The Hi-Tech Traditionalist: Neo-Bolshevism Suffers A Setback In Britain But The Stakes Are Much Higher In America

The Hi-Tech Traditionalist: Neo-Bolshevism Suffers A Setback In Britain But The Stakes Are Much Higher In America
The unrepentant old-style Bolshevik and notorious anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn

Have you ever been to a labor union meeting, a meeting of a local council, or perhaps an all-hands meeting at the large corporation you work for? Have you ever had to listen to “points of order” and hours of bizarre dogmatic speeches delivered by people who haven’t done anything remotely useful in decades? Have you noticed that if you happen to be actually knowledgeable in the topic being presented, you can immediately tell that both the data and the conclusions of the presentation are lies and even damn lies? Have you ever wondered why these liars who are droning on about things that start from the utterly bizarre, blow right past useless, and end up in being rather dangerous are making much more money than you do while adding no value?

Well, wonder no longer. This is Bolshevism. It is a grey hungry protoplasm, an enormous amoeba that has no agenda but to consume everything in its path, knows nothing except which side has the more “light”, more money, more power, or simply more regular folks still enjoying a modicum of financial and personal freedoms. Then it turns towards that light and extinguishes it forever. 

No country has ever recovered from Bolshevism. Not Russia, not Cuba, and yes, not even China. The countries of Eastern Europe that are doing well like Poland and Hungary have never embraced it, it was forced on them. Such is the case with the Baltic states. Their recovery has been made possible by the tough and seemingly hopeless battle they had fought against Bolshevism for the 50 years of Soviet occupation. Other countries, such as Belarus, Moldova, Ukraine, have not been so lucky. Bolshevism has entrenched itself there since the very beginning and never let go, with truly disastrous consequences. 

China seems to be doing well, but it is nothing but NEP on a massive scale held up by Western globalists and neo-Bolsheviks. When hard communist dogma was instituted in the newly born Soviet Union, its economy immediately went into a death spiral to the point that as even Lenin understood would have soon returned the country to a state of savagery and allow it to be colonized like the Congo. So he instituted a new economic policy (NEP), which allowed for small-scale private enterprises. The economy immediately rebounded, shops and restaurants sprang up and life became immeasurably better almost overnight. 

The Hi-Tech Traditionalist: Neo-Bolshevism Suffers A Setback In Britain But The Stakes Are Much Higher In America
Propaganda in the Cultural Revolution Period of China

But as Stalin had predicted, economic freedom gave birth to personal freedom and began to threaten the Bolsheviks’ hold on power. When Lenin died (whether of natural causes or from poisoning), Stalin immediately cancelled NEP and began imprisoning sufficient numbers of people from manual laborers to engineering department managers to build a slave labor economy. This economy managed to rebuild the Russian industrial base, though it was a disaster in the agricultural arena. It was the slave economy that gave the USSR first manned space flight and while it began to be slowly dismantled after to Stalin’s death in 1954, the country coasted on its coattails until its demise in 1991. 

China today has a hybrid NEP and slave labor economy, one that is enabled by blatant currency manipulation and bold-faced theft of intellectual property. The IP theft was pioneered by the Russian Bolsheviks who reversed engineered every Ford truck and Boeing airplane they could lay their hands on, but the Chinese one is on a much more massive and institutionalized scale. China could have never been able to engage in these policies, of course, had it not been permitted to do so by the West, a permission that the neo-Bolshevik Western globalists were happy to gove.

You may ask what a neo-Bolshevik is. I mean just because this is not 1917 it does not mean that old-style Bolsheviks cannot exist. Neo-Bolsheviks are Bolsheviks who pay more attention and spend more resources on public relations. Unlike the old Bolsheviks, the new ones do not promise space flight and a future of glowing cities where intellectuals roam the streets quoting Pushkin from memory. The neo-Bolsheviks limit themselves to simple promises of free processed “food” and porn on your free LCD screen. They know that this is the limit of what most people today aspire to.

The neo-Bolsheviks rarely appear in public because they know that even with tens of thousand of dollars in clothing and hundreds of thousands in plastic surgery they still look like thinly disguised reptilians from a low-budget 1950’s sci-fi flick. Just look at George Soros and the Clintons. To up their PR, their persuasion game as Scott Adams has put it, they opened a production line for sock puppet droid-like creatures who are the result of focus groups and the best in applied marketing theory.

From this production line we received Obama and Omar, Ocasio-Cortez and Greta Thunberg. In Britain they have pushed Khan the London Mayor. In Germany, Angela Merkel. In France, Emanuel Macron. In Canada, Justin Trudeau and Cynthia Freeland, the real prime minister. All of these are still very much operational field models and the damage they have already done and will yet do to the cause of freedom worldwide is literally immeasurable. 

The Hi-Tech Traditionalist: Neo-Bolshevism Suffers A Setback In Britain But The Stakes Are Much Higher In America
Stalin monument in Zhdanovsky Park, Moscow, 1930

It is important to understand though that even Bolsheviks 2.0, the neo-Bolsheviks, have limitations. Their resources are not infinite. Like everybody else, they must choose their battles and the front lines are all in America. This is why they haven’t been able, apparently, to field a custom-made droid in the British elections, allowing instead an old-style Bolshevik, Jeremy Corbyn, to mind their shop in that country, a task at which he failed miserably. 

It is a very poor testament to the importance of the UK on the world stage, or rather the lack thereof, that the globalist neo-Bolsheviks put little resources into fighting for it, abandoning it to a rather bizarre guy with a big mouth and a penchant for blatantly overt anti-Semitism. 

But there is an interesting moment developing now. Hitler, one of the leaders of the Bolshevik movement of mid-20th century and the leader supreme of its nationalist wing, had made a mistake that led to his rather short-lived though sadly over-achieving tenure. To put it in a nutshell, Hitler underestimated the power and resolve of the English-speaking people. He believed that he could easily hold England at bay while he fought with his Bolshevik colleague in Russia for supremacy over the Bolshevik dominions. He believed that America would never intervene and fight alongside Britain until it was too late. He also believed that America hated Stalin and the proto-globalist Soviet Bolsheviks more than they hated his nationalist brand of Bolshevism. 

He came close. England almost fell. America joined the war two years later than it should have. But in the end the English-speaking world defeated nationalist Bolshevism we know of as Nazism in the West and helped Stalin do the same in the East. Stalin’s victory, many would be interested to know was made possible by three things: Russia’s inexhaustible landmass, American aid, and a kind of nationalist NEP that Stalin instituted in 1941 as the Red Army was fleeing the Germans. Fearing literally for his life, Stalin suspended the Bolsheviks’ globalism and animosity towards both nationalism and religion. He dusted off the old icons that survived being burned on his own orders and reanimated the fresh corpse of Mother Russia, a corpse into which he himself fired the final bullet only two decades earlier. Armed with American materiel from canned food to tanks and Russian nationalist fervor, Stalin got Hitler bogged down and bleeding between the Volga and the Vistula, making himself the king of the Bolsheviks. 

We may be seeing some interesting parallels today to this mistake by the Fuhrer. England was put on the back-burner by the neo-Bolsheviks, but it delivered to them a rather painful defeat. In the main theater of operations, the US, president Trump and his core support among the public have not succumbed to any of the Bolsheviks’ weapons from massive fake kompromat to the dreaded committee gavel. But there is more. Trump has been waging effective warfare against the main bastion of neo-Bolshevism: China. By depriving the Chinese of the ridiculously preferential terms under which they have been doing business in their hybrid NEP slave camp economy, Trump is severely curtailing their ability to serve as an economic showcase of globalist success and he is beginning to reverse or at least restrict the net cash flows that until now were all going east.

 Neo-Bolshevism Suffers A Setback In Britain But The Stakes Are Much Higher In America
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speaking to attendees at a rally for Bernie Sanders in Council Bluffs, Iowa
Image by
Matt Johnson

Finally, by lowering taxes on personal and corporate incomes, slowing down the mad dash to over-regulate, and reviving tariffs on imports, president Trump has restored America’s status as the global showcase of free enterprise. 

So far in history we have two examples of Bolshevik collapse; the supernova of violence that was the Second World War and the pathetic whimper of incompetence and rot that was the Soviet Union. We are close to the time of the third Bolshevik collapse: that of China and the neo-Bolsheviks. Let us hope and pray that their defeats in America in 2016 and in Britain just last week will combine with Trump’s reelection in November of next year to ensure that the collapse of the neo-Bolsheviks and their Chinese enterprise will not drag us into a third world war, a war that would be fought in a world stuffed to the brim with nuclear warheads. 

Related articles

European Union At Risk Of Losing The Balkans To The East

Kozeta Çika

America Really Did Have A Manchurian candidate In The White House

L Todd Wood

With Russia Having China As A Friend, Who Needs Enemies?

L Todd Wood


PermReader December 15, 2019 at 7:24 am

Bolshevism was so “national branch” of a communism, that after destruction, by the communists (stalinists) themseves,it has no repetitions in the world.

Show me December 22, 2019 at 1:51 am

Bolshevism survives by killing the opposition. They starved millions of peasants to death in Ukraine in the 30’s along with more millions in Russia when Stalin collectivized agriculture, confiscated the crops, killed the land owners and sold the produce on the world market for cash to invest in industry. They then industrialized Russia and did industrialize to some degree.
They were among the victors in WWII, had a terrific spy service that delivered America’s nuclear secrets for the A bomb, used captured German scientists to develop a space program and suppressed dissent while stealing whatever they could from the occupied countries of Eastern Europe.
Now Bolshevism is dead, oligarch’s and national corruption giving it a different name, but I think some of the same people are at the top and certainly the same people are on the bottom.
Same in Cuba, where Che executed 50 K people against the wall and no telling how many died in China, 50 million? No one really knows, but millions died of starvation while the Communist Party solidified its rule.
The article puts forth a dramatic outcome, but I think it’s far too early to project victory.
The coup in Washington is probably just the earliest salvo, the Red Coats at Lexington.

PermReader January 9, 2020 at 1:59 pm

There is the clear assymmetry of the Bolshevism(marxism) and far right nazism ,despite all common totalitarian features: nazism has strategical one enemy : Jews(though hidden by many proxes). Marxists has the whole world of the enemies,including ,besides capitalism,all religious institutions. But the question of their allies is more complicated and interesting one.


Leave a Comment

Subscribe to our evening newsletter to stay informed during these challenging times!!