​Most Americans think of their nation as fifty states, with familiar outlines on a map. They think of the Founding Fathers, the red, white and blue flag, and the capital building at Washington, DC. 

Though the unique inception and development of the United States of America undoubtedly has made the population of the USA more varied than that of most nations, until the past few decades, the word "American" had a real meaning and brought to mind a type of character that was identifiable to people across the world, and with which most of the citizenry more or less identified. Over the past fifty years or so, due to mass immigration and intensive propaganda campaigns by the mainstream media, we are led to believe that "American" is a designation available to anyone who meets a low bar of criteria established by paid-for politicians and verified by disinterested bureaucrats. Ilan Omar, Rashida Talib, and truckloads of border-hoppers are as American as Thomas Jefferson. How dare you suggest otherwise?

We are seeing the beginnings of an awakening among Heritage Americans. (The fact that "Heritage Americans" even needs to be specified indicates the absurdity of the question of nationalism in the country today). We have considered people who dwelled within the borders of the USA to be American. We have considered people who dwelled within the borders of Texas to be Texan, and those who dwelled within the borders of Georgia to be Georgian.

The current election fiasco highlights the problem. Chuck Schumer and various Golden Swamp-dwelling Hollywood celebrities have been waging a campaign to "take Georgia" for the Senate. A similar effort to "Turn Texas Blue" has been raging for years now, and has been successful enough that in his last contest, Senator Ted Cruz barely hung on to his seat by the skin of his teeth. The fact that Georgia, Texas, Virginia, and North Carolina get bluer with every passing year is not due to leftists' success in persuading the historic population of the merits of their policies. These states have been flooded with immigrants, from both foreign nations and other American states, that are hostile to the historic population. We must ask: In what way are the state borders meaningful today, if at all?

The headlines are full of disputes about disenfranchisement of voters in swing states caused by various election shenanigans. There are accusations of rampant fraud which will never be completely resolved, leading to uncertainty and the stink of illegitimacy for whoever is eventually sworn into the Presidency.

If you consider that Americans (and Georgians, Virginians, and Texans) are a culturally and historically distinct people, and you value the consent of the governed as fundamental to the legitimacy of government, all this wrangling about the legitimacy of the last election is beside the point. What if we accurately count the votes of a random group of people with no common sense of identity, or common anything, who happen to live within the lines on a map? Can a true representative government come from a hodge-podge of hostile groups, based upon a count of who successfully pulled more of their kindred into the pen by election day? Of course not. There are people groups who are not being represented, however the votes are counted. In our current situation, it is the historic, founding population that is being disenfranchised.

Currently there is a groundswell of Republican voters calling for mutiny against the GOP. There is more than enough reason to revolt. With the balance of the Senate at stake, Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee just successfully co-sponsored, with Kamala Harris, a measure that will allow big tech companies to bring in an unlimited number of H-1B green card workers. And Republicans are ignoring demands from the public to take seriously the mountains of evidence of voter fraud that may have cost Trump his re-election bid.

Michael Flynn Jr, son of recently pardoned General Flynn, tweeted "I'd rather be shot in the chest than stabbed in the back" with regards to a boycott on voting for the GOP in the upcoming Georgia run-off. In a profanity-laced lived stream entitled "That Georgia rally just cost the GOP the Senate," in which the gathering of thousands of citizens to protest election fraud was seemingly ignored by the party brass, Mike Cernovich, a social media influencer credited with helping move the dial to Trump in 2016, ranted, "They've done nothing for us. They give us no reason to vote for them other than the Chuck Schumer boogeyman. F*** the GOP." If one is to use social media as a gauge, cries of this sort are becoming deafening. 

One definition of "nation" is "a large body of people, associated with a particular territory, that is sufficiently conscious of its unity to seek or to possess a government peculiarly its own." 

A nation is a body of people conscious of it unity. Our political borders are increasingly irrelevant, and our elected lawmakers increasingly non-representative.

It is time to ask yourself a question, and answer with unvarnished realism.

Who are your people?

Years ago, Duck Dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson stirred up a bit of a media firestorm with some comments he made about how black people were happier in the old days. Here are Robertson's words as reported in The Atlantic:

"I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field .... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word! ... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues."

The article launches into a boring and predictable screed about how Robertson is glossing over the brutality of racism in the Jim Crow South. Viewing the world only through the limited lens of modern racial politics, they cannot understand any other paradigm. Modernists view old-time Southerners like Robertson as something odd and repulsive, and in their dismissiveness, they miss the point he is trying to make. Thinking whites are inherently privileged, they cannot conceive that poor whites, or "white trash," were about as poverty-stricken and low status as the black folks they worked beside. They have no awareness of the cordial and often warm relationships that existed throughout the South between black and white people, regardless of status. And they have no means of comprehending the profound truth of the phrase "They were godly; they were happy" - that people in far worse objective circumstances in the past were often far more content than those in modern times because they found peace and strength in their faith.

A phrase that was common in Robertson's generation and those prior, which is seldom heard these days, is "ain't no use complaining." This may sound to some like a statement of despair and helplessness, but it was not - it was quite the opposite. 

"Ain't no use complaining" was a statement of determination made by someone who viewed the world with clear-eyed realism and a sense of duty. 

"Ain't no use complaining" was an acknowledgement that life is inevitably tough and unfair, and one could only play the cards they had been dealt.

"Ain't no use complaining" was a statement made by someone who was lacing up their boots, putting on their hat, and heading out the door to face the challenges of the day.

"Ain't no use complaining" was an affirmation of an intention to do something proactive, rather than passively wallow in self-pity.

My grandmother was a girl during the Great Depression. Due to hardship, she and her siblings were separated. Most were sent to live with relatives in different states, but the two oldest were placed in an orphanage. When I heard this story and reacted with shock, she replied matter-of-factly, and without a trace of bitterness, "It had to be done." 

"It had to be done." There's another phrase you don't hear anymore. People once accepted that hard decisions had to be made, and that despite these difficulties, one must continue to persevere.

Today, complaining is favorite national pastime for most, and a career for some. Misfortunes are not something to be overcome, but are cherished opportunities to gain attention and, if you're lucky, to leverage for the greatly prized "victim" status. Think of the things that evoke histrionics in the media these days: incidents of rudeness or tactlessness, even some barely perceptible ones that have been termed "microagressions." The prevalence of "hate crime hoaxes," offenses people report which we later learn they have inflicted upon themselves, is proof of the rewards of victimhood. Victimhood is embraced, celebrated, and broadcast as widely as possible. 

Contrast this attitude to the modesty, dignity, and self-respect of prior generations, even in the "oppressed" classes. My mother recalls her parents' black friends express shame and disappointment at the behaviour of their children during the "civil rights" protests of the 1960s, not because of some internalized slave mentality that made them believe they should accept an inferior place in society, but because they wanted their children to pursue their goals in a way that showed respect for God, themselves, and others. 

Virtue signalling is another modern affliction. I cannot count the times my grandparents quietly stepped in to provide for the needs of their neighbors and friends; sharing food or material goods, pitching in to help fix, build, or clean, offering consolation or encouragement. It is hard to imagine that any of the people I knew of their generation, black or white, would have broadcast their misfortunes or their accomplishments to 500 of their closest friends on the internet. 

They made their choices not for praise, but out of a sense of responsibility to their neighbors and genuine compassion. You know, the qualities virtue-signallers like to say Americans (other than themselves) lack.

Missed by many amidst the news of civil unrest in the nation was the discovery of an old interview which may shed light on the reason for our current national condition.

I have written in the past about the practice of occultism among our national elites in politics and entertainment. I began a journey of discovery about the topic when, during the 2016 election season, Wikileaks released the personal emails of Clinton insider John Podesta. The disturbing revelations included his communications with one Marina Abromovic, a supposed performance artist, inviting her to his home to perform the sickening "spirit cooking" ritual.

The unearthed clip was from an old interview with Abromovic in which she explained that Donald Trump was going to rise to power, and that he was a "magician" who would "wake up the world." I am unwilling to assume that a devotee of occultism is using the term "magician" as a figure of speech. What does this highly-placed practicioner of the dark arts know about Donald Trump?

You may recall Trump enthusiasts excitedly reporting the 2007 "prophecy" of the late televangelist Kim Clement that Donald Trump would become President, and that he would face impeachment threats but emerge unscathed. Amazingly, Clement also "prophesied" at the same time that Bill Gates would bring a new financial system to the world. In the wake of the COVID-19 lockdown, Gates has emerged on the global stage to promote his "quantum dot tattoo" identification system, which allows for cashless, touchless financial interactions. (Unbelievably, the quantum dot tattoo uses a patented substance called "Luciferase," and the patent number is 060606 - "666." If the symbolism of this is not intentional, it is an incredible coincidence.) He has touted the benefits of his injectable identification system which also removes the need for carrying personal ID cards, and tweeted that because of COVID-19 there is no alternative to the implementation a global vaccination program. End-times prophecy watchers have been sounding the alarm that the Mark of the Beast is being prepared for the public.

Clement was incredibly accurate in his predictions, but was that because he was sharing prophecies from the Lord, or channelling the plans of the enemy?

There are additional reasons for concern about the motivations of Bill Gates. A few months ago, Microsoft made the startling choice to use the above-mentioned spirit cooker Mabrina Abromovic in a promotional video for the new Microsoft virtual reality system. (The promotions were removed from the internet rather quickly after severe backlash from the public.)

In his pre-Presidential days, Trump expressed concerns about possible risks of vaccinations, which caused many critics of Big Pharma and the liberty-minded who object to mandatory vaccinations to view him as a kindred soul. It is odd that a man who was once viewed as a vaccination skeptic pledged, in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis, to fast-track a vaccination for the illness and make it available to all Americans. It is even more odd that a few weeks ago, Trump filmed an ad in support of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation GAVI, the Global Vaccine Alliance, which works to increase access to vaccinations in poor countries.

To honest observers, it is clear that there is a canyon between Donald Trump's rhetoric and his actions. Yet, enthusiasm for him remains for a large number of people. For millions of people, the "Q-Anon" phenomenon plays a role in their unwavering faith. "Q-Anon" is a mysterious entity who supposedly channels insider information to Trump's faithful followers about his 4D-chess plans to drain the swamp. Every action taken by Trump which seems to betray his promises is explained as a brilliant part of a long-term, complex scheme to bring down the bad actors in government. Millions of people still tenaciously hold to the Q-Anon advice to "trust the plan," because, despite copious evidence to the contrary, "patriots are in control." Recently, Donald Trump Jr. and General Flynn have retweeted social media posts made by "Q-Anon" supporters, indirectly signalling support for the theory.

Nobody knows who Q-Anon is. Some believe the phenomenon is run by patriotic insiders in the intelligence community. Theories include Q-Anon being run by General Flynn, Barron Trump, John F. Kennedy, Jr. (who supposedly faked his death years ago and is now helping Trump behind the scenes), or some kind of artificial intelligence program. To reiterate, millions of people have faith in a secret plan based solely upon on a series of anonymous internet posts. How can otherwise sensible people be convinced to believe Q-Anon rather than plain evidence? It's almost as if they are under the spell of a magician.

​Indisputably, the current state of American pop culture and entertainment is abysmal both morally and artistically. Most people with good character and taste have disengaged from it completely, or limit themselves to a few carefully selected shows or performers. While I do not blame anyone for choosing not to wallow in the toxic sewage pumped out by the so-called entertainment industry, the sad fact is that we share a world with millions of people who are enthralled by it, so I believe we should keep up some degree of awareness.

In a recent piece I detailed how many A-list celebrities are pushing an unmistakably satanic agenda on the now spiritually empty, morally rootless American population. The train continues to careen full speed towards the lake of fire. While satanic expression used to be a fringe activity practiced by a few heavy metal performers and shock artists, today it is standard fare offered by the most celebrated pop stars. There is no more pure embodiment of this sick trend than relative newcomer Billie Eilish, a teen from Los Angeles, who could have been Ozzy Ozborne's hip zoomer granddaughter. Songs like "All Good Girls Go To Hell" and "Bury a Friend" are accompanied by blood-chilling, waking-nightmare style music videos. The current "it" girl of American music, she has been plastered on countless magazine covers as of late, and she even broke records at the most recent Grammy awards for being the youngest artist in history to sweep multiple categories.

While the normalization of satanic imagery and ideas is horrifying, I don't believe this trend is the most dangerous thing being pushed by the American entertainment industry. Christ warned of wolves that would appear in sheep's clothing. I fear more real harm can be done by deceivers, such as the "Hollywood Christians" who wander among the credulous sheep. It is my strong opinion that there are NO real Christian Hollywood stars. You can no more be a Christian Hollywood star than you can be a Christian drug lord or a Christian mafia boss. You do not become a household-name star, with all the accompanying wealth and societal influence, by being an enemy of the system that sustains you.

This seems to be a hard point for many people to accept. Many American Christians swoon when a star thanks God for their Oscar, or tweets a prayer request for a sick child. They excitedly share stories on Facebook whenever a celebrity gives a boilerplate interview about the importance of faith. Recently there has been an undue amount of fanfare about the supposed Christian conversion of rap artist Kanye West. Last year he released an album called "Jesus is King," and hit the talk show circuit to talk about his faith. He has been offering a series of concerts called "Sunday Services" that are attended by selected fans and fellow celebrities.  Christians all over the country have been gleefully celebrating Kanye's supposed salvation, and are hopeful that Kanye will bring many souls to Christ.

Where, oh where, do I begin debunking this nonsense? First, there is no evidence of spiritual fruits. In the past, Kanye declared himself to be a god, dubbed himself "Yeezus," and often mimicked Christ, portraying himself in a crucifixion pose or with a thorny crown. He even taunted an actor dressed as Christ on stage during a live performance. A true convert would unequivocally, forcefully denounce his prior behavior, begging forgiveness from God and grieving for any fans he had led astray. Nothing like this has happened.

There is not only an appalling lack of repentance, but also of humility. When appearing with megachurch "prosperity preacher" Joel Osteen last fall, Kanye was pleased to inform the crowd that he, "the most talented man in the world" was now serving God. On another occasion, he claimed God was using him "to show off." 

He continues to keep company with the worst kind of blasphemers. Just a few days before the Osteen appearance, Kanye appeared at the Astroworld festival where he shared a stage with a number of sickening performers, including openly satanic shock artist Marilyn Manson, who burned a Bible on stage as part of his act. The above-mentioned Billie Eilish even attended one of his "Sunday Services." Unbelievably, there are still plenty of Christians excusing his behaviour as the missteps of a "baby Christian." The lack of discernment among American Christians is mind-boggling.

Osteen is but one favorite "preacher" of the glitterati. Other "Hollywood Christians," such as Justin Beiber, Selena Gomez, Nick Jonas, Chris Pratt, Bono, and various members of the Kardashian/Jenner clan, have been spotted at megachurch Hillsong. Hillsong's stadium-filling worship services feature heavily tattooed, skinny-jeans wearing pastors and concert-style musical shows with performers who are staples of Christian contemporary music stations. 

Calling Hillsong a modern-style church does not fully convey the lack of sanctity their "worship" services display. For example, one Hillsong rendition of Silent Night -  I am not making this up - opened with a lengthy drum solo and featured a burlesque-style dance troupe. The problem isn't simply that Hillsong is too worldly. The problem is that it is not even a church. Instead of a cross, the center stage is often lit with a pyramid-shaped "hill" overwhelming the stage, and other non-christian symbols are frequently used. The Christmas pageant featured a soloist who looked more like Ishtar than the Virgin Mary, and dancers under a bright moon carrying glowing orbs. One popular Hillsong tune, Oceans, begins with the lyrics "You call me out upon the waters/The great unknown where feet may fail/And there I find You in the mystery...Spirit lead me where my trust is without borders." Not only is Christ not mentioned, the lyrics make more sense as a promotion of new age spiritualism or ancient mystery religions. 

Similarly, video of Kanye's Sunday Services show attendees wearing pastel robes, swaying in circles while singing hypnotic, rhythmic chants. The costumes, music and symbolism bear little if any relation to traditional Christianity. (Attendees are required to sign non-disclosure agreements, so there is no telling what goes on behind the scenes at these events).

If these "churches" were merely watering down Christianity to neutralize it, that would be bad enough. But it is worse than that. In my opinion, these churches are part of a calculated plan to herd nominal, lukewarm Christians towards the coming One World Religion. While the Pope welcomes Muslims and Pagans to his fold with talk of tolerance and inclusiveness, Hollywood Christians are slowly, insidiously, helping to transform American Christianity into a hybrid of all faiths. American church-goers, who have been convinced that there is no such thing as wolves, only different kinds of sheep, have no idea.
​

The Unite the Right event in Charlottesville made its mark on the psyche of the nation in August 2017. For most, it is cemented in their minds as part of national history, the nature of which has already been decisively settled. Those who depended on the MSM narrative have heard the event frequently mischaracterized as a "white nationalist rally," and often used to condemn Trump for supposedly calling Nazis "very fine people." (For a more accurate assessment of Unite the Right, please see our series of articles about the event).

Having satisfactorily convinced most Americans of the elite-approved narrative, the Fake News peddlers have moved on to other subjects. Consequently, most people don't know about the Charlottesville saga that continues to play out in the courts. That is unfortunate, because the case not only challenges the official narrative of the contentious event, but also raises important First Amendment issues.

On February 21, a decision was issued by the Fourth Circuit in the Kessler vs Charlottesville lawsuit, which event organizer Jason Kessler filed against the city for violating his First Amendment rights by orchestrating conflict in order to justify shutting down Constitutionally protected speech. 

The "heckler's veto" issue that is central to the case has rarely been raised in U.S. courts. There is a precedent set in the Sixth Circuit from a 2015 case in which a group called the Bible Believers, a group of anti-Islam Evangelicals left unprotected by police, were removed from a Muslim festival in Dearborn when the crowd became violent towards them. In this case, the court decided in favor of the Bible Believers, reasoning that the police could have taken other action that would have allowed the Bible Believers to exercise their rights to free speech. 

Unfortunately, with regards to Kessler vs Charlottesville, the judge granted the city's motion to dismiss the case. The ruling, which focused heavily on the obligations of police to protect, stated that "plaintiffs did not suffer any violation of an existing constitutional right." 

Really? As Kessler remarked after the ruling was issued, the rally speakers "never got to say one word in support of the [Robert E. Lee] statue." 

They will appeal the ruling. It is entirely possible this case could be argued before the Supreme Court. As tensions in this country increase, the right to free speech in potentially volatile situations will become an even more a critical issue.

Kessler's persistence in this David-and-Goliath case is laudable. He and his legal team have faced delay tactics, stonewalling of FOIA requests, and adversarial press. They have been harassed with excessive discovery request by some of the Usual Suspects who have also been a thorn in the side of the Trump administration. (He is also a defendant in a civil case stemming from Unite the Right which is expected to begin in the fall of this year.)

Despite the disappointing ruling, Kessler remains determined and optimistic. Noting that free speech is the most important issue in dissident politics, he declares that he intends to fight until all legal options are exhausted. Either we will win, or we will learn for certain that the courts will no longer uphold the right to free speech. If so, we must be prepared to make a populist appeal based on the facts of the case - that, he believes, we can win.

​I'm not a scientist. In fact, I struggled with the basic requirements of science needed for high school and college graduation. It's not my "thing." Even if you did better than me in your science classes, you are probably not a "climate scientist." Still, I think there are plenty of common-sense reasons to disbelieve the doomsday cult of environmentalism. 

Some of us are old enough to recall when "global cooling" was a concern. Then the fear was "global warming." You don't have to reach too far back to remember when Al Gore received worldwide praise for announcing the Inconvenient Truth that the polar ice caps would all be melted by the year 2013. (In case you haven't noticed, they're not all melted). The list of failed predictions goes back decades. 

Mistakes and re-calibrations do not disprove the notion of global climate change. The issue isn't that mistakes are made - it's that when the predictions don't come true, there is never an explanation given for the errors, or even an acknowledgement. There is no explanation why we should believe in the greater reliability of the new assertions. Given the laughably bad track record of past predictions, it's reasonable for us to be highly skeptical of new predictions. Still, full faith in the doomsday proclamations is expected - no, demanded - by people who are completely unaccountable for their own previously stated beliefs.

Global elites flock to Davos annually in private jets to discuss reducing carbon emissions. Al Gore lives in an expansive estate. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rides in an SUV from her apartment to her office at the nation's capital. The Obamas just bought beachfront property which we are to believe will be underwater in a few short years. Celebrity environmentalism advocate Leonardo DiCaprio has used private movie studio jets to squire models from coast to coast and vacationed on one of the largest yachts in the world. Rather than being scorned by environmentalists as a hypocrite and a poser, he is showered with awards, which he happily jets all over the world to collect. He is not adored because of his conscientious stewardship of resources, but because, like Tom Cruise with Scientology, he is a celebrity member of a cult.

Why don't the Davos attendees set a good example for the rubes by foregoing their luxury travels and accommodations in favor of a video conference? Why doesn't political "it" girl AOC make going car-less cool by lacing up a pair of designer sneakers and hoofing it to the capital every day? When is Al Gore going to downsize and embrace a minimalist lifestyle? People who were sincerely concerned about the effects their actions have on the environment would not shamelessly flout their own advice, yet the loudest advocates almost invariably do. 

Invariably, solutions to man-made "climate change" are beneficial, or at least not disruptive, to those who propose them. Vegetarians want you to give up meat. City dwellers want you to give up your car. Web designers want coal miners to find a new line of work. "The future of humanity is at stake - people I don't like must sacrifice things I don't care about!"

I have recently heard celebrities encourage fans to eat less meat and dairy and use less plastic. Aluminum drinking straws and reusable shopping bags are popular. But consider the many things which impact the environment that are NOT being discussed. To prevent the end of all human life, shouldn't people be willing to give up hormonal birth control and quality-of-life drugs which are flushed into the water supply? How about imported foods like bananas, avocados and coffee? Eating only locally-grown, in-season produce would cut down pollution from fuel and refrigeration. How much energy would be saved if everyone in the USA completely gave up recreational travel, or if non-essential businesses all closed after sundown? And we don't really NEED to upgrade our electronics, use climate control, or buy new clothing regularly. Making such drastic lifestyle changes would be a sacrifice, but it's better than facing certain doom in *checks watch* 11 and a half years. 

And - this is almost too horrible to contemplate, but the future of humanity is at stake - we could urge our fellow Americans to STOP BUYING CRAP THEY DON'T NEED. We are called to sacrifice for the future generations who cry out, "For the love of all that is holy, please don't buy another throw pillow!" Think of all the fuel and plastic waste that would be saved if every soccer mom in America stopped binge-shopping at Target! It would be a big sacrifice, but worth considering before we resort to CANNIBALISM as one Swedish professor recently suggested.

Now that I think of it, I have also never heard a politician or celebrity mention the waste of resources and environmental impact caused by our numerous and never-ending wars.

Ubiquitous "Greta the Climate Kid" has traveled the globe recently, haranguing world leaders about their inadeuqate response to the supposed climate emergency. The Swedish teen, who has the autism-spectrum disorder Asperger's syndrome, is daughter of an actor and a singer. Last month, with tears in her eyes, she angrily shrieked at the UN:

Our entertainment and political elites comprise the cast of the least enjoyable show ever.
 
The movies are fake. That's fine. They're supposed to be. But how much of what happens off-screen is fake?
 
"Pop Star A throws shade at Pop Star B" reads the headline. The next day: "Pop Star B claps back!" These headlines serve a purpose, beyond just entertaining silly people and annoying serious ones. They provide clicks for websites and attention for celebrities. Does it seem plausible, even likely, that "feuds" like this are not based on real events, but simply cooked up by publicists on a conference call with entertainment reporters? When fashion magazines helpfully "track down" where you can buy the adorable shoes some random celebrity was wearing while walking her dog, are they really sleuthing, or participating in a clever and indirect form of advertising? One wonders how many celebrity romances are the creation of agents to in order to generate headlines and develop crossover fans.
 
In many ways, the headlines are part of the show. If the deception only affected celebrity image management and advertising, it would be of little concern. But the Hollywood Show is used for much more serious, and sometimes sinister purposes, and its impact is both broad and high-reaching.
 
When I was younger, there were rumors of mysterious messages that could be heard when cassette tapes of certain artists were played backwards if the stereo settings were just right. A few boys who always wore black and stayed in trouble at school liked music by artists who shocked audiences with their offensive lyrics and antics. Dark and disturbing performers existed, but they were always on the fringes. That is no longer the case. Most people are aware that pop culture and music have been steadily degrading. However, most people of decency have disengaged from pop culture long ago, and they do not appreciate that flagrant and pervasive evil has become mainstream. Even worse, the evil puppets are shaking hands with people at the highest levels of government power.

We have seen it play out countless times. A young, seemingly wholesome actress or singer secures millions of fans, then her character steadily changes for the worse. This could be partially dismissed as growing up, or reacting to the influence of the Hollywood environment. But that doesn't fully explain it. The behemoth of cooperative companies that create and sustain each celebrity's persona could easily brush indiscretions under the rug, and transition the young ladies' reputation from wholesome teen to wholesome adult if they so chose. They do not. This predictable arc, in my opinion, is a purposefully managed transition.

Taylor Swift was introduced to the public as a wholesome-as-can-be, acoustic-guitar playing teen. A decade later, she appeared in a video as a dominatrix, and a satanic priestess surrounded by live snakes. This year, Disney's "Hannah Montana," Miley Cyrus, sang "I'm nasty, I'm evil" while wearing a red vinyl bodysuit with teeth at the crotch. These are only a few examples.

In 2016, a large amount of emails from the account of Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta was published by Wikileaks. Among the trove of data was a curious personal email from one Marina Abromovic, stating "I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking Dinner at my place." Amateur researchers quickly uncovered information about "performance artist" Abromovic, and this alarming and sickening practice.

Below are some photos of a Spirit Cooking event. In video of the event, which may be viewed here, Abromovic explains that the bowl of liquid she is holding is a mixture of blood, urine, breast milk, and semen. She proceeds to splash the contents onto an effigy of a child.

​
Here are some more examples of Marina Abromovic's "art."

Though not herself known to the general public until recently, Abromovic keeps company with many, many people who are household names. Some of the photos below were taken at a Met Gala event in 2012 that she hosted which featured simulated cannibalism.

One megastar who has often been seen with Abromovic is Lady Gaga. Known for her headline-catching, outrageous outfits and antics (remember the dress made of meat she wore to the 2010 MTV Video Music Awards?), Gaga is a household name. She considers Abromovic a mentor. "I'm obsessed with her! She's incredible!" Gaga gushed in an interview. The affection is mutual. Abromovic has called Lady Gaga "my best student." 

Below are photos from an art event (again, featuring simulated cannibalism), and stills from a video Lady Gaga released in support of the "Abromovic Method" teaching offered by the Marina Abromovic Institute.

Lady Gaga, whose real name is Stefani Germanotta, has sold tens of millions of albums and won nine grammy awards. In 2011, she met with Valerie Jarrett at the White House to discuss an anti-bullying campaign. She has performed for Presidents, including an Inaugural event for President Obama's staff in 2013, and she stumped for Hillary Clinton in 2016. "Mother Monster" is idolized by her fans, her "Little Monsters."

She often uses religious themes in her lyrics and imagery. For example, in the song "Judas," she sings "In the most Biblical sense, I am beyond repentance... Jesus is my virtue and Judas is the demon I cling to..." In "Bloody Mary," she sings "When Pontius comes to kill the king upon his throne / I'm ready for their stones."

In the rousing LGBT-pride anthem "Born This Way." she sings "I'm beautiful in my way / 'Cause God makes no mistakes / I'm on the right track, baby / I was born this way." 

What religion does she practice, you may wonder? Why she's Christian of course, according to the Washington Post. In fact, she's practically a modern day Jesus, certainly more so than those uptight, church-y types.

​In this fallen age, many people have no trouble viewing Gaga as a Christian, and I have personally encountered fans who insist she is a nice Catholic girl and I am being too judgmental. Earlier this year, "Pastor" Joel Osteen attended a Pride-themed Gaga concert. Oddly, I don't often hear Christians use the phrase, "I swear to Lucifer."

Beyonce and her husband Jay Z were frequent guests of the Obama White House, and the close friendship between the two fabulous couples was celebrated by the press. Michelle Obama even called Beyonce "a role model for us all."

It is hard to overstate the worshipful enthusiasm of Beyonce fans. The "Beyhive" is known for viciously swarming anyone who slights their queen. But it's not just devotion, it's more like deification. When she failed to attend the 2018 Met Gala, the "Holy Ghost" meme began trending on social media, when fans claimed to feel the presence of her spirit. More disturbingly, when an on-stage mishap caused Beyonce's ear to bleed during a performance, "Cut for Beyonce" began trending, with fans posting photos of their cut wrists with comments like "If the queen bleeds the hive must unify and leak our blood to restore her spirits." Are some of these posts tongue-in-cheek? Probably. But even so, the joke would not work if the obsessive nature of her fans was not widely understood.

Even other celebrities seem awestruck by Queen Bey. Singer Adele said, "Beyoncé is the most inspiring person I've ever had the pleasure of worshiping," and she is only one among many.

Do you think that "worship" is not meant literally? For some people, it is. In 2018, a church in San Francisco began offering a "Beyonce Mass," described as "a womanist worship service that uses the music and personal life of Beyoncé as a tool to foster an empowering conversation about Black women." Based on the scholarship of Reverend Yolanda Norton, the service is about "how black women find their voice, represent the image of God, and create spaces for liberation."

Frequently performing in goddess-like attire, Beyonce does not seem to mind being viewed as an idol. It is well-known that she attributes her live performances to an alter-ego named "Sasha Fierce." In one interview she speaks about the first time "I felt something else come into me," prior to a performance, and explains that "Sasha" can do things that she cannot do.

In the spoken introduction to her video for Hold Up, she speaks "I saw the Devil/I grew thickened skin on my feet/I bathed in bleach/and plugged my menses with pages from the Holy Book." Yes, you read that right. She said that she used pages of the Bible as a tampon.

This year Jay Z became the first rapper to be a billionaire. He is sometimes referred to as "Hova," short for Jayhova. He has been pictured wearing a shirt reading "Do What Thou Wilt," the saying of the late British Satanist Aleister Crowley.

Kim Kardashian, the then-unknown daughter of OJ Simpson attorney Rob Kardashian, burst onto the national stage in 2003 when a sex tape with a rapper was released. She managed to parlay this ignominious introduction to stratospheric levels of fame and fortune for herself and her family despite the fact that all of them lack any discernible talents or charm. The marriage of Kardashian to rap superstar Kanye West further cemented both of their places on the international stage.

Inexplicably, the duo are treated with reverence and awe by millions of people worldwide. In 2015, an artist released "The Book of Yeezus," replacing every mention of God in the book of Genesis with Kanye's name. ("Yeezus" is a nickname for Kanye and the name of an album he released in 2013.) The creators describe the volume as "the story of Genesis for the new age." Another person has established a "Church of Yeezianity" in 2014. Its website states "We are a forward-minded group who believes that the one who calls himself Yeezus is the highest living human being and he will help to usher in a New Age of humanity." I assume this is facetious, but the fact that it even exists is noteworthy. As for Kanye himself, his religious inclinations are unclear - sometimes seems to worship God, and others he seems to believe he himself is a god.

In 2018, a Brooklyn artist, who said she is "strangely fascinated" with Kim Kardashian, exhibited art portraying the celebrity as Jesus, the Virgin Mary, and a Satanic priestess.

Like Lady Gaga, the Kardashians are touted as a devout Christian family, and Kim has described herself as "really religious."

The daughter of Christian ministers, Katy Perry released a gospel album as a teen. When her career as a gospel singer didn't pan out, she explained, "I sold my soul to the Devil." Perhaps she meant that metaphorically, but the trajectory of her career seems to indicate that she meant it literally. Her first big hit in 2008 was "I Kissed a Girl (and I liked it)." Her performance of the song "Dark Horse" at the 2014 Grammys prompted even mainstream publications to wonder whether she had performed a satanic ritual onstage. One Christian singer even walked out of the event.

A number of her songs and videos promote disturbing themes. In the video for "Bon Apetit," a nude Perry is surrounded by chefs with knives who serve her up as a meal. The song and video for "ET" seem to promote transhumanism and beastiality. Perry sings, "You're so hypnotizing. Could you be the devil? Could you be an angel?...Futuristic lover, Different DNA...Infect me with your loving. Fill me with your poison." At the end of the video, Perry is shown standing on animal legs.

In 2014, singer Rihanna, who is a protege of the aforementioned Jay Z, made an impromptu visit to the Obama White House, calling at the gate to say, "Cyrus, let me in." In the above photo, she poses as Press Secretary.

Similar to the others, she has a penchant for goddess and anti-christian imagery. 

The above still photos do not fully convey the full impact of this form of entertainment. Some of the videos I viewed for this article were extremely mesmerizing. Most were stunningly beautiful, and at the same time viscerally unsettling. It is as if each one was a masterfully rendered artistic horror film. One can only imagine its affect on rootless young people who have been immersed in this kind of material their whole lives.

The celebrity of these performers is created and maintained by massive corporate machinery. Choreographers, writers, musicians, costume and set designers, promoters, merchandisers, publicists, artists, dancers, producers...the list goes on and on. A few of them are talented, but most are unremarkable, and would not be international superstars without this support. One wonders who chose to thrust these particular individuals into stratospheric levels of wealth and fame, and why.

The guileful forces of evil have had great success in the entertainment industry. Celebrities are conflated with deities. Christian symbolism and ideas are conflated with satanic ones. Every possible abomination has been normalized or even glorified. And worse, it is embraced by people at the highest levels of political power in the world.

How can any of this be good news?  It is good because we know that every bit of this was fully predicted in the Word of God. It is good because evidence that evil is real is also evidence that its antithesis is real. It is good because every step Satan takes towards power is also a step taken towards his eternal demise. It is good because it is further reassurance that the Bible is true, and for those with faith in the one true Savior, it has a happy ending.

The tone of MAGA supporters has changed. I've seen it on social media and the message boards. The exhilaration that was evident after the upset election of Trump, providing real and unexpected hope that the country would be saved from invasion, has been steadily dampening for the past two years. Some observers have noted that MAGA supporters have been going through the stages of grief: Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and, finally, acceptance. 

Americans are in different stages of the grieving process. For example, some are in denial, spinning wild theories about the elaborate, behind-the-scenes plans that are in place which will bring our lawless overlords to justice any day now. Some are in the bargaining stage. "If only Trump had appointed better people," or "Maybe we can still salvage the country through the courts." In my observation, there seems now to be an increasing sense of resignation. As the demise of the United States continues, evidence of anger and depression, and a sense of doom (the "black pill") are evident. Lately, I frequently see comments like "The US had a good run," or "Well, we're toast."

Some say that when a loved one dies after a long illness, grief is mingled with a sense of relief. A stage of the struggle has ended, and one may now turn to focus fully on the challenges ahead. The acceptance stage of grief is marked by an honest assessment of one's situation, acclimation to the new normal, and taking responsibility for making a way forward. I believe more people are moving towards the acceptance stage. One YouTuber I enjoy was asked how she manages to stay calm and chirpy while presenting her detailed research peeling back layers of corruption among the elites who are causing our civilizational rot. She explained simply, that with regards to the loss of Western Civilization, "I've already grieved."

As we face the loss of a functional government and society, what does it mean to make a new way forward? What is important, and within our control? How do we build outside of our collapsing institutions?

One simple first step is to cut the cable cord. For many people, television viewing is a comfortable habit, and while it is true that a few worthwhile shows do exist amidst the manure, is it really a good idea to spend hundreds of dollars a month for the privilege of allowing people who hate you to pump toxic sludge into your living room? Cutting the cord will not only save you money, but it will take away the crutch of spending time in a semi-vegetative state on the sofa, focused on superficial and sordid content created by some of the worst people on the planet. This frees you to pursue more edifying activities like spending time with your loved ones, reading, listening to music, pursuing hobbies or creative endeavors, improving physical fitness, or learning life skills. You will save money, and turn your attention to activities that better nurture mind and soul. What's the downside?

You can also "starve the beast" in other ways. Every week there is another company pushing an aggressively radical left-wing product or ad campaign. You could boycott the offenders, but even if you could keep track of every company deserving a boycott, their competitors are likely just as dedicated to the "globohomo" agenda. Instead, just get into the habit of buying less. Spend money only what you really need. When you do need to shop, try to buy second-hand, or from a co-op or locally owned business. You can enjoy simpler living, become more resourceful in meeting the needs of daily life, and revel in the fact that you are depriving the government of sales tax!

In a world where we cannot rely on institutions, it is helpful to depend as much as possible on oneself, one's family, and a community of trusted individuals of like mind. Focus on building and nurturing relationships. Learn from your elders and teach your children. Seek fellowship with like-minded community members, with the goal of building trust and support networks. Rekindle tribal bonds, the absence of which have left many of us without a sense of place or belonging. Doing these things will make you more fulfilled in the present, and more prepared to face an uncertain future.

Build, preserve, and maintain what you value. Most of us need to relearn independent life skills that the modern world has caused to become obsolete. Growing and storing food and raising animals. Building and maintaining shelter. Share what you know, and learn what you do not. Preserve your family history. Buy hard copies of literature and history books which the cultural police might wish to revise or blacklist as the revolution marches forward. We can all be flame keepers of our own little bits of knowledge, tradition and culture.

Most importantly, being Christian means that you are never, in any circumstance, without hope and a sense of purpose. Our world celebrates the superficial, fanciful, and ephemeral. Even if some do not realize it, people are in desperate need of those who will tell abiding truth, and offer hope, clarity, and wisdom. Sometimes it is necessary to speak boldly, but if you cannot do that, asking a thoughtful question or making a gentle observation is often enough to plant a seed of thought that will bloom at a later time. 

The fall of the empire will inevitably create distress and daunting challenges, but we do not need to wallow in despair. In the words of Wife With A Purpose, Ayla Stewart, there is a simple way to defy the forces of darkness and perversity that lurk all around: "Just be happy and normal!"

It may be true that the United States that we have known is "toast." We, its people, are not. 

Typical Southern responses to huffy pronouncements that our betters will take their ball and leave usually range from indifferent shrugs to "Good riddance!" or "I wish they would boycott my state!" Because of their staggering arrogance, these elites cannot conceive that the unwashed masses might actually prefer NOT to be graced with their presence or enlightened with their wisdom.

But what about their money? Milano tweeted her complaint about the Heartbeat Bill with the hashtag "#HB481IsBadForBusiness." That may be true, but as Bratcher said, "We don't believe in putting  a price tag on the value of a human life." It is unfathomable to our soulless ruling class, but there are quite a few things Southerners value more than money. Freedom, peace, community, traditional culture, and self-determination, to name a few. I have often heard members of the intelligentsia smugly say that Southerners "vote against their own interests." What they mean is that we vote for small government, when our relative poverty would make our states the beneficiaries of government programs. They don't understand that what we see as "our own interests" are not benefit checks, but the ability to live independently, free from government interference, and in a fiscally responsible manner that does not leave unnecessary debt to our children. They think that since we're turning down "free money," that either we do not understand, or that we are motivated more by racist hatred than self-preservation.

Thankfully, Georgia has a real governor, despite the best efforts of Milano, who had stumped vigorously for Kemp's opponent Stacy Abrams in the gubernatorial election. "I can't govern because of what someone in Hollywood thinks of me." Governor Brian Kemp spoke in response to the controversy. If more people like Bratcher and Kemp speaking up for Southern values, maybe we can get the Golden Swamp creatures to write us off for good!

White males commit more terrorism than any other group. Everybody knows this, right? If you try to debate terrorism on social media, the Smug Leftist will play his trump card: "ACKSHUALLY, statistics prove that WHITE MALES commit the most terrorism!"

This may not seem right to you, despite the fact that there are indeed headlines proclaiming that "fact." But you may be at a loss for how to argue the point, since numbers don't lie, right? Well, I'm here to help.

I spent several years of my life in government agencies' data analysis departments. I will tell you there is often political pressure on analysts to "prove" a certain point with data, and there are plenty of ways to manipulate or creatively interpret data to make it seem to point one way or another. Dishonest (or possibly dumb) journalists will happily tout a headline that a "study says..." something that they want to be true. Most people will simply absorb the headline, assume there is some truth to it, and move on. 

I'll try to give a quick summary of some of the common ways that numbers can lie:

1. GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT - This is a common phrase in  the world of statistical analysis. It means that if the data collection is no good, then the resulting data analysis will be no good. You must ask how the data was collected and by whom. Was it collected by trained, conscientious, and non-biased workers? Often the answer is no. It is wise to be skeptical of information collected by workers who have inconsistent training, a disinterest in data collection, or a motivation to skew data to secure agency funding or cover their own failures. Also, if you see the phrase "THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF X" , you may want to ask whether there is no evidence because the data was never collected!

Self-reported data is also notoriously unreliable. People can have highly inaccurate self-perceptions. They may make errors when responding to surveys, or they may choose to fudge or even outright lie in order to achieve the result they prefer or avoid embarrassment. Compared to carefully conducted scientific analysis, such information can be considered "garbage."

2. TOTAL NUMBER VS PER CAPITA. This is an especially useful one with regards to the "White people are the worst" arguments. Because Whites are a majority of the United States population, we are likely to have "more" of any given problem if you simply count the numbers. The "Whites are the worst" argument often falls apart when you look at the numbers as a percentage of the group population. This may seem obvious, but it is easy to slip past most casual readers of mainstream media, especially if it confirms what they wish to believe.

3. APPLES TO ORANGES. A few years ago some media ran reports that children raised by gay couples are happier than those raised by conventional families. This is an example of the "apples to oranges" deception. The conclusion was based on a comparison from two separate studies: a long-term, scientific study of children in conventional homes versus a simple survey completed by gay parents who volunteered to be questioned. The data was collected from two separate sources, one with a much more reliable methodology than the other. They are simply not comparable, at least not if you're trying to be honest and accurate.

4. FUDGING DEFINITIONS AND CATEGORIES: A tremendous amount of mischief can be caused by this one.

Most people know that unemployment statistics have been manipulated by fudging definitions. When a person has been unemployed so long that they have fallen into despair and given up the search, they are no longer technically a job-seeker, and therefore not "unemployed" for statistical purposes. So, excluding the long-term unemployed from calculations may make employment statistics appear to improve, even though no positive change has occurred.

This kind of fudging is critical for the "real terrorists" ruse. Most of us think of mass-casualty shootings or explosions when we hear the word "terrorist." But does the study cited count other things as terrorism? Arson, vandalism, unarmed one-on-one scuffles? Most mainstream articles don't provide that level of detail, and most people don't think to ask. If a guy who happens to be in an all-white biker club beats someone in a bar fight, would that be counted as "white supremacist violence?" If a member of an Aryan prison gang knifes another inmate, would that count? These are examples of criminal behaviour, of course, but not what one normally thinks of as terrorism.

Also, what is counted as an extremist group? If you are reading this site, you probably know that the SPLC definitions are extremely biased, and elastic to the point of being useless. They may include completely peaceful advocacy groups and orthodox religious sects. When an article cites a growth in "extremism" it may sound alarming, but it could just mean that more people are supporting the Family Research Center or other organizations that the study's sponsor doesn't like. It could even simply mean that they have expanded the list of "hate groups" to include new things. 

You may even want to question the definition of White, as some studies include hispanics or people of middle-eastern descent in the "White" category.

5. IN WHAT UNIVERSE? One of the most important parts of any study is choosing the sample population. Who are you asking? Is the study based on a representative sample of the relevant population? For example, if the findings are based solely on the study of elderly Scandanavian vegetarian nuns, it may not be applicable to other groups. More realistically, If the sample is self-selected (for example, if it is conducted with people answering an ad asking them to participate in the study), the sample is not random, therefore introducing bias into the results. 

Leading up to the 2016 presidential election, many polls of "likely voters" showed that Hillary Clinton was consistently ahead. The trick was in the sample selection. Manipulating the proportion of Republican, Democrat, and Independent voters in the sample affected final results, and in a way that casual observers did not catch.

6. MISUSE OF OUTLIERS: A outlier is an extreme example that lies outside of the normal range of something. Including the "outlier" information in an average can be very misleading. For example, averaging the seven-figure salary of a CEO with the salaries of the regular employees would create a misleadingly high impression of the typical company salary. 

This tactic should be kept in mind when people spout statistics about gun crime. The national gun crime rate is high compared to many other countries, but if you take out the outliers, that is, the top 10 or so most gang-infested cities, the overall rate goes down substantially. Including the numbers from the outliers, in this case the dysfunctional urban areas, makes the overall national rate much higher. This misleading impression is helpful to those who would like to imply that a high rate of gun crime is nationwide problem.

7: PUSH POLLS: "Would you support a mandate that millions of illegal immigrants be ground into hamburger and fed to alligators, or would you prefer allowing those who meet certain reasonable requirements to stay in the United States?" SHOCK POLL! 99% of Americans support undocumented migrants becoming citizens!

This is an exaggeration, but you get the idea. Don't accept "survey says" pronouncements at face value. If you think the results are suspicious, dig deeper to find out exactly what questions were asked and to whom. 

There are many, many more tricks that can be employed by those who want to influence the public with biased "facts." It's never easy to discern the truth in our information-overloaded world, but hopefully this article can give you an idea of some questions to ask when the facts seem fishy.