The Divorce Agreement to Avoid Revolution


 

Here is something that is going viral. It is the reality of our political-economic situation as we head into 2032 and begin to watch this cascade out of control come 2020. If we do not respect what is written here, there will be no choice for society and it will lead to revolution and blood in the streets. Historically, this always occurs because those on the left seek to oppress those who want to be left alone. When such threats emerged in Europe, those who wanted to be left alone fled to North America.

From the mid 1850s onward, particularly following the 1848 Revolutions, many steamships began to run advertisements to migrate to the United States. Even St. Petersburg, Florida, was incorporated as a town on February 29, 1892. The legend is that the two developers flipped a coin to see who would name the city. John C. Williams, born in Detroit, lost the coin toss to his partner Peter Demens and the name was decided. Demens named St. Petersburg after the place he grew up — St. Petersburg, Russia. Williams got to name the hotel in town — the Detroit. Nevertheless, as political tensions were rising in Russia, St. Petersburg, Florida became a major destination for Russians fleeing the rise of Communists.

Our problem this time around is that we have run out of new continents to flee to. As the left rises, the right has been cornered. This does not appear to be something that will end very nicely.

 

DIVORCE AGREEMENTDear Canadian liberals, leftists, B.C. social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Castro supporters, et al: We have stuck together for 150 years for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.

Our two ideological sides of Canada cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

 

HERE IS OUR SEPARATION AGREEMENT:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. We will settle for less landmass if we get the right portion, which must include Alberta & Saskatchewan.

That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy given the favouritism divide.

Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

–We don’t like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You can also keep the Carbon Tax.

–You are welcome to the liberal judges, CUPE and UNIFOR.

–Since you hate guns, and war, we’ll take our firearms, the police, and the military.

–We’ll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and the coal mines, and you can go with wind, solar and biodiesel.

–You can keep Butts, Barbie, Shannon & Suzuki. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all four of them.

–We’ll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, the farmers, Wal-Mart and the TSE.

–You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food vouchers, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies and illegal aliens.

–We’ll keep the greedy CEO’s and rednecks.

–You can have the peaceniks, the pipeline protesters, and anti-everything economically beneficial crowd.

— When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we’ll help provide security.

–We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values.

–You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, peoplekind, political correctness and Mr. Dress Up. You can also have our share of the U.N. We will no longer be paying any part of that bill.

–We’ll keep the SUV’s, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Volt, Tesla and Leaf you can find.

–You can give everyone free and regulated everything healthcare?. if you can find any practicing doctors.

–We’ll keep “God Save the Queen” and “The Old National Anthem words.”

–I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute “Imagine” or “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing”, with “Kum Ba Ya” or “We Are the World”.

–We’ll practice trickle-down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.

–Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our history, our language, the war memorials and the Queens picture.

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberals and socialists. And if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I’ll bet you might think about which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

Sincerely, Anonymous Law Student

P.S. Also, please only invite Leonard DiCaprio, Sean Penn, Martin & Charlie Sheen, Michael Moore, Barbara Streisand, and Hanoi Jane Fonda to your portion of landmass.

P.P.S. And you won’t have to press 1 for English when you call our country.

Let’s Keep This Going, Maybe Some Of It Will

Start Sinking in.

 


Published on Nov 30, 2016

SUBSCRIBE 42K
Hanson speaks about the 2016 election and the myths surrounding it at the David Horowitz Freedom Center

Victor Davis Hanson — The New Old World Order


Published on Oct 14, 2010

SUBSCRIBE 112K
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and military historian, professor of classics, and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is the author of more than a dozen and a half books. His most recent volumes are Makers of Ancient Strategy: From the Persian Wars to the Fall of Rome, which Dr. Hanson edited, and The Father of Us All: War and History, Ancient and Modern, a volume of Dr. Hanson’s own essays. Beginning with an explanation of why the post-Cold War New World Order is rapidly breaking apart, Victor Davis Hanson sees a world where nations are returning to the ancient passions, rivalries, and differences of past centuries. In light of this world transformation, Hanson looks at key challenges the United States faces around the globe: in Europe, Asia, Russia, Mexico, and Iran.

Awkward Moment – Candidate Kamala Harris Asked About Her Jussie Smollett “Modern Day Lynching” Tweet…


Against revelations that actor Jussie Smollett has fabricated a hate-crime attack, including his payments to actors to stage the events, Presidential candidate Senator Kamala Harris was asked about her prior tweet calling the fake attack a “modern day lynching”.  Her response is rather, well, awkward:

(Link to Tweet)

Hate Hoax – Jussie Smollett Rehearsed Fake Hate Attack With Two Pretend Attackers…


Chicago investigators continue to share stunning evidence about the hate-crime hoax carried out by actor Jussie Smollett with the assistance of two brothers.  It appears the trio even rehearsed the attack.

CHICAGO (CBS) — Jussie Smollett paid two brothers to stage an attack against him, directed them to buy items used in the alleged assault and actually rehearsed it with them, sources say. (read more)

Donald Trump Jr.

✔@DonaldJTrumpJr

They actually REHEARSED it so they could create the most outrage and stoke as much hate as possible?!? Terrible.
Jussie Smollett Case: Brothers Questioned By Police Were Paid $3,500 To Stage Attack, Which Was Rehearsed Days Before, CBS Chicago https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/02/16/sources-brothers-released-bought-rope-used-in-jussie-smollett-attack/ …

Sources: Brothers Released Bought Rope Used In Jussie Smollett Attack

A source says the brothers bought the rope used in the incident at Smollett’s request.

chicago.cbslocal.com

16K people are talking about this

Is There Ever a Right or Wrong?


What is true and what is false? Do those things even exist or are they simply subjective opinions? Naturally, if we look at politics there is a wholesale denial of the existence of any objective reality and moral values. Each side sees only its own reality and proclaims the other is wrong. Is the glass half-full or half-empty? Is there any absolute definitive truth in describing this glass pictured here?

This becomes a problem in politics. We cannot clearly distinguish good from bad, knowledge from ignorance, or dominance from submission. Who is the ruler and who is to be ruled? It’s a critical theory that is reduced in reality to the conclusion that there is no universal truth. No matter what we define, there is always an opposing opinion. Hence, this is my theory of why cycles MUST exist. There is never some one-size fits all. Such attempts by one side to impose their demands only leads to civil unrest. There can be no single truth in life for there will never be an agreement as to what is true or false.

It is wrong to kill someone. But what about crimes of passion that would not reflect the same act as someone who was a serial killer? What about a soldier who kills in a war? Is this not distinguished from someone who kills people in a nightclub rage? What about someone who defends themselves in a store robbery and kills the intruder? There emerges qualifications that will always call into question what is true and what is false.

 

Karl Marx’s Grave Vandalized – Is this the Cyclical Turning Point from the 1848 Revolutions?


Karl Marx’s grave was selectively vandalized. Someone used a hammer to deface the monument. No other graves were attacked so it is clear this was a politically motivated incident in line with the rising economic tensions between the left and the right. The tomb of Karl Marx is located in London’s Highgate Cemetery. Marx had been exiled from Germany and then the rest of continental Europe following the failed Revolutions of 1848, which engulfed most of Europe.

Marx did his research in London. This is his pass to the British Library. The Revolutions of 1848 were essentially a democratic movement and an uprising against the political elite. In 1848, Karl Marx published “The Communist Manifesto” with Friedrich Engels, and was exiled to London as a result. In London, where he lived the remainder of his life, he wrote the first volume of “Das Kapital.” This undoubtedly influenced the revolutions that opened the door to communism/socialism. This also inspired the collapse of the old feudal structures and created independent national states. The revolutionary wave began in France in February 1848, when the French monarchy was overthrown. Communism actually began in France as a “commune” where people lived in one shared community with no individual property rights. It was the French who convinced Marx that communism would work better than just socialism, which he had advocated initially.

This 1848 Revolution spread like a contagion, similar to what the American Revolution had done during the previous century. The contagion of 1848 spread to most of Europe and parts of Latin America. In total, it impacted over 50 countries. This was by no means a cooperation between various revolutionary trends around Europe.

Generally, a contagion is attributed to six factors:

  • (1) widespread dissatisfaction with political leadership, as we have today;
  • (2) demands for more participation in government and democracy, as republics have once again robbed us of our right to vote;
  • (3) demands for freedom of the press, which is manifesting today on the internet;
  • (4) the demands of the working class, whom today have been oppressed by huge tax rates combined with income taxes and VAT at 20%+;
  • (5) the upsurge of nationalism, which we are again watching unfold thanks to terrorism; and finally,
  • (6) the regrouping of the reactionary forces based on the royalty, aristocracy, army, church, and peasants, which is again unfolding as class warfare.

Many believe that the Yellow Vest Movement is unfolding in the very same spirit, and it too has spread like a contagion. Ironically, the cycle of civil unrest based upon economics discontent should rise in 2020. Indeed, the Yellow Vest movement appears to be right on schedule.

Jordan Peterson: The fatal flaw in leftist American politics


Published on Apr 12, 2018

SUBSCRIBED 2.5M

What is political extremism? Professor of psychology Jordan Peterson points out that America knows what right-wing radicalism looks like: The doctrine of racial superiority is where conservatives have drawn the line. “What’s interesting is that on the conservative side of the spectrum we’ve figured out how to box-in the radicals and say, ‘No, you’re outside the domain of acceptable opinion,'” says Peterson. But where’s that line for the Left? There is no universal marker of what extreme liberalism looks like, which is devastating to the ideology itself but also to political discourse as a whole. Fortunately, Peterson is happy to suggest such a marker: “The doctrine of equality of outcome. It seems to me that that’s where people who are thoughtful on the Left should draw the line, and say no. Equality of opportunity? [That’s] not only fair enough, but laudable. But equality of outcome…? It’s like: ‘No, you’ve crossed the line. We’re not going there with you.'” Peterson argues that it’s the ethical responsibility of left-leaning people to identify liberal extremism and distinguish themselves from it the same way conservatives distance themselves from the doctrine of racial superiority. Failing to recognize such extremism may be liberalism’s fatal flaw. Jordan Peterson is the author of 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos Read more at BigThink.com: http://bigthink.com/videos/jordan-pet…