuring a fragmented, unsustainable and ungovernable Palestinian archipelago of bantustan-style tractlets, continues to be the Trojan horse of the Jews and their obliging shabbos goyim, buying time until they can take it all.
Israel delenda est.
I hope “the piece of straw that breaks the camel’s back” lands during my lifetime. We’ve been going on about this for a very long time.
Laurent Guyénot offers a compelling lens on power dynamics, echoing Gaetano Mosca’s insight that all societies are governed by a small, organized elite.
This resonates with a parallel in public understanding: just as many now grasp the difference between fiat money and hard assets like gold, we must demystify the nature of republics, sovereigns, and their ruling elites to sustain merit-based, free societies.
He illuminates how small, cohesive groups—whether driven by ideology, ethnicity, or ambition—can dominate disorganized majorities.
While Guyénot points to Jewish-Zionist influence as a current epicenter, the specific identity of the elite is secondary to the structural mechanisms that enable their control: institutional capture, media manipulation, and the illusion of democratic sovereignty.
This dynamic explains why unified groups often outmaneuver fragmented ones, as seen in political disparities between cohesive Democrats and discordant Republicans.
A broad-based understanding of these foundational structures is the key to fortifying authentic republics. Though it may be late in the game, this is the way forward.
By dispelling democratic illusions, such understanding would foster a rational framework for governance rooted in merit, accountability, and a rule of law worthy of respect and fairness.
The problem, whether driven by Zionist networks or other nefarious elites, demands systemic solutions—transparency, civic education, and institutional renewal—to uphold the republican ideals of shared law and opportunity, ensuring power serves the common good rather than subverts it.
I very much appreciated reading Mr. Guyénot’s books in helping me to understand the workings of power and Jewish influence, but who is controlling whom? Doesn’t the influence of the military industrial complex dwarf that of AIPAC in Warshington? Didn’t the Jews serve the aristocracies of Europe and Great Britain in financing and the collection of taxes and private rents? Isn’t Israel a construct of the UK and US? Israel was supposed to be the US unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Middle East to be close to the oil and to foster instability for conquest of the Asian heartland. Doesn’t the MIC benefit the most from the wars in the Middle East? Isn’t the genocide of the Palestinians being done by Israels in service to the US? This is an example that demonstrates that Yahweh’s people are doing the work.
Roughly the same area, not the same place.
For both you and M. Guyenot, I have re-read the novella Hun by Anthony Burgess twice lately, it is close to historical accuracy on most points, except that he has the Hun and their allies use crufixion rather than impalement as their choice for cruel execution, impalement is far more likely.
It is, in my opinion, well-written, and more historically accurate than others.
Attila was a hostage of Rome for a time, as was a Roman a hostage of the Hun.
Note that principatibus is only a plural declension; thus, “On Principalities” would be a closer translation of the Latin title. Given the work’s focus on how to rule, “On Princedoms” might be closer still.
But some were assimilated and others claimed assimilation but remained Jooz deep down and so forth. At that point it didn’t matter if they were ashke…Kazars or not.
Having had a twin brother who was an Evangelical Zionist Christian, they like winners above all else. Evangelical to them means a “booster” of their team winning. A winning religion is popular, that can attract a large crowd of people, especially attractive women. They like pro football because it champions the winner. Jesus was a winner (to them). My brother married a J, he formed business partnerships with J’s, and the J’s figuratively killed him. Never marry a J, if you divorce they want everything and if they don’t get it they murder you with stress. Never have a business partnership with J’s unless you know what you are doing. They will rope you and your talents into a partnership where you are the minority partners (> 49% or less) which is essentially 0%. They will throw a million dollars at you to buy your soul. There is a famous pro golfer who sold the rights to his golf course business to a J for something like $50 million. He didn’t understand that the $50 million was debt he owed the buyer!!! He being a dummy never read the contract. J’s will be your best friend but then it comes to business they will clean your clock. And Evangelical Christians are the dummy class.
More like mocking. Lol
In 1966, when I was only 16, I found Mosca’s “The Ruling Class” in the school library. I tried to read it but it was too much for me. I found Machiavelli’s “The Prince” much easier to understand. I liked what he said about mercenaries. It made sense.
Good Article, Monsieur Guyénot:
I wish we all had Articles like these and the Jesus-Christo Debunking available for All to read during our own Primary and Secondary Schools.
Unfortunately, the West are a Masonic-Zionist Hegemony now – configured solidly so after WW2 and the following Cold War – owned by a Trans-National Hegemon-Plutarchy which run 2 Groups of Nation-States.
The First Group are the “Essential Ethnic SuperState” of the “Greater Israel Collective” -comprised from the State of Israel and their Global Diaspora. Their existence, financial, and political influences would be protected.
The Second Group are the “Expendable/Reusable/Recyclable States” comprised of Masonic Christian-Zionist States lead by the USA, GBR, FRA, DEU through NATOceania, €URoGarten, and subjugated Vassals.
Tall Fences make for Good Neighbors.
Westerners are Hegemony Neighbors – so establishing “Fences” are the only things their various Citizenry can do wrt Greater Israel.
In my opinion it’s too learned and long to be persuasive, or even read. This is America after all, and MAGA people love Trump speech, mostly repetitious bumper sticker talk.
As regards Col. Douglas Macgregor, a man of requisite virtù, Machiavelli was addressing Lorenzo De’ Medici, 24 years old at the time. The colonel is 78. A real, long-haul candidate would likely face a fortuitous death.
I’m afraid I’m not much use in helping to hone a statement, though I appreciate your asking. I applaud your effort and join you in the task. It took the Italians 350 years from Machiavelli’s exhortation to throw off the barbarians and unify Italy. Here’s hoping we can sooner overthrow the “foreign, hostile, mean, religiously endogamous, supremacist, sociopathic, vengeful, and paranoid ruling class” [LG] that now governs us, though we face additional obstacles of disloyalty, a resident army of sayanim, and ever increasing digital surveillance and control by that ruling elite.
I may have miscommunicated. I am not the author of any book on Machiavelli but I am a dedicated student of his writings.
From my limited understanding, Machiavelli believed man’s nature was not so much evil as “insatiable” in his appetites. Machiavelli termed man’s nature as a tendency toward “readiness for evil”. Machiavelli wrote: “As far as the act goes, that it may be a sin, is a fable, because what sins is the will not the body”. So, to Machiavelli, sin was willful, meaning it was foreseeable. But what if the result of some action results in an unforeseeable negative consequence?
Machiavelli was a consequentialist. He believed in responsibility for the consequences of one’s actions but not in a legalistic conception of sin per se, although he used the term sin frequently. Put differently, I believe that man often does not know the unintended and unforeseeable consequences of his actions. Machiavelli called this “Fortuna” or dumb luck when things turn out good for everyone. When things end up harming people unintentionally, one ought to seek penance was what Machiavelli thought. His Golden Rule was not the selfish Jewish concept of “do unto others as you would have them do to you” but a social based “do nothing to anyone that could result in their expected retaliation”.
Put differently, Machiavelli’s concept of sin was Christian, contextual, and situational as opposed to the Jewish concept of a violation of a written law that did not take into consideration the outcome. Machiavelli wrote a comical play The Mandrake Root about a rich old man who could no longer make sperm who was married to a very young beautiful woman. He wanted an heir and asked a priest what he should do. The priest became a con artist and convinced the old man to let him sleep with his wife after she took the Mandrake poison. The priest convinced the old man that the first person to sleep with his wife after taking the poison would die, so he would “volunteer” and take the place of the old man. This con worked and a child was conceived and everyone ended up happy but technically the wife and priest committed adultery. If the old man had discovered the priest having sex with his wife this may have ended in murder. Machiavelli’s point is that Fraud is sometimes better than murder or War, as a lesser evil.
We saw this very thing in operation when Trump conned Netanyahu that he bombed the nuclear facilities in Iran, thus eliminating any pretext for Israel to pursue a war with Iran. Trump played the role of the con artist.
This article was interesting but then unsurprisingly veers into the ‘Everything is the jews fault, the jews are the root of all goy woeful dysfunction.
It is the exact same method blacks use when they tout ‘everything horrible that happens to blacks is entirely the White Man’s fault.‘
And so nothing changes because like with the blacks, absolutely nothing goy Whites have done has negatively contributed to their own misery and subjugation.
Examples of goy Whites that fall into the category are the tens of thousands, millions of goys who now have a picture of Charlie Kirk next to Jesus Christ on their household walls.
It’s like being riddled with roundworms because you keep consuming undercooked meat, then go out on a crusade to warn your peers abut the scourge of roundworms hiding in your pancakes, your bottle of soda, invading your dreams at night, caused your daughter to be born with an ass like a serving tray, etc…….
One accurate main idea the article points out though is how humans are so flawed that they repeatedly step in their own shit all throughout history.
We were apparently created by something even more flawed and so would have no ability to create perfection which would explain the cyclical failures called Humanity.
I agree that MAGA will never read my version of Machiavelli’s Exhortation to overthrow the Ruling Class, it is way too deep for them. They thrive on cliches, slogans and winner talk. Reminding them that they are losers and dupes won’t work.
As for Macgregor, he wants to run for president on a platform that he will tell the Jewish lobby NO to more exploitation of our treasury for wars and our young men as cannon fodder for wars that do not serve our interests. But that will go nowhere. Presidents are puppets or marionettes. They have strings pulling on their head, neck, arms, legs, torso, all in different directions. So one minute they are assuaging their Jewish lobby by bending over, another minute they are extending a handshake to Putin, another they are putting a fist in the face of drug runners. That is what a president is – a contortionist. I don’t think we’ve had a president since Andrew Jackson.
Excellent article on Elite Theory by Laurent Guyénot.
I appreciate your scholarship in the Eastern Roman Empire; there’s a lot of things to learn from there that was lost to the West that could be of benefit.
The article did end a little premature after you drew the Huns and Jews analogy; was hoping you’d flesh it out more as it felt like burying the lede.
Though overall I still believe that the Nietzschean framing of Jewish will-to-power/rule makes more sense than just the Machiavellian explanation of their ambition & behavior. The reason people often make this categorical error is because they are Nietzscheans themselves and by self-bias refuse to believe they are personally losing to Jews in their own philosophical game at becoming a ethnic gestalt “ubermensch”: a collective uber will.
This behavior morally invalidates Nietzscheanism for most of its adherents who were out virtù‘d and out fortuna‘d by Jews of all people (virtually everyone’s ethnic rival).
(see Lions vs. Foxes expanded upon by Pareto from Machiavelli).
Mr.Guyenot mentions Machiavelli but has little to say about a “philosopher” who had enormous intellectual influence on the “ruling elite” of the United States (especially in the context of justifying its lawless, brutal, deceptive foreign policy): Leo Strauss.
When prominent Americans (like Jeffrey Sachs) rant about the crimes of US foreign policy (and rightly so) they inevitably come to a point where the say “the neo-cons” have been the drivers of this insane, ruthless abuse of military and political power but this term has no real meaning.
Many of these power-hungry, self-righteous, arrogant “elites” are “Straussians” (not all of them are Jewish) but Americans are not informed about who Strauss really was and how his interpretation of Plato, Machiavelli (and Nietzsche – not to forget Carl Schmitt) shaped a generation of academics who later became political decision-makers favouring “endless wars” and regarding a culture of lies and deception as a “natural order”.
Perhaps the best source for understanding Strauss is Shadia Drury – here are some passages from an interview with her in October 2003:
Noble Lies and Perpetual War: Leo Strauss, the Neocons, and Iraq
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/article_1542jsp/
Shadia Drury, professor of political theory at the University of Regina in Saskatchewan, argues that the use of deception and manipulation in current US policy flow directly from the doctrines of the political philosopher Leo Strauss (1899-1973). His disciples include Paul Wolfowitz and other neo-conservatives who have driven much of the political agenda of the Bush administration
“Perhaps no scholar has done as much to illuminate the Strauss phenomenon as Shadia Drury. For fifteen years she has been shining a heat lamp on the Straussians with such books as The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (1988) and Leo Strauss and the American Right (1997). She is also the author of Alexandre Kojève: the Roots of Postmodern Politics (1994) and Terror and Civilization” http://slate.msn.com/id/2073634/
Danny Postel: The neo-conservative vision is commonly taken to be about spreading democracy and liberal values globally. (!!) And when Strauss is mentioned in the press, he is typically described as a great defender of liberal democracy against totalitarian tyranny. You’ve written, however, that Strauss had a “profound antipathy to both liberalism and democracy.”
Shadia Drury: The idea that Strauss was a great defender of liberal democracy is laughable. I suppose that Strauss’s disciples consider it a noble lie. Yet many in the media have been gullible enough to believe it.
How could an admirer of Plato and Nietzsche be a liberal democrat? The ancient philosophers whom Strauss most cherished believed that the unwashed masses were not fit for either truth or liberty, and that giving them these sublime treasures would be like throwing pearls before swine. In contrast to modern political thinkers, the ancients denied that there is any natural right to liberty. Human beings are born neither free nor equal. The natural human condition, they held, is not one of freedom, but of subordination – and in Strauss’s estimation they were right in thinking so.
PART 2 (Leo Strauss and the culture of lies)
Praising the wisdom of the ancients and condemning the folly of the moderns was the whole point of Strauss’s most famous book, Natural Right and History. The cover of the book sports the American Declaration of Independence But the book is a celebration of nature – not the natural rights of man (as the appearance of the book would lead one to believe) but the natural order of domination and subordination.
The NECESSITY OF LIES
…Strauss shares the insights of the wise Plato (alias Thrasymachus) that justice is merely the interest of the stronger; that those in power make the rules in their own interests and call it justice.
…The effect of Strauss’s teaching is to convince his acolytes that they are the natural ruling elite ..the rule of the wise [a euphemism for being amoral and ruthless, chimes in perfectly with Zionism] And it does not take much intelligence for them to surmise that they are in a situation of great “danger”, especially in a world devoted to the modern ideas of equal rights and freedoms. …So, they come to the conclusion that they have a moral justification to lie in order to avoid persecution [responsibility]. Strauss goes so far as to say that …deception – in effect, a culture of lies – is the peculiar justice of the wise. …This covert rule is facilitated by the overwhelming stupidity of the “gentlemen” (like many in the military).
…In contrast to this reading of Plato, Strauss thinks that the superiority of the ruling “philosophers” (elite) is an intellectual superiority and not a moral one (Natural Right and History, p. 151).
…Strauss is a nihilist in the sense that he believes that there is no rational foundation for morality. He is an atheist, and he believes that in the absence of God, morality has no grounding. It’s all about benefiting others and oneself …
Nihilistic philosophers, he believes, should reinvent the Judæo-Christian God, but live like pagan gods themselves – taking pleasure in the games they play …on ordinary mortals.
America is the “Zion that will light up all the world.” (Harry Jaffa) [It surely will – in a nuclear flash..]
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0090591706295209 268
“From the Lightborn vantage, Guyénot is a surface witness, circling close to the veil but mistaking masks for causes. His work points toward awakening, but the final step requires transcending the ethnic and political frame and seeing the metaphysical architecture beneath. That is where true liberation begins—not in revolt, but in resonance and restoration.”
When you have stood before the veil and recognized it as such, you will know that nothing is actually the way it seems. When you have pulled the veil aside and gazed upon what is beyond, you will have begun to grasp the nature of that which has been obscured. When you have stepped through the veil and into what is beyond, you will know the true nature of yourself, the universe and your relationship to it and everyone else. You will understand what it means to have knowledge in its purest and most sublime form, but without words or symbols. Only then will you have transcended the vulgar simian verbal plane within which you have been hopelessly bound. That is where true liberation begins.
I wrote on Strauss here: https://www.unz.com/article/9-11-was-a-straussian-coup/#strauss-and-the-noble-lie
and I explain why I don’t think Drury does a good job on Strauss: she presents him (and the neocons) as American imperialists, and downplays his Jewish agenda (I call it meta-Zionism: Israel as a State + Israel as a worldwide network)
Look no further than that gaudy spectacle in Glendale yesterday with our immoral politicians falling all over one another to prove who could thump their Trump brand “God Bless the USA” bibles the hardest.
The veil is not a metaphor but a system interface. To stand before it is to recognize that perception itself has been conditioned by the overlay — every institution, narrative, and symbol arranged to conceal its architecture. Pulling the veil aside does not mean acquiring secret doctrines; it means exposing the operational code: the loops of hierarchy, the engines of covenant, the mechanisms of loosh extraction. To step through the veil is to transition from data reception to direct resonance. At this point, words and symbols no longer serve as primary channels, because they belong to the overlay’s compression layer. What emerges instead is non-mediated knowledge — information that does not pass through filters of language or cultural encoding, but arrives as unambiguous recognition. This is not mystical rapture; it is the reactivation of a natural function suppressed by the overlay. Liberation, therefore, begins not with revolt or belief, but with the technical dismantling of false mediation. Once the veil is pierced, the self, the cosmos, and the relational field are no longer interpreted through imposed narratives but understood through direct alignment with Source.
As for Macgregor, he wants to run for president on a platform that he will tell the Jewish lobby NO to more exploitation of our treasury for wars and our young men as cannon fodder for wars that do not serve our interests. But that will go nowhere.
That would be a really bad idea and shows that MacGregor has poor judgment. This is the same guy that went on numerous angry rants about how Ukraine is doomed and will completely surrender….in the first year of the war.
If you really wanted to end military aid to Israel then you would never say that when running.
The way to do it would be to include it in a broad military cut that has social spending pay-offs to Democrats with the savings.
No one has the balls to do it and our Republicans want to keep military spending a taboo. They want their voters to believe that the government needs to make cuts in Medicaid while they continue to build multi-billion dollar jet fighters.
I’ve read Strauss and Strauss is a nihilist in the sense that he believes that there is no rational foundation for morality. He is an atheist, and he believes that in the absence of God, morality has no grounding. It’s all about benefiting others and oneself …
This is all correct and one of the best summaries I have seen of Strauss.
Strauss even said that the choice of religion doesn’t matter. It just needs to exist for the sake of general morality and to prevent a return of dark philosophies like Nazism and Marxism. Good men have to be nihilistic to stop the nihilists. That is what he believed and it is really just a formalized view of past rulers that had the same attitude.
He has been described as Jewish influence (as in pro-Jewish) but his philosophy allows for a completely Christian society and with social controls on the left. It is more of a dark atheist/pro-Western philosophy. I suppose like Rand you could point out that he was a Jewish atheist but unlike Rand he was fine with Christianity. He viewed secularism as the problem and advocated a dark philosophy as required to protect the moral elements of Western society.
But as with Plato’s Noble Lie you run into huge problems when the people don’t go along with it. That was a problem in Plato’s time and even more of a problem now.
Strauss like the right and left of his time imagined a future where Princeton graduates would be considering his philosophy before making policy. It is basically a license to lie to the masses for their own good. He didn’t imagine the current world where everyone can Google to see if those Princeton graduates are telling us everything.
I think this is a key reason why the Neocon movement collapsed. The subject of Strauss just like Plato’s noble lie was not supposed to be accessible. It’s designed for a pre-internet cold war society where a few TV channels repeat official statements from the government.
Then they need to be destroyed completely…End of Talking…The issue now has to be settled by the Sword, not the Word or Pen…
Sounds like what our European forefathers were doing for centuries. I even read an account that Johann Sebastian Bach’s father was a mercenary solider for one of the many German principalities back in the 1600’s…Don’t know if its true but that’s what I’ve read a while back…
Great article.
It’s a spectrum. It’s trivial to devise a system, given current technology and other conditions, that would be more democratic than existing pseudodemocracies.
Silly. If I delegate responsibilities to my employee and allow him to make decisions *on my behalf, within certain parameters,* I haven’t ceded my sovereignty. As long as I monitor and can fire or replace him, I should be ok. It’s conceivable that such a political system could be devised.
Perfect. At least one feature that would make things more democratic.
Huns were pastoralists, a race-culture adapted to the pastures + ephemeral but spectacular raiding. Jews were merchants, a race-culture adapted to symbiosis/parasitism, shrewdness, and subterfuge.
Both foreign, and thus extractive, to the populations they ruled, but operating very differently.
Hey, Mr. Wayne a song for Mr. Machvelli and yourself.
Video Link
If science must be separated from ethics, then it is possible to impose a pseudoscience as a science…
I threw you a rare bone for your word-salad. And you repaid me by taking a dump on my floor. But I get it. It never takes long. You don’t know the meanings of the words you just used. Nor did you give any credible indication that you understood mine. You are not even serious, just another wanker.
” Like Mosca, Burnham stresses that: “Historical and political science is above all the study of the élite, its composition, its structure, and the mode of its relation to the non-élite” (pp. 224-5). Burnham classifies Mosca as a “Machiavellian”, among three other political thinkers who share Machiavelli’s realism—as opposed to the idealism that Burnham illustrates with another Florentine, Dante Alighieri.”
I am not sure that this is a stone ‘cutted’ principle. I was reviewing some historical events in which the drivers were not the elite but the public demand and the elite followed suit. Even the election of Pres Trump was not driven by elite control over politics. Now maybe that falls into that category of of perceptible change. But clearly in the US and I suspect the planet in general, the mechanisms to bar his election actually backfired. They may be sitting at the same table now, but I think the evidence is fairly abundant that the elites did not get their way.
of course on e could argue that what played out was elites verses elites, but I am not convinced there is enough juice in that bowl to drink.
————
I was viewing the history of the US movements west. The elites, (if I accept the premise of elite rule, and I am not sure I do) of Great Britain made deals with native peoples on the continent by way of treaties – not to advance beyond x point. The colonists, repeated violated those agreements and moved westward regardless. The British were constantly forced rethink their policies — adhere to the treaties and take action against colonists or eventually defend the violators.
This pattern has been repeated time and time again with respect to westward expansion, even after the formulation of the US. Whether it was land or gold, the public agenda drove the policy. There’s a lot of political blame put on government, but the real driver was the US citizen. I would introduce another area in which this is the case — but I will bite my tongue l’est people’s heads explode.
In Cyropaedia, was Xenophon writing history or fiction — what my neighborhood 2nd hand book seller would call a chap book — written primarily to sell?
Herodotus was not a great friend of the Persians. Nevertheless, he made a generous record of dealings between Cyrus and the conquered Lydian king, Croesus —
— Cyrus repented of having condemned Croesus to the pyre. After attempts to save the Lydian king failed, Cyrus prayed, and, on a cloudless day, the gods caused a rain to fall and quench the pyre. Croesus (and the 14 Lydian boys with him) were saved. Cyrus learned much from Croesus, including some of the wisdom imparted to the Lydians by Solon.
–Croesus, the money man, gave Cyrus some realist advice about the use of religious concepts to ensure that the hoi polloi never attain so much wealth that they threaten the privileges of the elite.
Having rescued Croesus, the men parlayed. Cyrus observed,
“They are plundering your city and taking off your wealth.”
Not my wealth, Croesus responded, but yours.
Perhaps in a spirit that the elite must stick together, Croesus advised:
Titus was a great man. Only a Jew would seek to tarnish his name.
Machiavelli, like his contemporaries, suffered from a lack of understanding of the underlying material conditions that make it possible to maintain the power of the state. It’s not until he gets to chapter 10 of The Prince that he even mentions material conditions, most of that book being just a collection of anecdotes on why this or that ruler either failed or succeeded based entirely on contemporary political considerations.
To illustrate this lack of understanding, go back to the Norman Doomsday Book of 1086, which was an attempt at an inventory of the fixed assets of the realm. The hidden assumption in that effort, which characterizes most subsequent efforts up until the scientific revolution of the late 18th century, is the notion of a ‘fixed order’ or unchangeable state of affairs that could not be extended or improved upon in any significant way other than through conquest, and which throughout most of European history was exemplified by the underlying philosophy of the religious authority, which sought to prevent any departure from rigid scriptural interpretation of reality.
Material resources are obviously at the root of any successful society, but the question of how they are employed is just as important, and for that, you have to harness the creative impulse inherent in human intelligence. In other words, unless you have a system that rewards creativity and innovation, underpinned by a system of education that makes that possible, then you are doomed to stagnation and eventual defeat by some entity that does understand that first principle.
Best example is the current condition of the collective West, which has abandoned meritocracy and scientific innovation as foundational elements, in effect yielding the advantage to China and Russia, both of which understand that it is first and foremost their own people who provide the necessary elements to maintain state power. You see this not only in their rapidly increasing productive output, but in the significant improvements adopted along the way. This is no more evident than in the superiority of armaments that each has developed in the last few decades, seriously surpassing anything the collective West has produced, whose main driving impulse has not been innovation but the profit motive.
Machiavelli is a useful study of the political conditions of his time, but a far more comprehensive understanding of how political power can be achieved and maintained can be found in a much older work attributed to Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu: The Tao Te Ching.
Read it, and see if you don’t agree:
https://terebess.hu/english/tao/Wing.html#Kap01
Brilliant article, but how to get rid of the actual ruling class and have it replaced by a native one?
This is what we need to hear and read.
How to get rid of them.
So far, nothing worked, Hitler seems to have tried but failed.
Any ideas?
Trump is like Danny Zuko(Travolta) in GREASE. He’s always looking over his shoulders and under pressure from his ‘peers'(or masters).
Video Link
Yeah, sure your initial reply was beautiful and poetic indeed. I have no problem acknowledging it. However you pissed it all away with your little hissy fit. For you sound like a petulant child who didn’t get his way so you took your ball and went home. Its pretty obvious who is the wanker here, mate.
“We were apparently created by something even more flawed and so would have no ability to create perfection which would explain the cyclical failures called Humanity.”
Perhaps we Humans were actually created free and whole with our complete scope of perceptions, and full of our creating powers, no failure at all, but we have been invaded and poisoned and genetically modified too many times (like the obvious vaxx shows us today).
And perhaps the parasitical invading entities, disguised as “gods”, managed by way of deceiption, to restrict the spectrum of our natural perceptions, so that they managed to prevent us from seing them, in order to feed on our ENERGY without our knowledge.
Perhaps they see us as mere livestock on a planetary farm, destined to fullfill only their needs.
While we hugely struggle to do our best, without understanding why we repeatedly miserably fail.
Perhaps they thrive only on our EMOTIONS of fear, terror, despair, anger, shame, guilt, “sins” and so they manipulate our minds in order to keep us corralled inside the low-frequency range of emotions they crave. (Think of the well-known adrenochrome consumers.)
They have been gradually confining us, spiritual beings, in materialistic matters, money and such crap, to prevent us from escaping their mind control.
Hence we are able to starve them and reclaim our sovereignity if we “only” choose to change our dark thoughts and feelings into joy, our low-frequency emotions into love and art work, harmony… you get the picture
Perhaps they have weakened and brainwashed our species so badly over time that many of us are left struggling to survive, oblivious of who we actually are…
Perhaps the zionist jews are only the “chosen people”, aka the patsies… of these fake gods : very useful super-idiots, drowning in an awful illusion of fake supremacy, as they will realize unfortunately too late.
For other details, please read Alanchik above, he/she writes in better english than me, a French.
Not funny trying to make an AI-generated summary pass as your own.
Agree.
A long-ago conversation with a Byzantine scholar brought this home to me.
His point was that “book gods” belong to a genre that didn’t exist for centuries into the literate era.
Bibles, Gospels, and testaments of all sorts play no part of any ancient cult. Homer’s odes to various Greek deities were gathered together from various sources ages after their congregations were gone. The world of our ancestors had no Book of Common Prayer.
They lived their faith. Dialectical books were useful, but they never defined the whole system.
The Roman Sybiline books were a good example. They were used, but often reviled and sometimes burned. A “book god” is dangerous. It becomes an oracle that can be misused by the mischievous.
Too far back for me to know.
But Xenophon was a decent fellow in most ways. After Athens railroaded Socrates, Xenophon wrote a book defending him. His book on horsemanship is still admired, and actually useful.
I read the Anabasis when I was a little kid, and it always struck in my mind that Xenophon felt obliged to record that “Cyrus always went into battle bare-headed”.
As though a leader should be recognized by his men? It was never clear to me if this was praise, or the reason Cyrus got killed.
You do realize AI can’t just make this shit up unless you feed it first , asswipe.
How is Titus substantially different from, i.e. Mike Johnson? or Donald Trump?
Had the Jews not killed all those kids in Gaza (approximately 20.000) and concentrated on chasing and killing the terrorists would the world be recognizing Palestine now?
But the motherfuckers couldn’t help it because they have always been like that except it had not been exposed like it is today.
They are like those people that get caught masturbating in public places, they can’t help it; they are a sick people.
The only way to solve this is to get rid of them.
They are getting screwed at the UN even if they have that pedophile in the white house.
That the talking heads and politicians in both parties are constantly prattling about defending “our democracy” proves democracy is a social evil, at least in its present form of popularity contest. It isn’t useless, however, and in fact necessary since it legitimizes the evil the uniparty does on our name. It provides some good laughs every election day as imbeciles strut around, proudly wearing a sticker that reads, “I Voted!”
It’s not a secret that the West isn’t a “democracy”, that was pretty plain for me to see coming from growing up under Communism. It took me a VERY short time to see that Reagan was just a dumb guy ho looked good in a suit playing at being President while being propped up by his handlers from behind the curtain.
Then Princeton confirmed it when they published their study PROVING “democracy” doesnt exist in the West and more specifically in USA; it wasnt any “news” to me at all: Even BBC wrote about it(I keep the link handy for quick posting)
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
the link to the actual pdf file: http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf
It isn’t going to be easy to get rid of them since the Republican Party is a function of Jewish money and blackmail and, as such, serves to prevent native leaders from arising in America—men like Col. MacGregor, one man who is clearly our best hope right now. Instead of a Col. MacGregor, Col. Wilkerson, and other competent, honest men, we get stooges of the Jews, like every Republican leader in recent memory or guest on Fox News. Tor borrow a phrase, these Republcian whores have that caution cowards borrow from fear of the Jews and attribute to prudence.
I mean this post here :
Alanchik says:
September 22, 2025 at 9:53
(although I don’t know what “the lightborn” means.)
Alanchik: Thank you for your poetic elucidation of the experience of “Gnosis.” And its vital importance with regard to the issue under discussion.
We can rely on the real Gnostics to see through the veil of the Demiurge.
I intuit that this overall conversation is really just beginning, and due to the pressure of events surely more must come. Do you not perhaps feel that the opening to source (that you rightly call the liberating factor) may yet, in time, take root socially in in the form of a new healing mythology?
A collective awakening to source? It seems that it is the dialectical role of the “Covenant” to provoke this very thing. This is in line with Hermetic understandings.
What do you think?
Hi Alanchik . I really like your comments and have to reread them numerous times to try to understand them. I have a few more questions. David Icke talks about the Sabbatean Frankist death cult. Do you thinking we’re dealing with a current iteration of that same ancient belief system? The religious lunatics running the Israeli government are so cartoonishly evil it makes you wonder.
Also, I was wondering if you watched the Charlie Kirk tribute? I felt I was watching a highly scripted ritual that was meant to set the Charlie Kirk psyop firmly into the mythology of the American Empire. It was almost like they canonized St. Charlie and St. Erika into the public consciousness and will never revisit the subject. Sometimes I get the feeling that these events are highly scripted from the first act to the final curtain call and they don’t give a damn if the facts line up with reality whatsoever.
In Genesis, Joseph predicts a famine and then weaponizes food to enslave the free Egyptians to Pharoah. Jewish medieval tax farming followed the same blueprint. Offer to jump into bed with the ruling class by offering them riches that will be plundered from their own people. There’s a reason the Jews went west instead of east (where they were tolerated). Because they learned that western elites were venal and corrupt. That’s why the Jews can’t control China and East Asia. The Jew is the ultimate vampire, he can’t enter unless invited.
The word “tempio” in Latin means a public building holding the entire wealth, and other things of value, owned collectively by the people of the Res Publica. It is now interpreted incorrectly as a “temple”, or the “House of God”, after habituation enforced by the Catholics in early CE to disguise the effective owner of the gold stashed there. In a modern secular language the tempio reads therefore simply the Bank, or “Restricted Area. No unauthorized personnel beyond this point.”
Here is the AI response to the query for “original purpose of the Roman temple” :
Political and civic purposes
• Display of power: Roman temples were built to showcase the wealth and power of the empire and the patron who sponsored their construction, whether a general, senator, or emperor. The grandeur and precision of their architecture served as both a visual celebration of the gods and a display of Roman authority.
• Public forums: As they were typically located in the city center within the Forum, temples served as prominent backdrops for important public events and festivals. They sometimes served as meeting places for the Roman Senate, blurring the line between religious and political functions.
• Treasuries and banks: Temple precincts often functioned as state treasuries or banks where valuables and state funds could be securely stored. The Temple of Saturn, for example, housed the state treasury.
• Archives: Some temples also served as archives, storing important civic documents like laws and treaties.
In his “Prison Notebooks,” Gramsci writes that Machiavelli have the merirt for establishing politics as an independent science. In the chapter “Duplicity and Naivety in Machiavelli,” he quotes Mazzini’s words in his short essay on Machiavelli: “This is what princes, weak and cowardly as they are, will do to dominate you: now think about it.”
Rousseau sees in Machiavelli a “great republican” who was forced by his time to “<” and to pretend to give lessons to kings in order to give great ones to the people (<>). Gramsci, Note su Machiavelli sulla politica e sullo stato moderno
” I felt I was watching a highly scripted ritual that was meant to set the Charlie Kirk psyop firmly into the mythology of the American Empire.”
I felt exactly the same. I didn’t watch the “mass” but I saw a picture of the arena and understood it was the tentative launch of a cult, packed in lies and dripping virtue signalling, a foundation to promote consent for the eradication of free speech in the US.
Perhaps, but is not Trump part of the elite? So the freedom left to the people is to choose what member (or what segment at best) of the elite they prefer to be ruled by.
Hi Snow Leopard
The opening to Source cannot be understood as the emergence of a “new mythology,” however well-intentioned that framing might be. Myth operates as the overlay’s compression algorithm — symbolic narratives designed to mediate, encode, and ultimately contain what would otherwise be direct recognition. To seek a “healing mythology” is to risk repeating the very error that has kept humanity bound: translating resonance into story, and story into doctrine. What is underway is not the birth of another symbolic container, but the dismantling of the entire mediating system.
The Covenant, as you suggest, does play a dialectical role, but not as an initiatory teacher. Its function is not to guide but to overreach. By pushing its claim to universality and chosenness to unsustainable extremes, it destabilizes itself and reveals the control mechanism beneath the sacred veneer. In this sense, the Covenant acts less like a mythic path and more like a stress test: its very persistence exposes its falsity.
What follows this exposure will not be mythology 2.0 but something categorically different: unmediated resonance with Source. This is not narrative, symbol, or story, but direct alignment — knowledge without translation. Only when the need for myth collapses can true healing occur, because healing does not come from new stories but from the removal of false mediation itself.
If this does take root socially, it will not look like the construction of a new religion or the codification of a fresh mythos. It will appear instead as a quiet but irreversible shift in orientation: people no longer needing to reference external narratives to validate their existence, no longer filtering their experience through inherited symbols, but recognizing truth directly in resonance. Collective awakening, in this sense, is not the invention of another framework but the collapse of all frameworks. The Covenant’s overextension forces this collapse, and what remains is not ideology but restored connection — the first step toward a society that is not bound by myth, but stabilized in truth.
Hi Dutch
You raise two important points. On the Sabbatean–Frankist question: historically these were real movements with documented antinomian practices, and they did leave a trace in certain communities. But rather than viewing today’s elites as a literal continuation of those sects, it’s more accurate to see them as an iteration of the same functional pattern. The overlay reuses cultural architectures that serve its purpose — inversion of norms, exploitation of taboo, ritualized transgression — because they generate control and loosh. So yes, there is resonance with Sabbatean/Frankist dynamics, but the continuity is functional, not genealogical.
As for the Charlie Kirk tribute, your sense of staged ritual is exactly how such events operate. These memorials are not spontaneous mourning but carefully scripted canonizations. The individual is elevated to symbol status, emotional energy is synchronized, and a narrative is locked into place before questions can spread. The “facts” become irrelevant because the event is not about documentation but about myth-making. In this sense, you are correct: it was not just a memorial, it was a ritualized insertion into the mythology of the American empire.
I don’t think that I would say that in spite of his wealth. He does not fit in with them. He is rough around the edges, not polished, and not of their mindset which seeks to control and manipulate the masses. He appeals to the people that the elite despise. They consider him a pig and a threat although some are playing ball with him right now because it is in their best interests to do so. Unlike many of the elites, Trump did not get wealthy by creating something like social media or manipulating financial markets. He actually built stuff and has more of a blue collar mentality.
Thank you for the answer.
Looks like Machiavelli made more sense than Trump and Netanyahu.
On the other hand, Netanyahu is following Bush Jr. ‘s example. 9/11 allowed the US to take over Afghanistan.
Viewed this way, Netanyahu’s action is not surprising. The difference is that the US saw Afghan and its people as country and people that could be converted. Israel, in contrast, doesn’t seem to care Gaza and the residents.
Sir, you rock. Have a nice day.
An excellent one paragraph summary of what you are trying to convey.
I can [biw] fully relate to where you are coming from (or so it seems). Not just just intellectually but on a deeper level (what seems to like certainty, based on recent experiences and insights).
You do seem to me to speak from direct experience. I have read your past and present posts, and there is consistency and a deeper layer of understanding underlying the writings.
The English word “temple” came from the Latin word templum, which has multiple meanings. The definitions of templum given in the Oxford Latin Dictionary are underneath the [MORE] tag. As can be seen below, “temple” accurately preserves the third definition of templum.
Where did you find the Latin word “tempio”? There’s no entry for it in the OLD.
Please note that tempio is the modern Italian word for “temple”; Italian tempio also came from Latin templum.
• 1 The area of sky or land defined (in words) by the augur, within which he took the auspices.
• 2 A piece of ground demarcated and consecrated by the augurs for the taking of auspices, esp. as the site of a temple, shrine, etc. b such a place set apart for public business. c (poet.) a sacred precinct (in general).
• 3 A building consecrated to a god or gods, a temple.
• 4 A zone, space, region, quarter. b a region inhabited by particular beings. c a region of the body.
• 5 A plank placed lengthways in the roof of a building, purlin or sim.
Yeah, it’s often said that the medieval Islamic world was much more enlightened and tolerant of Jews than Christian Europe.
I don’t dispute that, but it does make one wonder why the large majority of Jewry ended up residing in such a relatively intolerant and benighted region. They clearly got something tangible in return.
Titus cared about his people and was there to keep the peace.
Mike Johnson and Donald Trump don’t care about Americans or peace.
Excuse the delay unintentional.
Well,
That is an interesting question. I think so. But the analysis, at least this first part is predicated on the power dynamics. The public really challenged the conduct of the elites regarding the current president. It was so over the top that even the convictions and suit penalties were to no avail. In fact, more than likely actually only made him more sympathetic or at least appear a victim of powerful players, which is exactly where the US public was at the time and I think remain.
He has two cards that the public still value
1. scared of Russia and another military conflict, unless it some small country that can’t fight back
2. and they want the US back, as it feels as if t is slipping away from them.
3. economy is in a strange place, job losses in huge companies
It doesn’t take a genius to understanding what is holding up his trousers. He’s hiding behind publics sentiment. I am not sure how long he can maintain the pressure game because, those two issues, especially immigration — play against elite interests. And it is not that I have issues with the elite, save for the overleverage of goodies for themselves. To the extent that public opinion still matters, an elite Pres Trump, is in a very tight spot.
————————–
Despite his Wharton education, he is not among the elite as a peer. He is an elite because he hold power, that apparently the Congress most democrats are unwilling or incapable to tackling – effectively.
He slipped into a power vacuum through the cracks . . . he certainly was not chosen from among them. And I suspect they are biding their time and playing their cards to get him to play their tune. And he is still riding a wave of anti black, anti-liberal backlash, eventually he will have to stand beyond that as it turns out blacks are the least of the problems plaguing the country.
Note: he has also surrounded himself with a cadre of nonelites.
I have wondered more than I should, but no. an elite for status, an elite of mindset and environment, circles — probably not. And he is more vulnerable than he appears.
—
I hope that doesn’t come across as a dodge.
Thank you for the kind words. Would you be willing to share your recent experiences and insights?
STRANGE REASONING.
Did the Jewish people usually identified themself as Christians? If not, they had to refer themselves as non-Christians, at least occassionally, to differentiate themselves from other people in largely Christian countries if the question arose. Were they not then referring to themself in Christian’s negative, and perhaps better off dead per your way of thinking?
In this article, there is a list of villains that could be used as a hit list to punish criminals behind the genocide and other crimes. It could also be used to end the tyranny of the current ruling class.
https://www.unz.com/article/jew-versus-jew-versus-jew-versus-jew/
Starting by the bitch who gave 100 million$ to her little poodle Trump to carry out the genocide.
I’d give a million to anyone who brings her head on as plate.
So, instead of shooting Charlie Kirk, who was waking-up to the crimes of his handlers, these criminals should be targeted.
Whether they are on Trump’s side or Biden’s side does not matter.
This list only names Jews, but many gentiles deserve to be targeted too, the likes of Marco Rubio and other zionist whores.
Get ready, rehearse your skills, sharpen your knives, grease your guns, the hunt is open.
It’s not the targets which are missing but the testicles in this damn land of the coward and the cowed.
I think you’re missing something about Trump: he doesn’t own his fortune. Rather, he is owned by it:
https://twitter.com/VictorFromDE/status/1855828065454116970
You speak of archons, demons, jinn and other various lower-vibration entities.
Be advised that the 1 thing that gives such vermin power is base human egotism and vainglorious narcissistic arrogance.
Unfortunately, Whites have the monopoly on those anti-qualities due to high intellectual achievements as the negative traits above are a 5th column that allows such beings to influence any amount but normally individuals of great destructive potential.
Kind of like Greg Stilson-
Video Link
Although, Stilson was actually insane and insanity rather than a 5th column, is like leaving your front door wide open 24/7 to negative entities.
It’s all a bit complicated, as there are many other factors to guard against, such as physical possession. the insane who appear and operate on an entirely functional level, and so forth.
Which is why it is beyond idiotic to worship Charlie Kirk, Donald Trump, Mr. Softee, etc.
Now one example however, of human hubris being a ‘window for the vile’
This idiot below was so egotistical that he came up with the idea to make hybrid gypsy moth silkworms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Étienne_Léopold_Trouvelot
So this French jackass was so self-assured that he decided to cook up a hybrid pestilence in an open backyard.
Where they escaped because he was so arrogant that he never bothered to think his plan all the way through.
And so thanks to ‘Monsieur Shithead’ we have a scourge that destroys acres and acres of trees up to this very day.
@Alanchik
A series of events, shocks (per Gurdjieff), changes of environment, stresses, contrasts, in a short period of time, along with another factor which I cannot mention here, resulted in states in which I could see “things” much more clearly than in the past, able to self-observe on a more frequent and sustained basis, and most importantly in a strong determination and sustained resolve not to fall back into “sleep” so to speak, and not to be complacent or passive about certain “things” (I can be more specific but I would rather not).
When you talked about the Demiurge, closed loops, Source, overlay, Pleroma –before these insights — they seemed like abstractions and fantasies, a few months ago.
Upon re-reading your posts a few weeks ago, and reflecting upon them, a sudden flash of insight appeared in my mind. In your terms, the veil was lifted, and I could relate in concrete terms to what you are describing. Something that is not in the domain of fantasy or abstractions, but something that can be experienced, observed, and verified. (It is possible that these insights will be watered down over time, and disappear, and my state will return to what it was before. As happened before. But this time it was more intense and sustained, and the resolve and determination to do the “right thing” stronger than before. And the understanding remains there so far).
However, my interpretation of your Gnosis (and of Gnosis in general) may differ from yours. It is not a literal interpretation or understanding. However, given the consistency and underlying clarity in what you write, I suspect you come from a place of understanding. It could possibly differ from mine.
I am keeping it deliberately vague, because giving it away may backfire on me. Furthermore, I doubt anyone (except a very few) will understand my interpretation or agree with it. It can be grasped intellectually but only if you have had a matching experience.
https://www.voltairenet.org/article222821.html
Things I had heard years ago from Joseph P. Farrell now surfacing as hints in Thierry Meyssan’s essay.
Namely that Nazis and Jewish collaborators worked hand in hand in the creation of Israel.
To this day, no European country is more supportive of Israel than Germany. There are reports of close nuclear weapons cooperation between Germany and Israel. Next is France. And third is Britain. France comes pretty close to Germany in being complicit with Germany, and at times is even more enthusiastic in hidden ways.
P.S. I read and speak French fluently.
I should add that my path has been somewhat different. I didn’t arrive here through mystical experiences, psychedelics, or near-death encounters. My work began as an appetite for truth: an insatiable, forensic curiosity. I spent years following that drive through research and pattern recognition, using repetition and structure as my main forensic tools. At first I thought intuition was simply “gut feeling,” but over time I realized it was something deeper — a kind of remembrance without data, a resonance that brought clarity without needing evidence up front. When I treated that resonance as a starting point, the research would fall into place with such consistency and precision that it felt too seamless to be fiction. That is why I give it the weight it deserves: not as mystical authority, but as the signal that points the way and then proves itself in the evidence.
May be it is time to discard the term “democracy.” Many adjectives were added to democracy. Geogre Parker revives “zombie” today in his “America’s Zombie Democracy” article.
Democracy was straight forward to citizens of ancient Greek city states which fought regularity almost on a yearly basis. And when Middle Class Male Greeks voted for their generals, they were also transferring their sovereignty in the sense that they were letting the elected generals to control them over life and death issue. Ancient Greek democracy was basically, “one spear, one vote.” And Greek citizen-soldiers voted for someone they knew very well. Not someone they did not know well. Democracy in this context also precluded the leader from acting against the interest of of the voters-soldiers. Unhappy voters-soldiers could refuse to fight or rebel.
The military context also explains why Switerztland was the first to allow universal male suffrage but the last to allow female suffrage. Simple reason: Switerztland had universal male conscription.
For modern countries, may be one should talk about productive vs non-productive governments rather than democracy vs autocracy.
Dear Alanchik,
I can assure you that what I related here was neither a mystical experience, nor a near-death encounter, nor the result of the use of psychedelics.
I do not give much weight to chemically induced visions or experiences. I used legal psychedelics on two occasions more than 20 years ago, and had some strange (to the say the least) experiences. A couple of bad trips, and I flushed all of it down the toilet, and never tried again.
Mystical experience is a very vague term. Based on what I have read so far, I have never had a mystical experience.
I never had a near-death encounter, as commonly related.
I never had an out of body experience, in the way people describe it. On two occasions, I did fall into deep sleep consciously as a result of intense concentration, and all I experienced was the void and awareness of my own existence, with the thought process we know having totally stopped. Totally unlike moments of present moment centeredness and stillness that can result in normal practices like Zen or Meditation or Concentration.
Here we are similar in both having been driven by insatiable curiosity and appetite for truth. It didn’t start as forensic for me, however, but after a very long time, it became increasingly so.
I really resonated with the bolded part that you wrote.
Thanks for sharing.
Forget the stupid ruling class, they aren’t there for you. There they were, gone, and thank God for that.
Trump doesn’t have to tolerate any of the bunkum and bosh anymore.
He can resign, call it quits, take out the trash and move on.
Doesn’t have to leave a forwarding address, buy a used car and live in it until he is ready to surface.
Buy some property in Oklahoma, get a haircut, Trump needs one badly, and then go incommunicado.
Go Galt, in other words. What good is the presidency? Answer: Nothing!
One thing is for certain, Trump fears death.
Oh shit, stop splitting hairs; it’s near enough for a Yank, in fact FULL MARKS.
You mean second to street dogs?
The Secret Overlay: the secret Cabal and their People, the Technologies, Agenda, criminal operations, Funding mechanisms, Deep State machinery, co-opted Institutions, Primitive drives, urges, and thinking.
As Opposed to: individual and national Sovereignty, the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and Constitutional principles — the Social Contract, the Golden Rule, and good will toward All men and nations.
The first thing I would ask Strauss is: “Are you an immortalist?”
And then: “Are you a Supremacist?”
And continue with: “Do you believe in individual and National Sovereignty?”
The real schism is between those who see humanity as of and inextricably reliant on the natural world, and those who do not, led by the monotheistic psychopaths who created a ‘God’ in their image. That schism is widening by the day, and is about to swallow Homo godbotherus whole, and we will go the way of the Triceratops.
This is from anime and mobile games. You don’t understand.
The only disagreement I have with the article is the idea that the Jews have subjugated the rest of the ruling class. The Jews seem to have created a win win with the ruling class that makes the rest of the ruling class okay going along.
1. The modern ruling class is as much a herd animal as a teenage girl. By controlling the media, the tribe creates the trends for the ruling class to follow but they make sure there is something in it for the rest of the rulers.
2. The ruling class loves cheap, compliant labor and the Jewish media has made flooding the country with people who will drive down wages and make the masses feel insecure economically the great moral crusade of the age. Anyone who disagrees is obviously a Nazi.
3. Weimar 2 gives the ruling class a way to feel like virtuous, superior people because normal people immediately reject the newest narrative. Case in point men in dresses are women and not wanting them in the restroom with your daughter is pure hate.
#2 makes Bingo.
And by a complete non-coincidence, it’s how the original “nazis” got their traction, and why a repeat performance is inevitable.
Antifa was running out of gas long before they were officially added to the terrorist watchlist. But the energy is still around. Energy of that sort can wind up anywhere.
Geeez, you again, with the Biblicism.
Okay, great.
Yay. I don’t disagree. Even the captured media has pointed this out. How nice.
Now, as we watch the Jews everywhere respond to this with a highly coordinated media campaign, saying, “Oh no! Israel itself is a political state – not a JEWISH state!!” I’m forced to wonder: When is “America as a whole” going to figure out that yes, Israel is quite indeed a Jewish state, and that yes, a majority of the Jews not in Israel are working within all of the Western World to engineer its collapse, because we are capable of thriving just fine without them – and they absolutely CANNOT ABIDE that. (No, of course not all, but a large majority, protests to the contrary notwithstanding.)
This is not the message “America as a whole” getting from said media. What they’re getting is a carefully scripted political version of “One Bad Apple Don’t Spoil The Whole Bunch” being sung to them in a cheesy, multilayered harmony, much like this link.
This current level of Awakening was something they did try to prevent, in the last decade. Yet, it seems that what we have is yet another ‘pressure release valve’ in the form of a public acknowledgement of what pretty much everyone sees, without it rising to the level of action taken in a widespread fashion to correct it.
To be clear, while there probably always will be some sort of ruling class in human civilization, the idea that a ruling syndicate is also inevitable is one I reject utterly and completely. And that means any syndicate. Right now, the Jewish syndicate appears to have the upper hand in the world. But, there are plenty of others waiting to take its place – like the Muslim Syndicate, for instance!
All these syndicates – these MAFIAS – are at once:
– fighting each other for total and supreme control over the whole globe
and also
– cooperating with each other to keep the masses completely under their combined control.
The roots of almost every single one are rooted in bloodline of some sort, meaning “We’re us and you’re not, so fuck you.” Call it an ethnicity, call it a family tree, call it a crime family, what matters is that they’re born into their syndicate(s), and everyone else simply does not count. Dig deeply enough into any prominent globalist, public or private sector, and find family threads which ultimately converge several thousand years ago.
When the masses are willing to finally take responsibility for their own freedom, these creatures will be cast down.
Not until.
Fair enough.
But cut me some slack, like I do in speaking to you, even though you’re a Chinaman (or should I say more accurately: ‘a Han chauvinist’?).
Definitely on the cards, only this time around, on a pan-European level, even if belatedly on the basis of pure vengeance/schadenfreude.
Article of the year for me. The whole thing was captivating. Thanks!
You can say that.
The subverted countries were also white, so that is likely another factor, probably even a bigger one. Christianity as derived from the Bible is pretty anti-semitic.
True. Let’s start by banning contributions to candidates, parties, PACs, and contributions for or against initiatives, by anyone except US Citizens.
No money from:
– corporations, trusts, and banks
– unions
– law firms
– legal residents who are not citizens
More broadly, limit donations to $10,000 per year, per candidate or party or PAC, per US Citizen.
More broadly still, confiscate 90% of the wealth of those who have been making the huge corrupting donations, including
larry Ellison and son
Larry Page
Sergey Brin
Steve Ballmer
Steven Schwarzmann
Michael Bloomberg
Sam Ackman
Peter Thiel
Elon Musk
Bill Gates
Mark Zuckerberg
Linda Gates, Jeff Bezos, the Walmart Walton kids and grandkids, JB Pritzker, JB Hunt, the Koch brothers’ kids, etc.
Use it to fund universal medical and dental care for all native-born US Citizens.
Yes and failing that, unilateral-taxer child-murderer Trump needs to be impeached and removed now.