In a Empire of Lies, only brush with reality will inform people of the truth, especially as lives have become more atomized. In the past, when people were closer to family and kinfolk, they might have heard of first-hand experiences of close ones. Now, many people just know their nuclear family or individual lives, and much of their view of reality comes from mass media controlled by Jews. Of course, social media can spread the raw unfiltered truth — visual evidence of black criminality and other social problems — , but then, that is why Big Tech enforces Censchwarzship and why the Zionic Big Media and Big Academia have gotter ever more shrill and hardline with Political Correctness.
In the 70s and 80s, there was the notion of being 'mugged by reality'. It implied that the US had become a country of lies. After all, if truth was readily available, one wouldn't need to be mugged-by-reality to know the reality. One would have heard of it even if one didn't experience it. Consider tigers, grizzly bears, and sharks. Most of us never saw a tiger or bear firsthand(except at a zoo). And most of us never got bitten by a shark. But even without having been mauled by those animals, we know they are dangerous. We know a tiger can kill you in a split second. A bear can tear you apart. A shark can have you for lunch. We know this because we were taught the truth about nature. Don't wander into a forest where tigers lurk. Be wary in bear country. Don't swim in shark-infested waters. So, we don't need to be 'mauled by nature' to know nature can be dangerous.
But the notion of 'mugged by reality' suggests a white 'liberal' will turn 'conservative' or more realist IF AND ONLY WHEN he comes face to face with grim reality, especially of black criminality. Otherwise, he will continue to be a 'liberal' for two reasons: The systemic deception of academia, media, & entertainment AND the conceit of being 'tolerant' and 'progressive'. There's too much mendacity and vanity involved in being a good 'liberal' or a 'good conservative'(aka cuckservative) for that matter as even conzos now fall all over themselves to demonstrate they are not 'racist'.
Now, things would be different if we were living in an Order of Truth than in an Empire of Lies. Even people who never experienced black crime(or had a friend or relative attacked or murdered by blacks) would know that blacks are a problematic race, mainly due to evolutionary factors: Africa is a dangerous place, and not only the black race but various species are more vicious there(for survival's sake). African elephants are bigger and more aggressive than Burmese elephants. African buffalos are more dangerous than those in Vietnam. African rhinos are bigger and even more bad-tempered than Indian rhinos. All such dangerous animals plus ace predators such as lions, hyenas, leopards, wild dogs, crocodiles, and etc. have made organisms in general(and that would include Negroes) more ferocious, aggressive, and muscular. Also, the non-black races, having experienced the Northern Cold(even if they later migrated downward to places like South America), had some of the impulsive traits weeded out of them whereas the impulsive oogity-boogity genes remained intact among African Negroes.
COLIN FLAHERTY PODCAST: THE DARKEST DAYS OF THE GREATEST LIE ARE UPON US.In an Order of Truth, people would be informed and instructed as to the ways of Negroes. Just like one doesn't need to be mauled by a lion to know lions are dangerous or be bitten by a rattle snake to know it's venomous, one wouldn't need to be mugged-by-reality to know the truth of reality. But we don't live in an Order of Truth but in an Empire of Lies where 'truth' or 'falsehood' is defined less by actual ways and conditions of reality than by agendas, interests, and biases of Jewish Supremacists. In the Jew-World-Order, Iran is the 'terrorist threat with nukes' when it has no nukes. Israel has 300 nukes made with material stolen from the US. Israel aids terrorists in Syria. Israel uses terrorism to murder Iranian scientists. And Zionists in the US control US foreign policy to destroy entire Arab and/or Muslim nations. But, we are told 'Israel is our greatest ally' whereas 'Iran is the biggest sponsor of terror' and 'Assad gassed his own people'. And consider all the lies told about Jews and Palestinians. Jews stole Palestinian land and continue to occupy the West Bank(which is being prepared for full annexation), BUT we are supposed to worry about poor poor Jews. And even though US uses NATO to harass and provoke Russia, we are told Russia is the perennial aggressor. US instigated a coup in Ukraine, which is now totally owned by Jewish gangsters. But Russia is always the threat. US surrounds China with numerous military bases, but China is the big bad guy in the neighborhood. US has military bases all around Iran, but, in accordance to the same twisted logic, Iran is the 'aggressor'.
Fish rots from the head. US was never big on the truth, but with Jews at the helm, it's gotten worse. Just like the Color Revolutions finally came home with the Jew-Coup against Donald Trump, the Culture of Mendacity that characterizes US foreign policy is now indistinguishable from US domestic policy when it comes to news and information. It has come home to roost. But then, why not, considering that Jews don't look upon whites as Fellow Countrymen but as 'foreign goyim' to colonize and control? Jewish agenda toward whites doesn't work in accordance to the concept of National Interests; the only part of the world where Jewish Power operates on the basis of National Interests is Israel where Jewish leaders feel as one with Jewish masses, and this explains why the media in Israel are far more honest and truthful; Jews share truth with one another but generally resort to lies with goyim to control them. Jewish perspective on white goyim in the US is more akin to Jewish attitudes toward Palestinians, Iranians, Arabs, Russians, and etc. It is about 'us vs them'. Jews feel more like British Imperialists did toward the Hindus in India. When Hindu-based nationalism was on the rise in India, the British favored the Muslims as allies. (Initially when the British had taken control over India against the Muslim Mughals, they were more partial to the Hindus.) Jews now use blacks and nonwhites against whites in the way that the British came to use the Muslim minority against the Hindu majority in India. What Jews fear most is the reawakening and liberation of white consciousness. In the past, it was the fear of violent Anti-Semitic mobs or anti-Jewish discrimination that animated the Jewish agenda. Now, Jews are addicted to supremacist power and rely on white subservience to maintain Jewish Hegemony around the world. Jews know there are preciously few true-blue Nazis around. They don't fear the rise of New Hitlers. Jewish fear isn't that of the slave but of the master. The slave fears the master may no longer need him and sell him down the river. The slave fears the master will forever deny him freedom and dignity. In contrast, the master's fear is different. His first fear is the loss of power and privilege over others, something he's become accustomed to. It's like a rich man fears being poor more than a poor person does. Whereas a poor person is accustomed to being poor, it's totally anathema to the rich man who's come to believe he's deserving of the good things in life. When Jews had survival or basic rights on their minds, they had something of the slave mentality. Today, they are the rulers of the West and have a master mentality. They don't so much fear the potential for white mob violence against Jews as the possibility that Jews will lose their hegemonic status if whites refuse to play along as puppet-servants of Zion. Paradoxically, Jews bait whites with guilt over 'white supremacism' to ensure that whites will continue to aid and abet Jewish supremacism. It's pure bait-and-switch. It's not a campaign against supremacism per se but a selective targeting of white consciousness as 'supremacism' to perpetuate Jewish supremacism(and those of their allies, blacks and homos).
Things get tragic or tragicomic in a world where only one's direct contact with reality(or something close to it) wakens one up to the truth. It's worse if the danger is covered up or forbidden as a topic of candid discussion. It's even worse if the danger is lionized, sanctified, and extolled as if it's sacred. Imagine there's a button that is dangerous to the touch. If you press it, you get jolted really bad. Now, in an Order of Truth, people would be told, "Don't press the button cuz you'll be electrocuted." Thus, even those who never came upon the actual button would know it's dangerous. It's like the skulls-and-bones sign with the words 'poisonous' on certain bottles. You don't have to drink the stuff to find out if it's dangerous, just like most people know they shouldn't pick and eat mushrooms in the wild with proper knowledge. This way, you don't have to push the button, feel the shock, and learn the hard way to know that it's dangerous. But suppose it's taboo to speak about the button's danger. So, someone who comes upon the button may press it out of accident or curiosity. Not having been informed of the danger, it was the only way for him to find out. The hard way. And yet, he doesn't tell anyone about it because it's taboo to badmouth the button. But worse, suppose the powers-that-be spread the message that the button is a wonder-of-wonders, and there's nothing wrong with pushing it. Indeed, you SHOULD press it. Of course, you get the most unpleasant jolt. Then and there, you should be jolted or 'mugged' by reality. But what if, due to the incessant narrative pressure that consecrates the button, you feel 'sinful' and dirty to say that you were hurt by it. So, you pretend it was actually rewarding. Or, you say(in self-flagellation mode) that you deserved the righteous 'punishment' from the button because of 'muh guilt', also pushed by the powers-that-be on the button-pushers. If a river is polluted and toxic but also regarded as holy and divine, people may still choose to bathe in it and drink from it because, all too often with humans, irrational emotions override factual reasoning.
COLIN FLAHERTY: TEEN ON TEEN IS A LIE 2016 IT'S BLACK MOB VIOLENCE ON WHITES OR PIZZA IS THE CAUSEThis is where we are with blacks. People can only be 'mugged by reality' because the Jewish-controlled academia, media, and state spread mostly lies about blacks, pathology, and criminality. Facts tell us that less than 20 unarmed blacks are killed by the police in an average year, but the majority of 'liberals' believe the number is 10,000! Even though blacks are champion robbers, rapists, thugs, and murderers, so many people see blacks as hapless victims of 'systemic racism' and 'white supremacism'. Often, whites and nonwhites who live in unblack areas are often the biggest suckers of the Narrative. They see Magic Negroes on TV and movies; they are bombarded with news about blacks as victims. Also, as local news always describe black thugs as 'teens' or 'youths' or some such euphemism, the message gets out that it is taboo and unacceptable to mention the race of blacks when they do bad. Furthermore, the powers-that-be go boo-hoo-hoo over black deaths(when killed by whites) but totally ignore nonblack deaths, especially if the perpetrators were black. All such manipulations subconsciously instill the masses with the sense that black lives are more important than nonblack ones. While the ideology of America yammers about racial equality, the Jewish-controlled idolatry of America favors Jewish, homo, and black lives uber alles.
Under such conditions, many people are ill-informed about the black problem. Even the children of whites who moved to the suburbs in White Flight from blacks end up with the wrong idea. Instead of being grateful for their own safety and security away from black thuggery and crime, they come to believe, via education and news, that they have undeserved 'white privilege' while poor helpless blacks are being oppressed by 'systemic racism'. What about their parents who made the move to get away from black crime? In many cases, they dare not speak the truth that they know to their own children because people are naturally status-conscious conformists, and it's become 'unacceptable' for 'good people' to speak frankly about the race problem, especially pertaining to blacks. So, many white parents don't tell their kids. Also, in the safety of the white community, they gradually forget about the reality of black crime and become increasingly influenced by media lies and entertainment manipulation(where blacks are either presented as heroic/saintly, tragic/magic, or cool/badass if bad; so, even when blacks are presented as gangstas, they be idols to rhapsodize about).
One would think, with all the White Flight and Neo-Liberal hardline policies against black criminality beginning with Bill Clinton, most white people would know about the reality of race. Tragically, there is a huge discrepancy between general action and collective emotion. On some level, of course many whites knew. That's why even Jews and white 'liberals' joined in White Flight. It's why Neo-Liberals got tough on crime and locked up so many blacks and implemented stop-and-frisk. They also supported immigration on grounds that newcomers will make better employees and safer neighbors than the blacks. And yet, none of this could be said with any honesty over the years. Under Jewish control, blacks became ever holier and special in symbolism even as Jews and white neo-liberals pushed policies to clamp down harder on blacks to save cities from crime and blight.
And yet, this set the grounds for even more Afro-lunacy. After all, if blacks are so special as the children of MLK as the media/academia have constantly reminded us(especially as conzos are just as cucked as the libby-dibs on blackness), why were so many blacks locked up and pushed out via gentrification? Why was there so much talk of holy homos and wonderful immigrants that took attention away from black issues? Now, the hardline policies on black crime and the push for more mass-immigration were led by Neo-Liberals in the big cities. And many of these were Jews. Lest any blame fall on Jews, Libs, and the Democrats, the powers-that-be chose to blame all of US history for the black problem. So, never mind the new policy that New York Jews implemented since the 1990s to save the city from black thugs. Just blame it on Jim Crow in the South or even go back to 1619. Never mind 1992 and Bill Clinton and all those New Yorkers voting for Rudy Giuliani twice and for Michael 'stop and frisk' Bloomberg three times. The thing is Jews really needed blacks to defeat Donald Trump in 2020, and so they brought back blacks who'd been shunted to the back of the bus relative to homos and immigrants for special attention, lamentation, and celebration. Of course, even when blacks were getting less love than homos and immigrant-diversity, they were nevertheless glorified as a specially tragic-magic people, and besides, blacks always had lots of idolic star power via sports and music.
In the long term, the black problem shows it's useless to act on the truth if you don't speak the truth. So much of US policy from the early 1990s was based on the reality of black thuggery and criminality. To win elections(by gaining white voters anxious about rising black crime), Democrats had to out-Willie-Horton the GOP. But being cleverer, Bill Clinton and Jews pulled something sneaky. They got far tougher on black crime while, at the same time, covering up their 'racist' tracks with highfalutin talk of the Noble Negro! They walked one way, they talked another way. They figured all the talk would serve as cover for the walk. Maybe blacks will be too dumb to realize it with Clinton as the 'first black president', Bush II as the 'compassionate conservative' who gave tens of billions to Africa, and Obama as the real first black president. And maybe whites will be too razzle-dazzled by rainbow-homos to become aware of what total phonies they are. And this foolery might have continued but for the presidency of Trump. Jews and the goy-cuck deep state hated him so much and wanted him out so badly that they were willing to UNLEASH THE BLACKEN(which turned out to be more potent than the Kraken).
It's odd that black grievances mount with the passage of time. If the past was so bad for blacks, one would think they would be much better off with progress made through the years following the Civil Rights Movement. And yet, a large number of blacks remain mired in dysfunction, and in many cases, things have only gotten worse since the 1960s. A good number of blacks did make gains and progress, but they hold dear to outrage politics for two reasons. For street cred as their success might be seen as 'acting white' and betrayal of the brothas and sistas. And out of megalomania because successful blacks, like Jews and homos, just can't get enough spotlight as the magic-tragic people.
History is usually blamed for black problems, but what has happened since the 60s is also part of history. In less than 39 yrs, it will be 2060. So, what went wrong? In a way, the problem was freedom itself. Freedom is only as good as those using it, and too many blacks used freedom in bad ways. More freedom can mean more opportunity, but it can also mean more corruption, more degradation, more self-indulgence, and more crime. Blacks were prone to abuse freedom more than other races because they evolved to be oogity-boogity. But no one dare mention the connection between freedom and foulness when it comes to blacks... just like Jews and homos can't be blamed for anything; everything is blamed for the AIDS crisis EXCEPT the most obvious culprit, which was homo indulgence in depravity with new liberties. To say that blacks are naturally prone to act stupid and wild would be 'racist'. So, never mind that it is true. Truth must take the backseat to the Narrative. But then, it's perfectly fine to say blacks are naturally different and superior in POSITIVE ways. Interesting how that works.
It's always back to scapegoating History while ignoring that all that has happened since the 1960s is also part of history, and that blacks must bear much of the blame because they used their history of freedom and equality in the worst possible ways. While the odd innocent Negro lynched by whites is part of US history, so are all the white and non-black victims of black criminality, thuggery, and mayhem. But what does it matter? Did anyone take the knee for all the people beaten, attacked, or murdered by the mobs in 2020? No, the only approved and compulsory sympathy is for the creep George Floyd who died of overdose and was no victim of police brutality. (Given Jewish bankers funded much of European imperialism and profited greatly from the West's incursions into Africa, it's interesting how Jews never partake of 'white guilt' when it comes to blacks. If anything, Jews demand that whites unconditionally support Jewish tyranny over Palestinians and terrorism all over the Middle East.)
It goes to show history matters far less than 'thistory'(or this-story) as shaped by the powers-that-be. It was certainly true of Christianity. Even as Jesus's death receded into history, He became bigger and bigger because the clergy that controlled the Narrative put Him front and center of everything. And even as Christians gained in power and persecuted non-Christians, pagans, and heretics(and even as the story of Christians being fed to lions became a distant memory, if it happened at all), the Narrative of Christian victimhood grew only bigger. Whether an event happened long ago or recently, what is 'remembered' and resonates depends on whoever has the power the decide what is commemorated. This is one why dead Negro matters far more than millions of dead Arabs killed by Wars for Israel. Jews have the power of commemoration that defines the current 'thistory'. So, it doesn't matter how far back something happened. It is relevant now IF the powerful make it so with their means of commemoration, reiteration, and mythologization. That a lowlife punk like George Floyd could be anointed into the pantheons of the sainted goes to show (1) how powerful Jews are (2) how effective 'thistory' is and (3) how stupid the populace has become over the years under Jewish influence to fall for such nonsense.
At any rate, in an empire of lies where the only path to truth is to be 'mugged by reality', we should do all we can to make sure that PC libby-dibs and cucky-wucks learn about reality the hard way. Let them be 'mugged' by it. Those drugged on fantasy must be mugged by reality. People like Derek Chauvin should NEVER sign up to for police work in blue cities. Let Jews and white libby-dibs defend their own bodies and properties from blacks whom they purport to love so much. Of course, there are venal Jewish supremacists and fiendish deep state lowlifes who know all about the black problem but pretend otherwise to keep the power and push the agenda. It's like the Soviet authorities who willfully lied about grain harvests to keep the system going. But, there are plenty of suckers among the libby-dibs and the cucky-wucks. It's the difference between Jews who sold Obama as a new brand of soap and the suckers who bought it, fainting left and right in rapture. The world is made up of fuc*ers and suckers. In an empire of lies where the suckers willingly go along with the fuc*ers, let the suckers be 'mugged by reality'. So, people like Heather MacDonald and Ann Coulter need to stop trying to protect urban libs from black crime. If the libby-dibs are really into BLM and believe defunding the police will do wonders, let them follow such course and get mugged-by-reality. Stop trying to help or save people who hate you. This is why it was foolish for people like Rudy Giuliani to have cleaned up NY. By drastically reducing crime, it took away the one factor that 'mugs' libby-dibs into reality. Now, if the law-and-order types took pains to reduce crime with tough measures while, at the same time, changing the narrative to fit reality — "LOOK, CRIME WENT DOWN BECAUSE WE GOT TOUGH ON BLACK THUGGERY, the product of Negro evolution in wild and dangerous Africa" — , the policies would have been worth it. But just as the policies reduced crime, the narrative carried on with the same lies about Negro Victimhood and sanctity.
So, when the libby-dibs felt safer and more secure, they just embraced the Big Lie with greater gusto. Imagine someone who got sick from using bad drugs. For a cure, he's put on healthy diet and exercise regimen. But all through the process, he is never told he got sick from those drugs. Rather, even as he's recovering from the ill-effects of the drugs, his environment is filled with promotional material for the drug. So, what is the first thing he wants to do when he's healthy again? To use the stupid drugs all over again. The proper cure would have not only forced him to eat better and exercise but inform him of the dangerous drugs. But suppose the healer isn't allowed to speak the truth. He cures the person but doesn't inform of the dangers posed by the drug. (Or worse, the healer advises the usage of the drugs even though he saved the man from the drugs.) So, when the guy is feeling good again, he wants to go back to using the drugs. If the truth isn't allowed to be said, it's better not to treat the guy at all. Let him abuse the drugs until he gets so sick that he finds out the truth for sure on his own. It goes to show it's not enough to DO the right thing. One must also SAY the right thing, the truth. The word must be in sync with the world. It's like Merlin says in EXCALIBUR, "When a man lies, he murders some part of the world."
But the problem isn't merely with libby-dibs and cucky-wucks but even with the so-called Dissident Right, especially the boomers whose gushy sentimentality about Jews prevent them from connecting all the dots. So, they'll mention black crime and Muslim terrorism but hardly discuss the Jewish question. They are useless because the Jewish element is the most crucial. After all, it's the Jews who've decided which button to push and which theme/issue to highlight for the moment. Globo-homo yesterday, BLM today, Tranny tomorrow, and etc. Indeed, it's useful to distinguish between core power and favored power. It's the difference between the sun and the planets. Planets near to the Sun get plenty of heat, but this heat isn't self-generated but reliant on the Sun. In Hollywood, the big stars seem powerful, but they ultimately are not. Jews can make or break any of them. Jews are the sun, they are mere planets. Likewise, people who focus on tranny-mania but refuse to mention Jewish Power behind it are useless. They mistake planetary heat as auto-generated when it relies on the sun. Jewish Power is the sun that selectively chooses in the moment which group or issue gets the most light. There is hardly any action without traction made possible by Jewish levers of promotion and narration. Consider how the media was all about SAVE THE KURDS when Trump threatened to pull out of Syria. When Trump changed his mind, Kurds faded from view once again. Why did Kurds get a special boost? Because Jews aimed light at them. (Of course, Jewish Media don't mention Syria is a hellhole because of Judeo-Nazi-dominated US foreign policy and Israel's support of ISIS terrorists.)
What can result from the culture of lies or the cult of myth? Two obvious examples are the fates of National Socialist Germany and Imperial Japan in World War II. Without proper means for people to warn the leaders of the dangers of all-out war, doom was looming over horizon. And US foreign policy has been disastrous as the result of lies, except that Americans are fortunate to live in a country big and strong enough to fend off all attempts at retaliation. Japan and Germany declared war on the US and got totally smashed. But the US can spread lies, invade & destroy nations, and still stand tall at the end of the day as the lone superpower. Using the moral logic of WWII, the US surely deserves to have been nuked around 20 times.
An even more instructive case of the danger posed by the culture of lies is the Great Leap Forward, Mao's manic plan to accelerate China's transformation into a modern economy. So many deaths resulted from this, and it was all because of the culture of lies centered around the myth of Mao as an all-knowing god-emperor. Mao and his men didn't mean to starve people. They really thought they were doing good. And yet, it led to what may have been the biggest man-made famine in human history. (The death toll from the campaign is a major factor as to why communist death toll in the 20th century is so high.) Unlike the Cultural Revolution that began with an air of menace(with Mao planning to purge and destroy his perceived 'enemies'), the Great Leap Forward was launched with hope and optimism. Mao hadn't planned to kill a single person but ended up killing anywhere from 25 to 40 million people. How could such thing happen? It was because, by the eve of the Great Leap, China had turned into an empire of lies. Through series of purges, struggles, campaigns, nonstop propaganda, and education/indoctrination, Mao had sent a message to every corner of Chinese state and society that he is not only numero uno but infallible, invincible, all-wise, all-knowing, super-duper, and awesome... and anyone who even suggests otherwise is in for a big surprise. So, if Mao hatched a plan to catapult China from a Third World nation into a First World one in a matter of a decade(or less), how could anyone disagree? His wish was their command. How could it be otherwise in a country where Maoism was the sacred law of the land, where Mao cult was the new religion? So, when Mao said his plan would be a great success, it had to be a great success. There was no other way. So, almost immediately, various provinces announced tremendous gains under the new program. Wheat and rice harvests were said to be doubling, tripling, quadrupling... If some provinces were making such claims, others felt compelled to do likewise or make even more extravagant claims. World according to Mao trumped reality. So, if Mao had great hopes for the Great Leap, then it was up to the Chinese to make sure that reality conformed to Mao's vision. The provinces, having made big claims about increased harvests, had to ship the amounts stated to the cities. But in fact, there weren't great increases in harvests. The claims were mostly empty rhetoric to appease Mao's megalomania as the savior-builder-master of China. As grains were shipped to urban authorities in the exaggerated amounts, there was less food for the peasants doing backbreaking work. But being in tune with the spirit of infallible Maoism, the exaggerated claims continued and more grains were shipped to the cities. Even as the countryside had less food, China was sending food to other nations as aid. It did so because the government was convinced that the Great Leap was a wild success. In reality, things grew dire in the countryside. It was made worse by Mao's insane campaign to kill sparrows that ate grain. It never occurred to Mao that sparrows also eat insects that consume even more grain. (In America, the sparrows are the police. Police are blamed for black deaths, but when police step back, blacks kill more blacks and other victims. America, where 'pigs' became the scapegoated 'sparrows'.)
Now, the sane thing would have been for someone to tell Mao upfront before the Great Leap even started that it was a hare-brained idear. But who dared to say No to Mao? They were afraid even to say Maybe. It had to be Yes, Yes, Yes.
Or, Mao would have sobered up that it wasn't going according to plan IF the officials in the countryside did not exaggerate grain yields. But how could they not when they were expected to produce unprecedented bounties? After all, Mao was infallible, and you'd be a damn 'reactionary' to fail to fulfill Mao's dreams. Next, once the peasants started going hungry and dropping like flies from overwork and undernourishment, it would have made sense for someone to confess the grain figures had been falsified. But such a person would fear being purged and destroyed for having made up bogus numbers to fool Mao.
They were caught in a Catch-22. On the one hand, one dared not lie to the great Mao, but telling the truth could mean a death sentence. One felt compelled to lie in service of the Revolution as the Truth, but the lie could also be construed as treason. So, from all quarters, Mao heard nothing but happy news and glowing data. He genuinely believed China was advancing in leaps and bounds. Those close to him dared not speak any bad news. They existed in a state of fear and trembling. But eventually, things got SO BAD that the truth began to make its way to Mao in bits and pieces. When Mao asked about them, those around him denied the reports and insisted everything was going according to plan; and so more people suffered and died. But then, things got even worse, and the whole system began to break down. It's like, even if your nerves have been blocked from sending pain signals to your mind, you will eventually notice something isn't right when the body just feels wrong and isn't doing what it should. It got to the point where Mao ordered his men to tell him the truth. What was really going on? Mao had to forcefully order others to finally tell him the truth. Mao was upset that the truth had been kept from him, but he created this very culture of lies. After all, so many people had been purged, imprisoned, or even executed for having told the truth or shown any real courage and independence of mind. He surrounded himself with loyalists, true-believers, and flunkies. So, by the time Mao realized what a fiasco the Great Leap had become the damage had already been done. He blamed others for not telling him the truth — he had to pry it out of them — , but he'd created the conditions were only the approved dogma and narrative were allowed. And in the end, he learned nothing because a megalomaniac will always be a megalomaniac. Even as he assented to the reversal of the Great Leap policies, he blamed the people for complaining too much once the truth was out. So many peopled had died of starvation, but the concerns were mostly an annoyance to Mao. And tragically for China, Mao was allowed to remain god-emperor, and it wasn't long before he launched another crazy campaign, the Cultural Revolution.
There are parallels between Maoist lunacy and the insane Western Cults around Jews as new christs, homos as new angels, and blacks as new saints. Just like Mao remained mostly unscathed by the total disaster, notice how hardly any Jew connected with the insane Wars for Israel and Wall Street meltdown faced any consequences. Even after so many wasted lives, squandered trillions, and stolen gazillions, Jews are not only still in control of industries and institutions but objects of near-worship by both political parties. Even after so much black criminality and violence, it's always groundhog's-day-return to Noble Negro myths. And of course, US embassies now fly homo flags as the de facto new national symbol despite the cultural degradation unleashed by globo-homo, of which tranny-wanny insanity is a part. No matter what Jews, blacks, and homos do, it's as if they've been fixed as the permanent neo-trinity of the West.
Some on the Right have said the 'new left' is like Maoism, but it's not the case ideologically. Rather, something like Psychological Maoism has taken over the West. The current 'left' and its globalist enablers aren't into communism or class struggle and all that, the ideological components of Maoism. What they have in common with Mao is megalomania and the obnoxious insistence on the culture of lies to prop up their moral nihilism, which is worse than moralism or nihilism. While moralism can be overbearing, it can be a sincere effort to be more moral. While nihilism is dangerous, it is at least honest in its embrace of total freedom. In contrast, Moral Nihilism means owning the high ground of morality no matter how nihilistically you act. This is the Jewish Way now. Jews can do anything, but they're always right. They can lie, but it's always the 'truth'. Jews can kill, but they are always the victims. It's an empire of lies. Jews have mao-power, or mao-pao.
Report: Ga. fraud votes exceed margin of victory
