Making the vote irrelevant makes secession relevant.
If he gets anything approaching an honest vote count Trump will win in a landslide.
“The Corruptocracy,” Robert Gore, October 25, 2020
I stand by my statement. It’s obvious that Trump didn’t get “anything approaching an honest vote count.” One of the better crime scene investigations I’ve seen is “The 2020 Election: Fuckery Is Afoot,” by blogger Correia45, and I’ve posted others as well. As the litigation-filled days go by, we’re sure to find out more about the Democrats’ electoral fraud.
I won’t venture a guess as to whether such disclosure and litigation will ultimately lead to awarding Trump the election, but I have my doubts. The corruption runs too deep. If Biden wins, his camarilla will try to explain away the obvious with talk of glitches and anomalies, all of which mysteriously broke their way. They shouldn’t bother; they’ll be fooling no one and it just adds to the rage.
Good often emerges from even the worst situations. The good emerging from this one is that the veil is completely lifted, the election provides transcendent clarity. Many have already peeked under the veil. Those who refuse to grasp what is now appallingly obvious are too dense, deluded or corrupt to be of concern, and should be left to whatever ignominious ends fate has in store for them.
This election has made it made perfectly clear that we live in a corruptocracy. We can’t vote corruptocracy out any more than the people of the Soviet Union could have voted out communism (also a corruptocracy) and for the same reason: the vote itself is fundamentally corrupt. If Trump loses, it clearly discredits the notion embraced by the losers of every election: wait til next time. Next time is likely to be even more corrupt.
Amazon Paperback Link
Kindle Ebook Link
What’s clear to those of us who voted for Trump is if we want to get back what we cherish about America, we’re going to have to fight for it. Freedom is not free, and neither are individual rights, the rule of law, capitalism, peace, or the opportunity to build a better life.
Although I and others have suggested some sort of semi-amicable divorce for our bitterly divided country, that’s not going to happen because of the nature of the division. As I said in “The Corruptocracy,” the division is between the productive class and those it supports.
After this election there are undoubtedly millions of disgusted Trump supporters who would embrace a split in a heartbeat, but peaceful secession is precluded by the fundamental flaw at the core of every collectivist ideology: governments don’t produce, they steal. Leeches never desires separation. The blue needs the red; man cannot live on high tech, media, crony capitalism, and finance alone.
The battle is joined, collectivists versus producers. Tactically, there’s no dumber strategy than waging war against those who support you, but their pretensions notwithstanding, collectivists are never all that bright.
If Biden is declared the winner, Covid-19 restrictions are no longer necessary to hamstring the economy, discredit Trump, and justify mail-in voting fraud. The precedents have been set and a scary germ story can always be concocted when needed to frighten and subjugate those who are easily frightened and subjugated. If the collectivists have a brain in their collective head they’ll quickly lift all the restrictions to resuscitate economies so their collectivist governments will have something to steal. On any honest accounting for pension and medical liabilities, most of them are already bankrupt.
SLL reader SW Richmond recently commented:
if one looks at this map:
…one can see the geographic answer to our problem: “Centralia”.
Centralia includes the entire South except Virginia, extends north and west to the mountain states, Midwest and Arizona. “Centralia” has copious access to ports and harbors, energy, food, internal transportation, manufacturing, fresh water, military assets including nukes. Centralia does not include VA, MD, PA, NY, etc, nor CA, OR, WA. MN, IL, WI and MI can choose. We may desire to include Jefferson. A not-so-great migration would ensue much like during the dust bowl. Voter registrations could be reviewed before migrants were accepted.
This is not a drill. It is about survival.
This most definitely is not a drill, it is about the paramount issue that defines human history and philosophy: who decides the terms of an individual’s survival, the individual or those who rule by violence in the name of divine right, the collective, some other vicious justification, or naked force?
The idea of individual rights protected by the government was the foundation of the American experiment. It was and has been imperfectly realized; it is an ideal and humanity rarely attains its ideals. Government is and always will be the antithesis of that still revolutionary ideal. The US government’s massive expansion has been at the cost of the people’s liberty and has destroyed most of their rights. That destruction has been ongoing since the beginning of the republic and Trump has done nothing to stop or reverse it. Philosophical insight and consistency are not among his virtues.
Nevertheless, a Biden administration will be worse, much worse. The Democrats now openly aspire to the collectivist ideal—the complete subjugation of the individual to the state. We’ve gotten a preview of coming attractions with coronavirus totalitarianism, which has obliterated the few freedoms and joys left to Americans. For the millions of Americans who voted for him, including me, Trump represented the last, best hope for what we consider the American way of life.
There’s no going back, and the way forward is for those who cherish the American ideals of individual rights, freedom, limited government, the rule of law, and equality before that law to break away from Washington’s and its aligned states’ corruptocracy and sunder the ties that bind us. Nations and governments are not cast in stone for time and all eternity.
Certainly the bankrupt dis-United States and its government aren’t. The bill is coming due for the debt orgy and an unprecedented and catastrophic global economic cataclysm will take down whomever is unlucky enough to be the president. A defeated Trump would dodge that bullet. The resulting chaos will be unmanageable by a government that produces only debt, can steal little or nothing from a bankrupt economy, cannot borrow at anything but ruinous interest rates, and which must cover its soaring budget deficits with scrip it either prints or creates via computer entries, whether or not it outlaws real money (gold) or forces its increasingly worthless scrip to stay in the banking system.
At that time, an organized secession movement has a real chance. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Collapse will be freedom’s staunchest ally if the moment is seized. It won’t be easy and it won’t be without blood. Until it happens, prepare for the worst, it is assuredly coming and coming soon, but work towards a brighter future in a nation that does not yet exist.
For those who don’t want to wait, almost six years ago (January 7, 2015) I published “Revolution in America,” which presents a nonviolent way to take down the government by attacking it at its weakest point. It requires the collective action of millions of people and at that time I believed the recommended course of action would remain hypothetical. Things change. Although the hour is late, any significant fraction of Trump’s rightfully enraged 71 million voters could still put the plan into effect. The article merits a second look. Please pass it, and this article, on.
I to voted for the Orange man in 2016 and it took two weeks to prove that he was a put in office to destroy the Christian basis of our country. The Christian Zionist are deluded and the small hats control the money, msm, judges and ussa…..my opinion and it’s very sad.
Thank you, Private Hudson. Please continue crying into your beer. the rest of us will fight.
Very good as usual thus I am linking as usual @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Nothing New Under The Sun 2016
Reblogged this on Starvin Larry.
Could then the blue counties be cut off? Surround them and let them be self sufficient…..as if they could.
Without the coasts, and through controlling immigration from blue areas Centralia would remain red (productive, prosperous and relatively free) for generations. Chicago has a port and a power station and so could become an independent city-state, or join Canada assuming the Canadians would have them (“Refugees Welcome!”).
Stopping blue immigration would be the largest problem; ask Texans and Arizonans. Blues are like viruses; they move in and destroy an area, then move on leaving a wasteland behind them. This is one thing which must be “arrested”.
Part can be slowed by limiting who can vote. For example – ALL citizens can vote in a Federal election (except Federal employees, can’t have the inmates voting themselves things); State elections limited to those who have resided for at least 3 years; Local elections limited to those who have resided at least 5 years. This forces people to be exposed to the culture before voting to change. Also may limit the number of people moving if they know they can’t affect immediate change.
The economic destruction coming from a second wave of “covid” lock downs combined with the civil unrest from all the lies the media will spin out of this contested election will usher in the last 8 years that looks as though it will commence on or about the 20th anniversary of 9/11:
Texas, Georgia, and Florida would be in open civil war in days.
Ditto Michigan. Virginia. And PA.
The guy in Apt 3A can’t secede from the couple in 2C, or the family on the first floor.
People would vote with their guns long before they voted with their feet.
The idea that it could ever happen nationwide, let alone work, is flatly delusional.
But violence, nationwide, on an scale unprecedented anytime since Appomattox?
That you can have in spades.
The arch-model for what you imagine has a name: the Yugoslavian Breakup post-1990.
And it wouldn’t be all bad, everywhere.
Just worse than anyone can recall in living memory.
Matt Bracken’s Bosnia x Rwanda probably isn’t what you were hoping for.
But it’s what’s headed our way.
More “predictions” from the greatsoothsayer Aeslop. How many times have you been right? Oh yeah… zero.
Hedge, if your reading comprehension is no better than your memory comprehension, it’s no wonder you’re so confused.
The only prediction, per se, I ever made was that Ebola was going to get here in 2014. When FedGov, including genius Fauci, said it couldn’t, wouldn’t, and that even if it did, we could handle it.
We know how that turned out.
You could look it up.
But you go on imagining there’s a non-violet way to divide this country, when vote tallies, even in red or blue strongholds, run 60-40.
It’s going to be national war on a floor-to-floor nd house-to-house level, everywhere, simultaneously.
If you don’t have anyplace that’s not a national forest to call home, you ain’t got a country. That’s true in both directions.
Pingback: Quote of the Day | Amazing Arizona Land Company
I’d prefer to just start killing the bastards… Much easier..
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." - Grand Ole Party
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." - Indeki - Real News Network
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It's Perfectly Clear…”
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..."
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It’s Perfectly Clear…” – iftttwall
Pingback: [ZEROHEDGE] Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." | Liquidary.com
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." | ZubuBrothers
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." - Truly Times - News
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It’s Perfectly Clear…” – Finanz.dk
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It’s Perfectly Clear…”
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It’s Perfectly Clear…” – Investing Matters
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It's Perfectly Clear…” – MAGAtoon
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear…" | | Dawson County Journal
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It’s Perfectly Clear…” | COLBY NEWS
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." - Open Mind News
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It’s Perfectly Clear…” – Investing Money Trends
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It's Perfectly Clear…” – Maris Research
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear…" – American Broadcasting CommUnity
Pingback: It’s Perfectly Clear | Financial Survival Network
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." | AlltopCash.com
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." - Nemos News Network
Pingback: Today’s News 10th November 2020 | The One Hundredth Monkey
Pingback: Robert Gore: "It's Perfectly Clear..." | Zero Hedge
Pingback: Robert Gore: “It’s Perfectly Clear…” – Patriot Powerline
Robert, you’re still making the fatal mistake that individual competition is the greater good of mankind, when science proves the opposite is true.
And then you predicate everything on top of that argument, which by extension makes everything else you say wrong.
Your ignorance is completely layered like an onion.
Which “science” has proved what you say it has proved?
I think he meant “Scientology”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Robert, you are so predictable, you asked for the science, and this will come back and bite you later, and leave yourself exposed.
But more on that later…
You also put science in quotation marks expressing your skepticism, yes?
I’m flabbergasted that you need science to prove that cooperation and altruism exists, and that it is beneficial to the giver and receiver. Sure, science has still not come up with an answer as to the difficult question of where and how the motivation for altrutism exists, but there is no doubt that it was hardwired into our evolutionary past.
Cooperation and altruism even exists within the animal kingdom.
Pingback: It’s Perfectly Clear, by Robert Gore – Governmental Services Corporation Watch
I asked a question and you provided links to articles. Thank you. I did not say that cooperation and altruism do not exist. I am a capitalist as both a writer and the CEO of a tech startup (4rysprays.com) and I cooperate every working day, which is all of them. As a manager, I cooperate with other managers and employees, our customers and potential customers, our suppliers, and our shareholders. I sign contracts all the time. What is a contract other than a tangible memorial of cooperation?
I also compete every working day. We compete for markets, for sales, for employees, and for financing. Once upon a time I competed for the love of the woman who became my wife. There are two ways to allocate resources, via competition, markets, and voluntary exchange, or coercion. Competition is the basis of capitalism, the system that has produced far more human progress and wealth than any system based on collectivism and coercion, which ultimately produce regress. To say that cooperation and altruism exist, which I gather is the point of your recommended articles, in no way scientifically proves that competition, and by implication capitalism, has not conferred enormous benefits on humanity. It has and the evidence is undeniable.
Cooperation and altruism exist, and both are rightfully matters of voluntary individual choice. However, I start looking for the exits when collectivists start talking about cooperation and altruism, because voluntary is not generally what they have in mind. Coerced cooperation is extortion or assault and battery and coerced altruism is theft. If that’s not what you have in mind, if what you seek is voluntary cooperation and voluntary altruism, then we’re on the same page. I wish you well in those endeavors.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Did you actually read the links I sent you?
“…and I cooperate every working day, which is all of them. As a manager, I cooperate with other managers and employees, our customers and potential customers, our suppliers, and our shareholders. I sign contracts all the time. What is a contract other than a tangible memorial of cooperation?”
That is not cooperation within the context of altrutism, as discussed in the links.
You are working for purely self-interest, to build profit in your company, and probably, from a personal point of view, gain personal pride and satisfaction in doing so.
I can’t believe you misunderstood this point.
“I also compete every working day. We compete for markets, for sales, for employees, and for financing.”
Again, you’re missing the point entirely.
“Once upon a time I competed for the love of the woman who became my wife.”
Really? I’m happy for you, but it’s completely irrelevant to this discussion.
Again, I’m flabbergasted at your (mis)understanding of this issue.
“There are two ways to allocate resources, via competition, markets, and voluntary exchange, or coercion.”
Coercion? Can you cite some examples?
“Competition is the basis of capitalism, the system that has produced far more human progress and wealth than any system based on collectivism and coercion, which ultimately produce regress.”
Again, can you cite some examples?
“To say that cooperation and altruism exist, which I gather is the point of your recommended articles, in no way scientifically proves that competition, and by implication capitalism, has not conferred enormous benefits on humanity.”
Really? Ok, can you cite some examples where science supports your assertion?
“However, I start looking for the exits when collectivists start talking about cooperation and altruism, because voluntary is not generally what they have in mind. Coerced cooperation is extortion or assault and battery and coerced altruism is theft. If that’s not what you have in mind, if what you seek is voluntary cooperation and voluntary altruism, then we’re on the same page.”
Again, I don’t know what reality you are operating in, but alturism is voluntary, it’s not mandated through coercion.
“Collectivists.” “Collectivists.” “Collectivists.” “Collectivists.”
You continually throw around that word, to the point to turns into a pejorative, and suggest that people like myself, are not very smart and don’t have brains. I’m not sure if you’re going to progress your argument when you throw around insults and generalisations like that. I can cite many dumb and ignorant people on your side of the political fence too.
Peter, You sound like a couple of smug elitist I just had a discussion with on another site. Robert is right. Instead of throwing out links to other sites tell us what you believe, or can’t you? Similar to the two I had a discussion with, you throw out smug condescending replies, basically one liners, but can’t explain your position. If you are smart like you claim, let’s hear a real argument from you.
My argument is sound, and my links support my argument.
Perhaps it’s you that doesn’t understands this philosophical discussion.
If Robert was right, why hasn’t he replied?
I didn’t respond because you keep changing your argument, attributing assertions to me that I didn’t make, and bringing in new assertions. Here is your first assertion:
“Robert, you’re still making the fatal mistake that individual competition is the greater good of mankind, when science proves the opposite is true.”
I dismissed that assertion out of hand. For science to “prove” that individual competition is not in the greater good of mankind, science would first have to specify the greater good of mankind, which is a question of philosophy, not science. Anything that purports to prove that anything is in the greater good of mankind is not science, it is a philosophical assertion masquerading as science. Such pseudo-science runs into the problem confronting all social “sciences”–the impossibility of testing the proposition against some sort of control. To say that individual competition or anything else is or is not “in the greater good of mankind,” you have to specify your hypothesis, be able to test a baseline–here’s a society based on competition, here’s an identical society with no competition–and you have to be able to specify your criteria for the “greater good.” Whatever you call the proof for your claim, it’s not science.
I then spent the rest of my last comment addressing assertions you made in your second comment, and rejecting assertions attributed to me that I didn’t make. This time I’ll address certain of your questions and comments in your second comment.
“Did you actually read the links I sent you?”
“That is not cooperation within the context of altrutism [SIC], as discussed in the links.
You are working for purely self-interest, to build profit in your company, and probably, from a personal point of view, gain personal pride and satisfaction in doing so.”
In your previous email you asserted that I asserted that cooperation and altruism do not exist, when in fact I did not. I then said that I cooperated in the context of my work, which as you correctly note is motivated by self-interest. I don’t argue that cooperation cannot be motivated by altruism as well. I’m not going to argue with links that I don’t have time to read. Connie makes a good point–what’s your point? You keep saying that I miss the point, but you never state the point I’m missing.
“There are two ways to allocate resources, via competition, markets, and voluntary exchange, or coercion.” (quoting me)
“Coercion? Can you cite some examples?”
Marxism, socialism, democratic socialism, the welfare state, fascism, the income tax, legal tender laws, coronavirus lockdowns, mandatory vaccines, and zoning laws, to name but a few. All of these systems or laws are grounded on coercion or its implied threat.
“To say that cooperation and altruism exist, which I gather is the point of your recommended articles, in no way scientifically proves that competition, and by implication capitalism, has not conferred enormous benefits on humanity.” (quoting me)
“Really? Ok, can you cite some examples where science supports your assertion?”
Science cannot support my assertion because what constitutes a benefit to humanity is a philosophical, not a scientific, question (see above). There are philosophers who have argued that humanity would benefit if most of us were dead. As for the benefits of capitalism, I would argue that the Industrial Revolution was powered by capitalism and did indeed confer enormous benefits. That we have this forum to debate these questions is one small benefit of capitalism. WordPress provides a platform and I voluntarily pay for it.
“Again, I don’t know what reality you are operating in, but alturism (SIC) is voluntary, it’s not mandated through coercion.”
I agree, which means that any kind of coerced transfer of income or wealth from one person to another is theft, no matter who is doing the coercion and no matter what purported altruistic justification they claim.
“Collectivists.” “Collectivists.” “Collectivists.” “Collectivists.” (quoting me)
“You continually throw around that word, to the point to turns into a pejorative, and suggest that people like myself, are not very smart and don’t have brains. I’m not sure if you’re going to progress your argument when you throw around insults and generalisations like that. I can cite many dumb and ignorant people on your side of the political fence too.”
Collectivism is indeed a pejorative. How can the label for a philosophy whose variants killed hundreds of millions in just one century not be? Many times collectivists have used the rhetoric of cooperation and altruism to justify their depredations. If you want to say that what resulted isn’t true cooperation or altruism because they weren’t voluntary, we’re in agreement. I will use the term when it describes a philosophy. Nowhere have I suggested that you are “not very smart and don’t have brains.” Those are your words, not mine. And nowhere do I use insults and generalizations to advance my arguments. I try to use facts and logic and I’m open to contrary facts and arguments. I don’t claim science proves my points when they are points science cannot prove or even address. Finally, yes, there are many dumb and ignorant people on both sides of every political and philosophical fence. I put neither you nor I in that category.
Thank you for taking the time to comment.
Thank you for that well thought out reasoned reply. I have gotten increasingly tired of people responding to thoughtful articles and discussions with flippant replies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If it’s not worth thinking and reasoning about, it’s not worth doing.
Robert, as we say in Australia, you’re all over the place like a mad woman’s breakfast…
So why are you replying now?
Robert, this discussion is simple, I’m proposing that altruism is the way forward for understanding, and for a mutual benefit to all in this world, as opposed to your desired naked dog-eat-dog capitalism.
You have made so many off-topic and bizarre assertions with your rebuttal, but we will get back to them later, but first i want you to substantiate your first reply, and that is…
“Competition is the basis of capitalism, the system that has produced far more human progress and wealth than any system based on collectivism and coercion, which ultimately produce regress.”
Demonstrate to me, why you think capitalism has given “enormous benefits” to the people who have lived under the capitalistic system?
Demonstrate to me, that capitalism has been the great panacea you claim it to be.
And this time, no throwing the question back at me, which I’ve already substantially answered in my first post.
I have no interest in continuing this discussion.
Wisdom in action.
When kids we were frequently admonished “Stop changing the subject”. Kids can blether on forever.
Altruism works great in an ant colony!
Unfortunately humans are inherently evil and thus the reason that both capitalism and altruism will eventually break down into some form of socialism and then communism.
The scum always seem to float to the top of the colony and keep changing the rules until 10% owns 90% and 90% get the remaining 10%.
The first disciples started out with a pure form of “altruism” shortly after Pentecost:
Acts 2:42-45 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers. (43) And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. (44) And all that believed were together, and had all things common; (45) and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need.
But within a century that too failed as even within the faith there are “scum” who heap the colony mound all upon themselves.
This earth is really nothing more than a proving grounds for where each soul will spend his or her eternity so live wisely:
Pingback: Civil War 2.0 Weather Report: At The Bank Of The Rubicon – Wilder, Wealthy, and Wise
Long ago I had commentated on this site that President Trump had not rescinded any of the previous executive orders from previous Presidents that if used would basically make him an American Caesar. He has the ability and the excuse to do so now. If the election fraud is allowed to stand then we are a banana republic. If POTUS seizes power with these edicts we are still a banana republic. Either way loaded magazines are probably going to come in handy.
Peter, you may wish to scientifically have your drinking water examined. Something seems extremely wrong, and I am suggesting it may be in the water.
Pingback: Links on the Election Fraud – brushbeater
Pingback: It's perfectly clear | altnews.org
Pingback: It's perfectly clear | The Freedom Post