MONOLOGUE WRITTEN BY CLYDE LEWIS
I know many of us are realizing that nothing in the world is at it seems. With this idea, people find themselves at a crossroads. They are confused and when people are confused, they do nothing — they wait and see how the crowd reacts.
Back when we were kids, I remember that when we would go to church or school dances, the first couple of songs would play and no one would dance. Then, a couple would walk out to the floor and dance and then another couple of songs were played, then another couple takes the floor — it isn’t until the third couple starts dancing that the floor fills with dancers.
We know that everyone doesn’t always dance to the same tune, but when they see more and more people respond – they too begin to listen and awaken.
People are waking up in droves, but the majority continues to be played by the ruling elite’s control system, unaware that almost every subject under the sun is rigged: In effect we are confined to living in a false or limiting paradigm.
Against the ‘insurmountable odds,’ we ask ourselves if there will ever be a new paradigm experience.
Having seen through the grand deception, will the awakened ever change the control system? Can we somehow go on to cultivate new theories and practices for a humane new paradigm experience, one that will create a world that truly makes a difference for everyone?
The first thing that needs to happen is to improve what is called, “social cohesion.”
Social cohesiveness has been a topic of long-term interest in sociology and psychology as well as in mental health and more recently in public health. While the concept of social cohesion is intriguing, it has also been frustrating because its multiple definitions prevent its meaningful measurement and application.
Social cohesion is the set of characteristics that keep a group able to function as a unit. What constitutes group cohesion really depends on whom you ask.
For instance, psychologists look at individuals’ traits and similarities among the group members. Social psychologists treat cohesion as a trait that combines with others in order to influence the way the group does things. Sociologists tend to look at cohesion as a structural issue, measuring how the interlocking parts of the whole group interact to allow the group to function. The truth is cohesion, is what a group needs to survive – there needs to be common goal and a common mission of a people in order for them to prosper.
Like food, and water, the social strata needs a well of information that is objective and without a political agenda.
It can be said that the information we are fed by the mainstream media is affecting how we as a people see each other.
A clear and present danger to the reading, listening and seeing public is the growth of sponsored/biased journalism masking as news.
I was once asked on Facebook why I continually post stores from media outlets I constantly condemn. I explained that the reason is simple — the talking points that media present are what most people listen to and act upon. You can only work with what you are exposed to — from there you can form opinions and express your concerns and or reasons for believing what you are being fed.
We still have a choice and like it or not whatever the media decides to focus on shapes our views in society.
The ways of looking at the world are rarely wholly right or wrong; they are more or less useful, depending on the questions they conjure.
We see that in this time of history, many are questioning what it will be like five or 10 years from now, probably because we do not like the here and now and have given up on what to do with it. If we would have heeded the warnings of despotism in works, we would have understood that the threat within – is too occupied to look at the threat that is outside the confines of the so-called protected state.
Thomas Jefferson warned us when he said:
“The time to guard against corruption and tyranny is before they shall have gotten hold of us. It is better to keep the wolf out of the fold than to trust to drawing his teeth and talons after he shall have entered.”
That time is now here.
In the face of Western governments’ coordinated efforts to criminalize journalism and to weaponize social platforms, we begin to see the suffocation of democracy. If there is no one to warn us that a strategic plan is being implemented to rob us of our freedoms, then we face a famine of knowledge which will lead to our enslavement.
If one decides to remain neutral they are attacked, if one decides they are right wing or conservative they are attacked. It used to be that satire and criticism would be what the liberal left would use to roast conservative views — but now the Woke crowd and the Cancel Culture are acting like psychopaths.
They viciously attack, and are relentless and unforgiving.
Freedoms of speech, the press, and of religion; the right of association for any and all peaceful purposes, to be secure in one’s person and papers and other properties from those in political power without legal warrant and due process of equal and impartial rule of law; these and other such rights captured in the U.S. Constitution and complementary legal bases, means the of securing and protecting the civil liberties and rights that are inseparable threads along with economic freedom in the tightly woven single tapestry of human liberty. To abuse or abridge any one of them is a threat and a warning signal to all other sides of liberty.
A lot of people are paying attention to how their rights are being violated and how these violations are being supported by psychopathic liberal governors and mayors who have allowed their states to be overrun with rioters and those who willfully break the law.
The obligation of an American citizen was to live up to this ideal of a land dedicated to the liberty and rights of each and every individual. To strive to practice what was preached. Clearly, to overcome those weaknesses in human nature that resulted in a failure to fully respect and live by the idea of human freedom, a society in which the government exists to protect the individual in his rights and not to make the individual a subject to those in political power for their own purposes, whether those in power was one, or a few, or even many.
Sometimes, moments of great political and ideological crisis place things in more essential defining clarity. Certainly, the rise of perceived totalitarianism has give rise to movements that become outraged and violent.
Equally there have been left and right-wing political passions that have resulted in the trashing of U.S, cities and the so named insurrection that took place on January 6th in Washington D.C.
Even on my show I get the occasional revolutionary that calls in and says that blood will flow in the streets and that freedom fighting American will take those that oppress them
and hang them in the public square if the need arises.
The call always ends with the Jefferson quote:
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants.”
Yes, Jefferson said that — but he ended it by saying “It’s natural manure.”
Yes, indeed and so is cheap talk.
It is just another form of virtue signaling.
How shall that history be an inspiration and an aspiration for the next generations if it is all torn down and cast away? And most importantly, the denial and distortion of its founding ideals of a morality of a free people?
What matters is action that doesn’t always have to include the shedding of American blood.
It was directed by Joe Dante and was a satirical view on how the states would react to an overthrow of immigrants in the United States for the purpose of replacement voting.
The film is set in the United States in which foreign immigration has skyrocketed: The mayor of Los Angeles speaks only in Spanish, Rhode Island is populated mostly by Chinese-Americans, and Alabama has a congressman from India. Politics is openly reduced to a matter of catering to various ethnic groups for their votes – the Alabama congressman will only support the U.S. President if his state receives more money for Hindu temples. When an atomic weapon is used on Pakistan by India, an international organization makes plans to bring orphans to Idaho.
Idaho Governor Jim Farley orders the state’s National Guard to close its borders, as Idaho has already received more than a million refugees; he acknowledges this even though the Governor himself routinely indulges in Mexican food, Mexican soap operas, and an affair with a Mexican-American reporter.
Meanwhile, the President of the United States turns out to be an equally ineffectual leader, ruthlessly exploiting immigration to fill districts and states with those most likely to vote for his own party. He will move more Koreans to New York since Koreans are one of his core constituencies. Reputed as indecisive, the President delegates his decision-making entirely to his advisors, most notably his unofficial chief advisor.
Meanwhile, the CNN cable network is reporting the events and influencing them at the same time. The News Director, Mel, attempts to time events to maximize ratings, while his staff becomes polarized over the political issues involved in the conflict between the, Governor and the President. Standard fare for the cable network is to show footage of crying immigrant children, which is done with the Pakistani orphans waiting to move to Idaho.
As the deadline approaches, the Governor and the President call in, respectively, the Idaho National Guard and the United States Army. Tensions rise when the commanders of both units turn out to be bitter rivals from the Gulf War. Meanwhile, governors from other states send in their own National Guard units to aid one side or the other, causing the conflict to escalate into the national arena. Mexican-American pro-immigrant rioters bomb the Alamo, while anti-immigrant rioters retaliate by bombing the Statue of Liberty because of its plaque, stating that “We no longer want your tired, your poor or your huddled masses.”
It all escalates into a civil war.
As I was watching the movie, I couldn’t help but think of the irony. The film was released in 1997 and while it focuses on out of control immigration — I have been reading recently that states that are considered liberal are seeing their populations dwindle as many of them are fleeing to conservative states like Utah and Idaho.
California’s population fell by more than 182,000 last year, the first yearly loss ever recorded for the nation’s most populous state.
The figures followed the announcement from the U.S. Census Bureau that California would lose a congressional seat for the first time because it grew more slowly than other states over the past decade.
In recent years, more people have left California for other states than have moved there, a trend Republicans say is a result of the state’s high taxes and progressive politics. The average sale price of a single-family home in California hit a record $758,990 in March, a 23.9% increase from a year ago.
Governor Newsom has claimed that California’s population decline is an outlier, blaming it on the coronavirus pandemic.
More Californians, Oregonians and Washingtonians are moving to Idaho and Utah.
Utah became the state with the 3rd largest growth rate and Idaho is one of the fastest growing states in the nation.
The net increase from California accounted for nearly 60 percent of all net migration into Idaho.
In net migration, there were more people that moved to Idaho from North Carolina, Texas and Wyoming than Washington, Oregon or Utah.
It goes to show you that liberal America is losing the middle and people are fed up with the way they are being treated –or the way they are being ignored.
Look at it this way they can either move to a more conservative state, or they can attempt to redraw state lines.
That is exactly what has happened in the state of Oregon.
A group known as Greater Idaho is pushing for rural counties in Oregon and northern California to secede and become part of the state of Idaho.
A group known as Greater Idaho is pushing for rural counties in Oregon and northern California to secede and become part of the state of Idaho. This effort has actually been endorsed by some of the top Republicans in the Oregon legislature. Today, the Oregon state government is completely and utterly dominated by the left, and due to the demographics of the state that is not likely to change any time soon. So, conservatives in rural areas that are deeply upset over the direction of the state enough so to redraw the borders.
Baker, Grant, Lake, Malheur and Sherman counties join Union and Jefferson, which voted last year to require county officials to study or promote joining Idaho, the Oregonian reported.
The grassroots group Move Oregon’s Border for a Greater Idaho wants to move Oregon’s mostly rural eastern and southern counties into Idaho, believing they’d be better served in the neighboring state’s more conservative political environment.
That would leave a small portion of Oregon, including Portland, Salem, Eugene and Bend.
Phase 2 of the plan would bring in parts of southeast Washington and northeast California. The California counties under consideration, the group says, are Siskiyou, Shasta, Tehama, Modoc, Lassen, part or all of Plumas, and parts of Butte and perhaps Sierra. The California area includes Redding, which would become Idaho’s fourth-largest city.
The group hopes political pressure from county initiative votes will lead to negotiations between Oregon and Idaho to move the border.
One of the chief organizers of this movement, Mike McCarter, says that this secession push “is our last resort” …
“Rural counties have become increasingly outraged by laws coming out of the Oregon Legislature that threaten our livelihoods, our industries, our wallet, our gun rights, and our values,” Mike McCarter, one of the chief petitioners, said in a news release. “We tried voting those legislators out, but rural Oregon is outnumbered, and our voices are now ignored. This is our last resort.”
Five counties voted in favor of leaving Oregon in Tuesday elections.
Obviously, this is a very viable political movement, and it will be quite interesting to see where this goes.
For the plan to succeed, the Oregon and Idaho legislatures and the U.S. Congress would need to sign off.
But voters in Baker, Grant, Lake, Malheur and Sherman counties passed measures in favor of the move on Tuesday. Mike McCarter, called it a big win.
“This election proves that rural Oregon wants out of Oregon,” he said in a statement Wednesday morning. “If Oregon really believes in liberal values such as self-determination, the legislature won’t hold our counties captive against our will. If we’re allowed to vote for which government officials we want, we should be allowed to vote for which government we want as well.”
The measures call for the counties to start considering the move and what it would mean. Measure 28-46 in Sherman County, for example, “requires Sherman County promote the interests of the county in relocating the Oregon-Idaho border.” The measure passed with 62 percent approval.
Measure 12-77, which passed by a similar margin in Grant County, calls for “the Grant County Court to meet on the first Wednesday of every April, August, and December to discuss whether it is in the best interest of Grant County to promote the relocation of the Oregon-Idaho border.”
The other three measures took a similar approach, mandating regular county meetings to discuss the matter. The counties joined two others, Jefferson and Union, where voters supported the Greater Idaho movement last year.
The measures don’t do a lot to move the border, but they do help promote the cause, McCarter said.
It is certainly encouraging to see people take a really big idea and try to run with it.
But of course, the liberals in Oregon are not exactly thrilled with the idea that most of their state could be ripped away from them and given to someone else. And as long as they are in firm control of the state legislature, it is going to be exceedingly difficult for this plan to get too far.
A similar scenario is playing out in Virginia. The Democrats have taken control of the state government, and the state continues to drift left with each passing year.
Obviously, many of those living in rural Virginia counties do not like this one bit, and the recent attacks on Second Amendment rights brought things to a boiling point.
There has been a lot of talk that rural countries in Virginia could try to secede and join West Virginia, and West Virginia’s governor Jim Justice has publicly said that he would welcome those counties “with open arms” …
But once again, this effort in Virginia is facing the same sorts of obstacles that the Greater Idaho movement is facing.
Of course, anything that is worth doing in life is going to require effort. And those that are trying to secure a better future for themselves, their families and their communities should be greatly applauded for doing so.
Ultimately, this is yet another sign of how incredibly divided we have become as a nation. In recent years we have seen multitudes of conservatives move to “red states” and multitudes of liberals move to “blue states”, and that trend is likely to accelerate in the years ahead.