Joe Biden And The Progressive Cleansing Of America–Channeling Pol Pot And The Year Zero

A 1959 picture of French children playing High Executioner with a scale model guillotine at first seems a bad idea, sending the wrong message; but on second thought, probably a very good way of teaching history. The French, no matter how hard they try, cannot airbrush The Terror from the history books that children read.  After the glorious days of storming the Bastille heads rolled by the hundreds – aristocrats, loyalists, sympathizers, and suspected sympathizers.  The Terror was McCarthyism in blood, a post-revolutionary gory excess to match any in history.

The armies of Genghis Khan decapitated thousands and impaled their heads on pikes on the high road into town, raped, pillaged, and marauded from Bulgaria to China.  The soldiers of the Crusades slaughtered everyone in their path as they entered the Holy City of Jerusalem.  Millions were killed or murdered by Stalin in his political purges and Siberian gulags; millions more by Mao in the Great Leap Forward and the famines that resulted; and six million by Hitler, and many millions more by Pol Pot.  Russians, Germans, Cambodians, and Chinese need a moral reckoning.  Even in the amoral sweep of history, a series of coincidental, random, or planned events which resulted in mayhem, destruction, and death need to be considered, if not remembered.

 
Here in the United States, we want no part of  history; and Americans are on a juggernaut to remove any and all references to the antebellum South, the Civil War, slavery, Jim Crow, Reconstruction. and Radical Republicanism that tore the country apart and continue to divide us.  It never happened.  Washington, the army officer who defeated the British, the first President of the new republic, and the icon of freedom and independence must be airbrushed because of his slave-owning past.  

Jefferson, perhaps the most impressive figure of American history – diplomat, writer, philosopher, inventor, and author of the Bill of Rights – has no place in the American pantheon because of his sexual dalliance with a slave and his slave-owning past.  Andrew Jackson, military hero who defeated the British at the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, statesman, representative, and executor of Westward Expansion is off the shelf, off the currency, and consigned to the dust bin of American history because of his execution of Madison’s and Jefferson’s vision of Manifest Destiny, the civilizing mission to expand America from Coast to Coast.  

Taft is gone because of his support of the great industrialists of the early Twentieth Century – the men who built steel mills and railroads and mined the energy to run them; who created the the financial instruments to enable their growth.  Theodore Roosevelt is gone because under his watch the exploitive, environmentally crude, colonialist Panama Canal was built.  Franklin Roosevelt, John F Kennedy, LBJ, Clinton are persona non grata because of their sexual improprieties.  Henry Ford, despite his innovative, efficient, and productive assembly lines is dismissed as a capitalist overseer whose interest was only in cars, millions of cars, and cheap labor. 

In fact only those Americans who, because of their representativeness of race, gender, and ethnicity, have been elevated to prominence, and are considered worthy of note - Harriet Tubman will replace Jackson on the $20 bill because she was a black, formerly enslaved woman.  

The authors of slave journals, women who told ‘the truth’ about slavery from their slave quarters but whose stories of economic servitude ignored the more nuanced explication of the complex social, economic, cultural, and historical factors which determined both the persistence of slavery and the nature of Northern revolt are Pulitzer Prize candidates, not objective historical analysts. 

Harvey Milk and the San Francisco Castro gay radicals and not the critics who called out the gay lifestyle as promiscuous and contributed to the spread of HIV are lionized.  The Palestinians who after decades and billions of Western economic support, are still mired in Third World poverty and political irrelevance while Israel, which has in a few short decades become a model of modern liberal democracy, and economic enterprise, are championed.

There has never been a more myopic social policy as the cancel culture – an assumption that whatever occurred before must be judged only through the lens of today.  So it is no surprise that Joe Biden has expunged from the Oval Office any trace of what he and his coterie consider racism, colonialism, imperialism, and white supremacy. Within the first few days of his presidency  Biden sat with Kamala Harris to decide how to make it over.  The office should reflect the diversity of America, the progressive Utopia to come, and not the assumed, erroneous claims to former greatness.  

Biden’s America is not unlike Pol Pot’s Year Zero when the past was totally erased, liquidated, and forgotten in Cambodia’s transformation into what was envisaged as a Maoist Utopia.  All the bourgeoise – doctors, teachers, lawyers, administrators, and bureaucrats were to be either eliminated or re-educated.  Everything – language, attitude, ideas, and actions – would have to fall in line with the new revolutionary doctrines.

As part of a socialist Khmer Rouge-like purge, getting rid of the bust of Winston Churchill was an important, iconic statement.  Kamala Harris, his Rasputin, reminded him of Churchill’s support for Empire and the oppression and exploitation of Africans that resulted under British rule.  He was a despot, said Kamala, an arrogant, out-of-touch reminder of disgraced royalist empires of the past, and a symbol of white supremacy if there ever was one.

 

Biden thought for a minute – Churchill had after all been a brilliant statesmen and the very spirit, spine, and soul of Britain during the blitz.  He had been among the very first to understand Hitler’s military ambitions and the regional hegemony that was implied by his Thousand Year Reich.  Churchill had anticipated the geopolitical ambitions of Stalin and rejected any compromise with the Soviet dictator.  Churchill was a historian, an author, and an orator.  He embodied the greatness of Britain and Empire and was its symbol.  “What I wouldn’t give to be a leader like him”, Biden thought to himself.  Yet Kamala respectfully disagreed, and not only should Churchill go but ever white, capitalist, imperialist, misogynist, racist born.

Once Biden had been convinced that his presidency was secure and no challenges remained, he channeled Pol Pot – this was to be no less than a complete social, political, and economic revolution; and as much as the Khmer Rouge purges and pogroms were notorious for their brutality and murder, Biden took the point. The past would have to be called out for its ignorance, retrograde assumptions, and historical irrelevance.   

No references to the calumnious past would be permitted.  The words ‘empire’, ‘colonization’, ‘civilization’, ‘origin’, and ‘morality’ were to be expunged from the American English lexicon.  There were no such things as empire or colonization, only exploitation, depredation, and misery.  Empire was a concocted term based on the rapacious right of white, European kings.  Civilization only exists in the forests of Africa and Papua New Guinea, untouched by Western corrupt, disruptive and venal interests.  Origin had no salience as a concept, as narrowly defining, Western, and racist as it is.

Biden’s ‘Truth And  Veracity Commission’, organized at the outset of his presidency is an American inversion of the Académie Française; and is the body responsible for assuring correct and appropriate language.  There are not to be any ‘he, she, his, her’ pronouns in any federal document.  Only ‘they’ will do. Wherever possible loaded, sexist English terms, such as history, will be converted to their gender-neutral form or better the revisionist form, ‘herstory’.  

Anything with traditional racial, gender, or ethnic connotations or suggestions will be eliminated.  There will be no such thing as a ‘Chinese virus’, even though COVID emerged from rogue animal markets in Wuhan.  All things African must be phrased positively. Words describing the dysfunction, misappropriations,  misrule, and economic rape and pillage of African nations will not be allowed and will have to be replaced by ‘problem resolution’, ‘exogenously influenced inefficiencies’, ‘difficulties of political transition’, and ‘reordering of socio-economic priorities’.

To succeed, the Progressive Revolution can have no impediments, and the albatross of history is the heaviest and most onerous. History is done and over with, said Biden, Kamala, and the Truth and Veracity Commission, without relevance or significance.  Only the future matters in the Progressive vision.  

It is surprising to some that Biden had in his first days in office put his stamp on a radical progressive social agenda – after all his victory was assured not only by neo-socialist Bernie and The Squad, but by many Democratic moderates who simply wanted a return to some semblance of normalcy and temperance – but those observing more carefully have seen him in the thrall of exactly those who have wanted for years to remake America into a Utopian, autocratic, Orwellian, gulag world.

Biden’s heroes are not LBJ, Kennedy, and Roosevelt but Noam Chomsky, Paola Freire, Argentinian populists, Cuban apologists, and Salvador Allende.  The end justifies the means, the universalist lyrics of the Internationale. and la lutte continua are all in the first pages of Biden’s songbook. 'Unity', Biden's call to arms, will require some degree of enforced cooperation. Utopian ends are too important to worry  about the means to get there.  The enshrined principles of American democracy are relative, to be taken with a grain of salt, nothing set in stone.  If free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion interrupt, divert, or in any way impede the march to a progressive Utopia, they must be ignored. 

Biden may be a nice guy, a considerate even compassionate man; but this is politics, and he is in the hands of radical, determined, handlers who have no truck with namby-pamby collaboration and compromise.   The next four years will be as divisive and contentious as the previous four.

Biden, Transgenderism, And The Religious Melodrama Of Lilly Farmer

Lilly Farmer made her First Communion when the was eight.  The nuns of the Sacred Heart who taught catechism said that she was one of the most pious, studious, and charming girls that they had ever taught.  They knew that even at this very young age, she had a vocation and would join their order.

Lilly came from a religious family, one which followed the teachings of the Church, went to Confession and Holy Communion every Sunday, fasted diligently during Lent, and made the Stations of the Cross during Easter week.  Lilly always joined her parents in their religious observances, and was especially taken by the depictions of Jesus as he made his way to Jerusalem, entered the city on an ass, was spat upon and reviled, and was crucified by Pilate.   

Her parents, like the nuns of St Maurice, felt that she had a religious calling, so heartfelt was her attention to Our Lord and her sympathy for him.  She was too young to understand the mysteries of the Resurrection, transubstantiation, and the miracles of the Bible, but had an empathy for things religious.  She felt the suffering of Jesus, and that was enough of a foundation for faith.  Her parents wished that they had had such an innocent, pure belief when they were her age.

She was confirmed at thirteen, despite puberty and early adolescence had lost none of her love and passion for the Church.  The nuns who taught her in middle school were even more convinced of Lilly’s vocation than their sisters were five years earlier.  They began to groom her for a novitiate at the Convent of the Sacred Heart .  It was a blessing, they thought, that a girl like Lilly – a bright, lovely, sensitive child – would be willing to give her life to Jesus and renounce the world.  There were fewer and fewer girls who were even marginally interested in this holy path.

Yet puberty does strange things, alters not only the hormones but attitude, approach, and the direction of one’s passion.  Lilly had murmurings that were disturbing, sexual intimations that were not quite right.  It wasn’t that she was attracted to other girls – all her energies were still and consistently directed to Jesus – but she had to admit that there was something more to her adoration.  Every Sunday she looked up at the marvelously male, sculpted, sensuous body on the cross and unlike most girls who harbored thoughts of being ravished by this glorious man, she wanted to be him. 

Fortunately she was coming into her sexual maturity during the Biden years, and the new President had made it clear from his very first days in the Oval Office that he was a transgender champion and a believer in the gender spectrum.  No one should be forced into one of two sexes, and the right to choose one’s sexuality was as enshrined in the Constitution as a woman’s right to choose abortion.  

Biden himself had never been tempted to consider anything but straight maleness – the press was on that case early on and interviewed hundreds of former friends, family, and colleagues.  Despite his Catholic education and upbringing and his repeated assurances that he was ‘a devout Catholic’, there had to be something ‘funny’ in his  background for him to express such commitment to a cause against which their Biblical injunctions let alone social ones.  Was he a closet gay? Or more likely, was he simply a bandwagon politician who saw advantage in welcoming the fraction of one percent of Americans who classified themselves as transgender. 

No, they concluded, this was a straight, white, Irish Catholic boy who had never looked astray.    In any case, the new President prominently displayed images of transgender men and women and the Folsom Street Fair in the Oval Office.  They replaced paintings of Madison, Hamilton, and Franklin; but said his Vice President, Kamala Harris, it was about time to make a clear statement.  The old sexuality was a thing of the past.

The priests in Lilly’s parish understood her sexual drama quite well.  They were all gay, found the Church to be the most congenial, welcoming place for men of their sexual choice, and were no strangers to the gender spectrum.  They, like Lilly, had abjured the notion of straight sexuality and fantasized themselves as female saints.  One of the most popular was Saint Cecelia, perhaps because of her rare beauty and aristocratic upbringing and because of her intended marriage to an attractive Roman prince. 

 As the legend goes, Saint Cecilia objected to the marriage because of her holy vows of virginity, but was forced by her parents.  On her wedding night she refused the advances of Valerian and said that her guardian angel would punish him if he were force consummation.  The story ends well.  Valerian becomes a Christian and a martyr as does Cecelia. There was something so romantic and thrilling about her story, so operatic and delightful, that the priests acted her part in mini-plays the priests put on in the rectory.

In any case, the priests understood the heady mix of transsexuality and religion – the powerful passions of both, and the marvelous edges on which one had to walk, and when she shared her desires with them – first in the confessional and then in private audience – they approved wholeheartedly.  There was nothing wrong with her feelings, they averred; in fact she was one of the very saintly few who understood the true dimensions of love.

“I want to become a priest”, she announced one day to Father Brophy.  At first taken aback, but then sympathetic, he encouraged her.  After all, under the current sexual ethos in America, she could simply declare herself a man, go to the seminary, take her orders, and become a priest.  Pope Francis had been avowedly supportive of vocation, however expressed, and was an early supporter of Biden’s presidential bid, his progressive views, and in particular his ‘inclusivity’  Gay men and women did indeed belong in the Church, and sooner rather than later, he would accept them – in all their guises – into the priesthood.  “The Pope will be no problem”, Father Brophy assured her; and because of Biden’s absolute secularism and refusal to grant any leeway to religious institutions to skirt civil rights laws, the seminary would do well to accept her.

So, it was as simple as that.  Thanks to her continued profound faith, her support of the priests of St Maurice and the Archbishop, who himself was gay, she had no difficulty in gaining admission to The Seminary of the Apostles in Stony Brook.  She would dress like a seminarian, use the common restrooms, and never be shy about her toilette.  Since most of the seminarians were gay, they would have no interest in her nakedness – she would be seen simply as missing some parts and having others.

   However, just before her matriculation, her path to the priesthood was abruptly blocked.  When the conservative Vatican advisors to Francis learned of this ‘abomination’ and found that he was nodding tacit agreement to this detestable secularization, they howled at his complicity with progressive gender radicals. The Church cannot abide such apostasy, and the slightest nod to its legitimacy let alone outright admission of it, would undermine the very pillars of Catholic teaching.

The priests of St Maurice were nonplussed, disappointed, and discouraged.  Finally they thought, true sexuality would be admitted by the Church, and they would be able to express themselves without recrimination.  Not only that, a transgender woman priest would set new standards of religious spirituality.  All hopes dashed.

When President Biden got wind of the odyssey of Lilly Farmer, he called her personally and thanked her for ‘her service’ to the alternately sexed men and women of America; and since the call was made publicly to which the press were invited, he took the opportunity to send a shot across the bow of the Church.  “No institution”, he said, “religious or secular, can restrain the normal expression of sexuality in all its forms.  The foundational principle of Christianity is, after all, compassion, tolerance, and welcome”.  The radical race-gender-ethnicity shills in the Congress and in academia cheered.  In one fell swoop, Biden had advanced their agendas of secularism and alternate sexuality

As far as Lilly Farmer was concerned, her dalliance with transsexuality passed once she was back on the streets.  If she couldn’t be a priest (Jesus), then she might as well be a woman and enjoy it.   She took a look at the gender spectrum and put her finger on the far female endpoint – ‘transformative feminine sexual essentiality’ was the box she checked. 

 She never lost her Catholic faith, just adapted it to her own more mature spiritual life.  The gender spectrum per se?  A parlor game, a spirited fun-filled orgy of Try This On For Size.  She never denied her fantasies – sexual dreaming is no different than those of The Brothers Grimm.  Sexuality has its goblins, villains, heroes, and charms.  Nor was she ashamed of her attempt to enter the seminary.  Weird sexual twists were part of the ethos of the day, the zeitgeist of America.  She was simply Sarah Bernhardt and Lionel Barrymore all rolled up into one.  One thing can be said about gender-bending – it is more fun than a barrel of monkeys.

Biden’s Assault On Free Speech–The Left’s Arrogant Move To Promote Their America

Free speech is enshrined in the Bill of Rights.  Americans have the absolute, inviolate right to express themselves freely, to be open and candid about their opinions, and to be assured that this right will always be protected.  The Founding Fathers understood the responsibility that comes with such a right, for the expression of such freely-spoken opinions will certainly be opposed by many.  That dialectic, they said, was at the heart of democracy.  Only out of the resolution of differing points of view and the settling of arguments would come better understanding.  They also were quite aware – the 18th century, despite the Age of Enlightenment and the enshrinement of logic was no less a contentious time than now.  In fact bar fights, shoot-outs, and brawls were even more common. 

In the movie ‘Gangs of New York’, directed by Martin Scorsese, the city in the 1860s was a lawless place ruled by outlaws, syndicates, and brutal gangs.  The ‘Americans’ wanted nothing to do with the Irish immigrants coming to New York; but internecine rivalries were common.  While the privileged members of the Virginia elite might not have envisioned such mayhem and social chaos – their vision was far more optimistic, nurtured as it was by a belief in reason and reasonableness – it would not have completely surprised them.  The guarantees of freedom of expression were bound to lead to untoward, unpleasant, and even deadly consequences.

Yet for the philosopher kings of the New Republic, it was only within this dynamic that democracy could flourish.  Democracy, they knew, was not a pretty thing.  The clash of difference was inevitable; but they had a fundamental belief in both the system in which opposing positions would resolve themselves through conflict, debate, and dissension and in the citizens of the country which they had helped form.  Government – as explained in the Constitution of which the Bill of Rights was only a preamble – was to be the guarantor of God-given rights, not the enforcer of any one opinion.   It was to be the adjudicator of last resort, and only then through due process.

What is so heinous about the current move to limit free speech is that it defies both principles.  It assumes that government should not only be a guarantor and a neutral arbiter, but an interventionist actor, taking sides and ensuring that its side prevails.  Worse it assumes the fundamental ignorance of the people governed – people who are too stupid, uneducated, gullible, and weak to be able to assess, judge, and decide on the veracity or reasonableness of others’ arguments.  The Left has argued that the issues of today are too important to be left to citizens.  Without the brakes, traces, and harnesses placed on them by government, they are sure to become as savage as the most cannibalistic tribe of the jungle.  Ignorance, progressives say, is endemic; and unless they, through the instrument of government, can enlighten the masses, the country will fall into misrule and disorder and never achieve the Utopia they envision.

Donald Trump was a master showman, a vaudevillian, and a circus performer.  He was not a new breed of politician, he was unique.  He challenged what he saw was the cant and arrogant self-righteousness of the Left.  He was not only a populist, but a radical populist who energized his base – the tens of millions of people who felt that they had found a voice, a man who would stand up to the progressive juggernaut, stare them down, and help preserve the values that had been a part of the American ethos since Jefferson.

In so doing, and typical of a man who made his millions on the mean streets of New York where lying, intimidation, threats, and thinly-veiled chicanery were part and parcel of his trade; a man who understood celebrity and its influence; and a man who was born with a fierce competitive independence, he without a doubt exaggerated, misstated, and manipulated the facts; and if his critics are to be believed, lied, fabricated, and deliberately distorted the truth.

No president has been so viscerally hated as Donald Trump.  His presumed lies and distortions were not only expressions of a manipulative, selfish, and ambitious man, but an evil one – a destructive, satanic, malignant force; and only removing him from office and public life would satisfy them.  No measure in the pursuit of this objective would be considered inappropriate; and the most damaging and most corrosive act to weaken the very foundations of Constitutional America, has  been the desire to close down free speech.  Trump’s utterances were to be prohibited from social media, and the voices of support for him monitored for inappropriateness

‘Inappropriate’ became the meme for suppression.  It became inappropriate to challenge conservatives’ views on abortion, gay marriage, black activism, abrogation of Constitutional rights, and One World internationalism; and even the more moderate critics of the progressive agenda which focused on race, gender, and ethnicity were forced to hold their tongues or at the very least express their opinions in a far more tepid and ineffective way.  People who spoke out loudly against the gross incompetence of Congress, its political corruption, and its anti-democratic agenda were considered facilitators of the renegade assault on Congress (January ‘21), complicit in the death and destruction.  Now, more than ever, those who even intimated a radical makeover of the discredited body, were to be surveilled, monitored, and even drawn before the courts.

The January ‘21 assault was a watershed moment for the Left, for it gave image and footage of unbridled free speech.  While only a handful of agitators stormed the Capitol, they were enabled by the millions who joined with Trump in his harsh, dismissive, and unrepentant attacks on it.  Whether or not Trump’s accusations of voter fraud and the illegitimacy of the election has any validity is beside the point; and so is the fanatical support of his followers.   The point is that only the few who actually breached security and entered the halls of Congress with bad intent were guilty.  ‘Enabling’ words and speeches, no matter how angry or intimidating, are not tantamount to destruction. 

The fact that the democratic system worked, that there has been an orderly transition of Presidents, and that a new, quieter, and more traditional Administration is in place, should be enough.  The braggart, blowhard, menacing, and hateful Donald Trump has been shown the door.  Enough people in the United States had had quite enough and were ready, as unpalatable as many of Biden’s policies were, for a change.

So what does Biden do in his first days in office? Inflame the anti-free speech hysteria, cloture the voice of millions, step on the neck of individual expression, and revert to the elitism and arrogant Establishment presumptuousness that he said he hated. He now wants to reverse the 1996 law (Section 230)which prevents any lawsuit against social media for the speech of their subscribers.  In other words, if government decides that John Smith has not only violated ‘community standards’ but has suggested, implied, or indirectly ‘threatened’ the United States, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram can be sued.  If the new law passes – and there is every indication that in a bi-cameral Democratic Congress it will – these social media will be obliged to shut down all political speech; and since much speech is political, referring as it does to social, economic, financial, or international policy – most speech will be shut down.  Social media will become forums for sharing recipes.

Biden insists that removing Section 230 is not tantamount to restricting free speech, but no more disingenuous, misleading, and distorted comment has come out of the new President’s mouth.  Of course it will abrogate the fundamental Constitutional rights of Americans; and Biden knows it; but far worse than his commitment to a profoundly anti-democratic and unconstitutional move, is his enthusiastic approval of it.  He like his progressive claques insist that America is too important to be left to right wing anarchists; and better to nip in the bud the already disturbing emergence of ‘fascist’ groups.  Once the threat has been eliminated says the manipulative, hyper-partisan Biden, we will restore press freedom.  Right, sure, whenever.

Biden in his first few days in office has confirmed the worst fears of conservatives.  He is indeed in the thrall of ‘The Squad’ and their shills.  Donald Trump was an opportunity, not a problem.  Now that the country has seen what free speech can do, they will be supportive of our moves to limit it.

This is not just about Donald Trump, nor the siege on the Capitol, but about the progressive agenda which requires compliance and obedience.  There is only one way to look at gender, race, and ethnicity; only one way to view the free market and the capitalist system; only one way to look at the world and its interrelationships.  Any objections recorded will be noted in the files, and offenders sent to the gulags for re-education.

For all Biden’s claims of unity, consideration, inclusion, and tolerance, his actions speak otherwise. Conservatives have been right all along in their objection to Biden and the progressive Left.  Their voices, unfortunately, were drowned out in the hysteria over Trump, and he is responsible for relegating valid conservative principles to insignificance.  It will take a strong, eloquent, persuasive, non-controversial leader to restore the Republican party, give it salience and importance, and to eventually restore democratic order.  No one, however, is in the wings let alone on the stage.