With the Election of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador Mexico is now an Open Enemy: People will finally understand why we needed to build the wall

In a lot of ways the election of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador as the new Mexican president is a good thing because it removes the masks of pretense and allows us to deal with the true nature of what Mexico is. Mexico has never been a friend to the American government. It is a socialist hell hole that has been barely surviving off the tourism of Americans looking to do things there that they couldn’t do in their home country. It is a country run by drug cartels as that is their primary export, and Lopez Obrador knows that, which is why he is seeking amnesty with the main drug lords to just make everything official. As a radical leftist, his election will just take the mask off what the Mexican people always were—social radicals desiring an openly socialist state-run confiscation of all wealth. At least we know what we are dealing with without the fake handshakes and kind words through the media.

There is no heritage of the Mexican people. They are a conquered people infused by the country of Spain and have been on a social justice campaign experiment that nobody would have tried in Europe that was a spectacular failure. Most of the Central and South American countries that have attempted the kind of turn to the left that Mexico has have not survived which is why they have gangs running their economies instead of legitimate governments. That is certainly the case in El Salvador and Guatemala, but at least in Mexico they benefited in spill over money that came from the richest country on earth.

Out of frustration since the election of President Trump the real strategy of Mexico as a country has been revealed, the desperate poor have been encouraged to flood the U.S. border and to overwhelm the court system and to bring all that destructive socialism into America to loot the value of the capitalists and destroy the country from within. That attack was to take place on two fronts, with poison from the drug cartels infecting the youth of the United States then by mixing socialist people desperately poor with the American people to change the voting patterns. Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador not surprisingly has proposed to make peace with drug cartels and to use drugs as one of Mexico’s greatest exports, openly. People in Mexico who elected Lopez Obrador are desperate to try something, and conservative ideas are not in the Mexican vocabulary, so at least we are dealing with villains that we can see for once. Instead of pretending to be friends to America, the open hostility has been revealed for what it always was.

This will help the Trump proposal of a border wall and secure the funding much easier than before where too many Americans were willing to give the Mexican people the benefit of the doubt. But essentially you can’t have one of the world’s poorest economies right next to the richest and expect everything to go well. It’s like leaving a mansion unlocked at all times with a next-door neighbor living in a double-wide. The poor will always seek to steal from the rich because they are poor for a reason. A lot of people from the Mexican culture are hard workers, but they lack a proper philosophy that would allow them to become wealthy, as much of their “heritage” has either come from the collectivist based Aztec and Mayan cultures, the socialist Christian conquistadors from Spain or the Marxists from Germany. The people of Mexico need a capitalist revolution in their home country before they are ever ready to be a proper neighbor to the United States and I can’t think of any better way for them to get there than to learn what will happen to them under a Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador presidency.

It was stated during the Lopez Obrador campaign that he desires to sit down with the United States as equals and negotiate NAFTA. The trouble is, Mexico is not “equal” to the United States. Capitalists and Marxists are not equal—one takes from the other so there can be no terms that promote a conducive relationship. That is like a robber negotiating with their victim, either I shoot you and I take all your money, or you give it to me so I don’t have to shoot you. That is the kind of negotiating that Mexico is proposing under Lopez Obrador. There is no equality, and its time that people who don’t pay much attention to politics in the United States finally learn what kind of neighbor Mexico has always wanted to be.

For a long time, open border progressives have attempted to fuse the two countries together playing on the sympathy that most people have for each other. Nobody wants to see some of the dirt-poor conditions that people live under in Mexico. Any right-thinking person would want to help, and Americans have, which is the only thing keeping Mexico barely hanging on. But the two cultures don’t mix as their value systems are radically different which is why there needs to be a wall to separate the two. Up to this point there just haven’t been enough Americans willing to admit that such divisions existed between Mexico and America. Large American businesses wanted to believe they could move to Mexico and run manufacturing plants, but now that will be nearly impossible as socialists will seek to take control of their facilities now that the pretension of civility has been removed leaving Mexico to rely on their primary export—drugs—poison.

Things needed to get worse in Mexico before anything would ever get better—and with the election of Lopez Obrador they have. As a far-left leaning activist everyone on all sides will finally get to see what it looks like to be an openly socialist country interacting with North America. Canada is another socialist leaning country that is now finding itself at odds with the American government under Trump. The business community of course wants peace between all countries just as Mexico hopes that Americans will still travel south and spend their money on Mexican tourism. But you can’t have something of value next to something seeking value by looting it from others and that is where Mexico is as a country. Canada is as well, only their mixed economy interacts with North American capitalism in more dynamic ways which blurs the lines for people who don’t see the socialism on the surface of things. But Mexico doesn’t have such blurred line.

While its true that the election of Lopez Obrador likely wouldn’t have happened if not for the election of Donald Trump, trying to maintain the illusion of civility would have only prolonged the inevitable. So, we might as well get to the meat and potatoes of this dilemma and let the American people see what has always been going on in Mexico. We’ve always been at war, we just never talked about it. Now we will, and now the intentions will be obvious. The border wall will further define the differences between the two cultures. The pain of that difference may have elected Lopez Obrador, but it has also caused Mexico to reveal their true problem, their Marxist roots and the failures that were created in that country because of it. By stripping away the civility that has camouflaged that difference for too many years, now we can all deal with reality, Mexico is a country of leftists made that way from the very beginning and they want to attack America. Some within our own country who call themselves leftists want to see that happen and they are domestic enemies for attempting the insurrection. But now the illusions have been lifted and we can see what really divides us and that is ultimately a very good thing.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Socialists of Seattle: Jeff Bezos tried to feed red meat to the wolves, and they bit him

Way back in 2013 I told you dear reader about Kshama Sawant, the socialist who was recently elected to city council in Seattle. Remember that? Well, she and the rest of her socialist brethren have proven me more than 100% correct with their anti-American brand of socialism that is going after the rich at every turn these days. The budget of Seattle is a disaster and these idiots are seeking measures to pay homeless shelters and taxing their big businesses to cover the costs—which has already pushed Boeing to remove a lot of jobs from the city to avoid the high taxes. Now the Seattle City Council has voted a new “head tax on their large businesses with an 8 to 1 vote on any company that earns $20 million or more in annual sales, 14 cents per employee hour, in an effort to raise $50 million per year toward outreach efforts for the homeless, including affordable housing and emergency shelters. This is what happens when people who have no idea what the value of businesses are truly for their communities or lack the understanding of what makes people homeless in the first place. Throwing money at the problem by stealing it from valuable companies is not the way to solve the problem. But when people follow the failed philosophy of Karl Marx, this is what you get in human intellect—deficient people too stupid to help themselves.

It’s a little funny that the big time liberal Jeff Bezos tried to appease these socialists in Seattle with his war on Trump by using The Washington Post as his personal blog to create an impeachment of his billionaire rival. Bezos is now the richest man in the world and he gambled wrong in thinking that the socialists of Seattle would stay away from him because of their mutual hatred of Trump. Obviously, Bezos is a smart guy who runs a great business in Amazon. But like many in his position he got caught trying to feed the wolves red meat hoping they would go away. Instead they only became hungrier.

The thing with socialists is that they always are looking for people of value that they can steal money from in an effort to call it “social justice,” “equality for all” and one for all and all for one, and all that garbage. Socialists mask their parasitic tendencies behind altruistic intentions, but what they really are reveals itself in decisions like their Seattle Head Tax—theft granted by government for the sake of those who work and produce and those who simply are too lazy to exist on their own. Socialists are those who want to live off the efforts of others, its that simple. There isn’t anything morally just about their actions, they are thieves—pure and simple.

If Jeff Bezos didn’t build Amazon up bit by bit over the last several decades what would it be? Would Kshama Sawant create Amazon, would the city council? Would the homeless people they want to help make Amazon the great company that it is today? If Jeff Bezos didn’t have all those sleepless nights in the 1990s when he was building his empire of e-commerce with distribution warehouses all over the nation for a business that was on the cutting edge at best—where were the socialists of Seattle back then—playing video games, reading books about Karl Marx, protesting the breeding patters of fruit flies cut off from a thousand-year old hole in the ground where someone wanted to build a housing development? They certainly weren’t trying to create jobs like Jeff Bezos was.

In a capitalist society—in ANY society a job creator is one of the most important aspects of civilization. Without job creators there is no economic expansion. Government doesn’t create jobs unless you count useless bureaucratic positions equivalent to slow ass workers at the BMV or a Clerk of Courts. People like Jeff Bezos and Donald Trump have far more value than a socialist looter trying to use the power of government to steal the hard work of those who take the big chances in business to create jobs from nothing. Yet where Bezos went wrong is that he tried to appease those progressive minded by tossing money at them hoping they’d go away—only they didn’t. Once they realized where the money was—after all Bezos is now known as the world’s richest man—and he lives in the neighborhood so to speak of people like Kshama Sawant—their target went to him. For a socialist it’s like a nice pile of shit for a fly to swoop on to take away all they could get while the gettin’ was good. Such lessons have come hard and now Amazon doesn’t have much choice in the matter, they’ll have to move their operations out of the Seattle area. Starbucks is in the same situation—Seattle is now notoriously unfriendly to business, and the word is out. Businesses will have to leave Seattle.

I was in Paris, France recently and the effects of their open socialism is grotesquely obvious. There are no big chain restaurants, no big factories—not like there should be for such a large city with so much history. The socialism of France has pushed away so much business investment because it’s a pain in the ass to do anything. It’s hard to even use the restroom in Paris, even near the tourist attractions the restrooms were dirty, and they charge you money to use them. I was stunned to see a toll turn style at the bathroom at Notre Dame with some Pakistani guy smoking a cigarette and collecting $2 a piss. I told him I’d just piss on the sidewalk outside which is what I dd. And so were about five other guys. No wonder Paris these days smells like piss everywhere you go. The city to deal with the exodus of their most productive turned to immigration to refill their empty apartments which has created their current crises—of mixing Muslims from the Middle East with the Christian Crusaders of old to extract revenge for the long conflict between religions that are left over from the Dark Ages. Instead of thinking of building new vehicles for space and colonizing Mars, the people of Paris are trying to keep piss off the sidewalks and nobody in their right mind is opening up a McDonald’s with free bathrooms across from the Eiffel Tower. Socialism has destroyed the opportunities for private investment to make a deal.

I’ve seen plenty of homeless people, I got to know them quite well in Canterbury, England where I’ve spent some time living in the city. Because of the social justice policies of that town ran by first the church, then by a much more socialist government in England after World War II homeless people have been incentivized into sleeping on the sidewalks. They are actually well fed and people befriend them letting them know that there is a safety net in case they fall from life. Knowing that, the weakest among us tend to throw in the towel too soon and retreat to a sleeping bag on the sidewalk rather than to shake a drug addiction, a family problem or whatever crises has come at them and destroyed their ambitions. When you give people free shelter, food and companionship—what reason do they have to keep fighting in life? Nothing, which is why when you start giving such people resources you get more of them, not less.

So Seattle has quite a problem now and there is no end in sight. I think it’s a good thing that the people of America can watch Kshama Sawant and her city council destroy their city, because it’s a good warning shot to the rest of the nation—socialism is dangerous, and it doesn’t work. And this is also a good lesson for people like Jeff Bezos. He should have never have tried to appease the socialists in the way that head hunters tried to appease their gods with human sacrifice, because it just makes the blood thirsty even thirstier. The only way out of all these messes is more capitalism and a defining stance against socialism before everyone can advance. Anybody who wants to help the homeless truly will learn these lessons quickly, the best way to keep people off the streets is to give them a job and let them earn their way through life. Giving things away for free while stealing from those who work hard and truly are people of value destroys opportunity for everyone. And that is something I think we can all agree is not what we want to see happening.

Rich Hoffman
Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The American Embassy in Jerusalem: Uncovering our true human roots as Palestinian radicals throw their bodies in front of an effort to keep it hidden

It usually comes down to either Marxism or capitalism in modern societies where ideological differences stand in the way of a peaceful exchange of social values. That is one of the reasons I find movie box office sales indicators so fascinating, because it informs us of the shared values of the average ticket buyer, where they enjoy a particular kind of movie enough to see in story form a set of idea at a movie theater with perfect strangers. In relation, regarding the unrest in the Middle East, nothing could be more fascinating than the problems between Israel and every other country in the region. Israel has been part of that region since well before the Islamic religion came to the Middle East, and even long before the Romans and Greeks had their empires which helped shape all the lands around the Mediterranean Sea. But after the Sykes Picot Agreement of 1916 it was Marxist revolutionaries who channeled their anger at the western nations that were the victors of World War I and then those United Nations powers which formed up the borders of the Middle East further after World War II that took over the governments of Iran, Syria, Iraq, and everywhere else to exact revenge on the creation of Israel. The border between Palestine and Israel today is not much different from America and Mexico—on one side is a capitalist nation—on the other is a Marxist one choking on failed socialism. It really is that simple—economic opportunity versus economic limitations based completely on political ideology hiding behind masks of religion to sell it to their people.

That is why it was so significant that President Trump moved the United States Embassy to Jerusalem today—to proclaim to the world that America had made a choice in the matter where it has been fashionable to play the middle ground. I am a huge supporter of this move by Trump and would add further that there could have never been peace in the Middle East until this occurred. Now we can say that a move toward peace has been made by the United States and further advancements toward peaceful enterprise in the region, and an expansion of capitalism into the Middle East for the benefit of everyone is now about to take place. That is a wonderful thing.

Of course, there is more to the story, as there always is. One of the aspects of a peaceful Middle East that I am most excited for is the restoration of proper archaeological research into the cradle of civilization that is behind the wars in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, even down into Egypt, and Libya. The greatest tragedy of this past century has been that wars over religious beliefs and political ideology have made those regions unstable and prevented proper archaeological research I would argue is necessary to understanding our own history as a civilization. For those who want validation of the great Biblical stories which have driven the most popular religions the world has ever seen, proper archaeology of the great sites of the Middle East is absolutely necessary. But there are other religions which came before Christianity that are also there for all to see and the relics from those collections have been sold all over the world into private ownership and that evidence has been alarming to those who pay attention to those types of attributes, and its time that the rest of the world is let on to that evidence.

I say it often, wars are created by those who truly want to be in power and that is certainly the case in the Middle East. There are very wealthy people who have an eye on history who know what is to be uncovered in the Middle East—evidence that mankind is much older than the Biblical accounts can chronicle, and those parties do not want mankind to know that information—because so long as most of the world’s populations fall under one of the known present religions, then those same people can easily control those people under current political assumptions. By introducing two opposites to the Middle East, Marxist revolutionaries and the capitalists behind the Jewish faith the Middle East has had much of the evidence of its vast past destroyed by war, and very little archaeology has been able to transpire due to the perpetual conflicts.

As 52 Palestinians died in protest during the opening ceremonies of the new American Embassy in Jerusalem it served as a grim reminder of as to why that region has always been unstable, and why the other side is so desperate to keep it that way. The American Embassy is a stabilizing factor and the Palestinians know that if they don’t sacrifice themselves to some degree that their end is coming anyway, and nobody up until President Trump has been willing to make that move. But Trump has an advantage in understanding the real nature of the Palestinian conflict from the side of the wealthy collectors that most people never hear about—because they get all their news from the constructed media accounts which say that the entire conflict is one of religious differences—which couldn’t be further from the truth. On the political side of things, the Middle East conflicts are between capitalism and Marxism. But even deeper than that, it is of the origin stories of civilization as a whole, and to prevent those stories from getting out, war has been used as a cover to prevent proper scientific research into the world of the Middle East which has always had the secrets just a few feet under the sand.

Honestly anywhere in the world where there is great conflict you will find a similar situation—the current governments wish to keep their citizens in the dark to the realities of the world which came before them. That is certainly the case in North America where it is now well-known that the Indians were just another come-lately group of humans who migrated into a region that had a rather sophisticated empire that rose and fell long before Columbus ever sailed to the Americas. Mexico had an advanced culture that was destroyed by Spain. To cover up that past the Spanish built Mexico City on top of the ruins to hide it for all time. All over the Central and South American regions are countries drowning in Marxism making it nearly impossible to have western universities set up shop to conduct long archaeological surveillance to uncover the true nature of ancient civilizations. What policy and rules can’t limit, the economic conditions of the region frustrate real efforts at science. There are still tremendous opportunities for archaeological research to be conducted in the great continent of Africa, but almost every country there is a Marxist regime and westerners tend to end up dead in their tents deep in the back country of the “Dark Continent.” Then of course there is Russia and China, some of the largest land masses in the world yet they are as covered as anything ever could be anywhere, because under totalitarianism politics, science is run by the state—and the states don’t want people to know what came before them. They need to create the illusion among their people who all there ever was that illuminated power and influence were their regimes—not some culture that rose and fell centuries ago, or even tens of thousands of years ago. How many Göbekli Tepes are hiding out in the deserts of the Middle East? My guess would be hundreds, if not thousands—and what would they tell us about the world before Christianity? A lot. But modern politics doesn’t want that information known to the people they wish to rule.

I am all for peace, and in order to get it, the Marxism that is driving the anxiety of the Middle East has to be conquered and driven out of the region. For that to happen, the American Embassy in Jerusalem is a good place to start. There is a need to conduct archaeology in that great city immediately that cannot occur because of the unrest that the Muslims bring to the conflict which prevents it, and the politics behind that anxiety is happy to prevent that research as long as they can. But mankind cannot allow such a thing to continue, so moving the American Embassy has more meaning than in just supporting the Jewish people of the region—it truly is the first step in peace, and in the greater understanding of our own histories as revealed through proper science. The mysteries behind so many wars are waiting for us to uncover them, and its about time. After the Embassy opened, I can say that my enthusiasm for learning these facts over the upcoming century just became much more feasible, and was a tremendous effort on behalf of science, which demands thoughtful research to be conducted free of war and turmoil.

Yes, Israeli snipers killed scores of Palestinians and wounded 1,300 as 35,000 protesters rallied against the US Embassy opening in Jerusalem overseen by Trump’s Middle East envoy of Jared Kushner and daughter Ivanka. It was the Palestinians who decided they wanted to dispute the territory of Jerusalem and follow the philosophy of Marxism into such a desperate strategic position. As I have said many times, he who has the gold, rules. And it determines who will win in this conflict, and why there will be peace in the Middle East. Because finally America picked a side, and that’s all it will take.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

Iran is Finished: Those with money always determine the rules–and the outcome

How wonderful it is that Donald Trump as President of the United States pulled America out of that treacherous scam of a deal with Iran. With all the talk about how dangerous it was I have not heard a single media outlet tell the truth about Iran and why the Democrats under Obama were so willing to give so much to them without anything coming back in return. The answer which is key to the entire situation is that it was Marxist revolutionaries that moved in and took over the Iranian government in the late 1970s and they still rule to this day. Hidden behind the radical Islamic practices of showing anger toward the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 is the not so subtle push to spread Marxism to the entire planet, and to use force wherever necessary to do so. Most everything done in the Middle East including the support of Saddam Hussein of Iraq was to deal with the mess created by Sykes-Picot and the spread of Marxism that was generated in anger over that World War I negotiation. In the stalemate of a century of policy failures in that region it was always Marxism and a strong desire to spread socialism and communism to despot countries around the world, like Cuba, El Salvador, all of Africa, North Korea, Vietnam, Russia—virtually everywhere—which drove the politics of the Middle East. And the deal Obama’s administration made was meant to provide money to the struggling economy of Iran to keep them active in that original aim of spreading Marxism to every corner of the world through terrorism. Isn’t it something that nobody is talking about any of that?

The truth of the matter is that Iran isn’t much different from what happened to Venezuela in South America. Sitting on major oil reserves the world was willing to put up with the socialism and Marxism that was destroying the governments of those two countries—because of their oil. Socialism had already infected Europe, so they had no real reference point to judge the evils of the behavior in Iran—since they weren’t far from being in the same boat. Obama’s deal negotiated by John Kerry was designed to tie Europe, the United States and Iran together in an effort to keep the economy of the failing Iran together so they could perform their role in the great scheme of Marxist expansion.

Any college professor in America could tell you what I just did dear reader, which is why they support Iran mysteriously even though currently the country is the number one sponsor of terrorism. That is because most liberals support that Marxist spread of influence, and they are rooting for Iran to do their damage for the acquisition of socialist triumphs globally. But for everything to work the United States had to be involved because it is only from that capitalist country that there is any real value for Iran to loot and continue to exist. What Trump did was cut off that support. The deal Iran has with everyone else suddenly became worthless—Europe doesn’t have anything of any value to add. With the United States out of the deal, Iran has no cover and no way to prop themselves up on the world stage to hide their acts of terrorism, or to fund it.

Put another way that might be easier for people to understand, many years ago I had a group of family members who wanted me out of their way. They didn’t want me in the family and they wanted control of my wife. When I wasn’t intimidated by their outright aggressiveness toward me they regrouped and decided to play nice to my face in order to bring about financial ruin behind my back. The trouble was, my wife and I had great love for their children so if we wanted to see those children have a good life, we had to deal with these people in a civil fashion. These family members calculated they could put us in a dangerous position to bring about financial ruin to my family achieving their objectives of destroying me to get me out of it, because if I had no money, the thinking was, my wife would divorce me and they’d all live happily ever after—from their point of view. They didn’t care about my own children, or even my wife, they just wanted me out-of-the-way any way possible. So when frontal aggression failed to scare me off, they decided to make a “deal” and they used their children as the bargaining chips knowing we wouldn’t do anything to risk their wellbeing.

Once the father of these kids realized that I would do anything to make sure his kids were well off he became lazier and much less motivated to work. He spent most of his time lying around the house feeling sorry for himself and complaining that he wasn’t wealthy. Eventually the whole family ended up moving into my house because they had no place to go. I had to put up with it because the fear was that great harm would come to the children if we kicked them out. They had in many ways made themselves addicted to my every effort.

For many months on and off over several years the entire family loafed around and mooched off my efforts. My wife was a housewife, as she stayed home with our children. I was already carrying my whole family the way men have always been expected to. But now there was an entire family of five living in my house composing of nine people and essentially only one adult working. My situation was a perilous one, it was a situation that directly affected my wife.  I thought having a knock down drag out fight might be needed which is how I prefer to do things, but then that would have damaged the children and the larger aspects of the family, so what was I to do? Things are almost never literal enough for a good fight, strategy is often the most important combatant, and winning without physical confrontation. Well, I worked three jobs, two of them full-time and one part-time on the weekends and I made enough money to cover everything. In doing so I accomplished two things, I gained leverage of the situation over the lazy parents who found themselves addicted to my efforts, and because of that, it gave me power over the situation to protect the children, for the sake of everyone involved. But for the husband of that ridiculous couple, I showed him that he wasn’t man enough to keep pace with me and he gradually withered away in guilt. It took a few years, but the experience destroyed him as a person, as he deserved it. I did all that work and I still made time to play with all the kids and help them anyway I could, and it had a major impact on them. They grew up moderately intact. Not the way they would have if my wife and I had raised them, but better than they would have been without us in their lives. The couple ended up divorced once the kids were grown, and in exactly the condition we predicted they would at the time. Looking back, I am proud of how we handled a very delicate situation. The key was that by having all the money in the situation it gave us the moral authority to do what needed to be done in the long run. Instead of giving them what they wanted, which was to crush me out of existence, I simply showed that I was so much of a man who I could hold up the entire world and then some—and still smile and have fun with life.  Gaining the high ground is important in every major conflict if you can get it.  Money in all civilized society decides who has the high ground and holding the high ground in an effortless fashion, meaning you do not give your enemy the impression that you are exhausted is the most demoralizing thing you can do to win over such opponents.  And when they have ill intentions for your life–who the hell cares how much you hurt them.

Essentially this is what Trump has done with the Iran deal, only he has cut it off at the time when everyone was most addicted to America’s money. Like my situation, he had to wait for the kids to grow up, when they could no longer be harmed by any action on our part. For the United States that time came when North Korea decided it would rather have season tickets to NBA games from the West rather than carry on the failed policies of Kim Jung-Un’s communist father and grandfather. Once Iran was isolated, the time to choke off their income was there, and because they had grown dependent on the efforts of the United States, they are now unable to survive without the money from the most successful capitalist country on earth. Iran has no money to carry on their nuclear program, just as North Korea didn’t. And the Iranian people are tired of a Marxist regime limiting their opportunities for the future, so they are ripe for their own revolution back into a capitalist country. But they won’t act until the current Marxist regime is broke of money—so Trump made a move that Iran can’t survive. They will be crushed without anybody having to fire a single shot. Europe will be fine, and perfectly safe, because everything always depended on the United States, because it was they who had all the money. And when you have the money, you get to rule the circumstances.

Much like my personal story, the Iranian deal centers on financial power. Rather than sitting around feeling sorry for ourselves, we always had the power to solve the problem by using our money to control the situation. Trump held his cards long enough to squeeze out North Korea so now is the time to make the move against an only slightly stronger Iran. But Iran unlike North Korea already has internal rebellious elements hungry to seize power back into the people’s control. Marxism has failed in Iran, and everywhere else it has been tried. Their plan was to loot off the United States until there was nothing left, just like the family I described who wanted to get rid of me tried to work me into my own death—literally. But once that failed and all the financial leverage was on my side of things, they found themselves crushed by the guilt and their own lack of resources and the rest is now history. Iran has suppressed their own people and they will no longer be able to bring death to the West by looting America until there was nothing left. Now all the wealth is in our court and they need it to survive—so they’ll have no choice but to submit. Mark it down on your calendars. Iran is as good as gone.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.

The Protests in Iran: What you need to know about why North Korea wants to blow everyone up–a brief history of Marxism for 2018 predictions

You might wonder dear reader why there has not been much coverage of the Iranian protests by young people demanding that things change in that hostile country which is one of the largest state sponsors of terror throughout the world.  Over the New Year of 2018 protests were abundant yet the media was silent on the matter because the history of the Iranian Revolution of 1979 was one conducted by various Marxist and communist groups oriented to the left of the political spectrum and their basic philosophy has imposed disaster economically there.  Prior governments in Iran were very friendly to Western culture and were rich with oil reserves—but Marxist Islamists like the  Mojahedin-e Khalq sought to push out Western influences in their country so they had a revolution not unlike the one where communism took over in Russia and the rest is history.  Within a roughly 50 year period communism driven by Marxist philosophy spread around the world, first in Russia by the 1920s, then to China and most of Asia in 1949, then to the Middle East in 1979.  In America our culture bent but didn’t completely break by adopting FDR’s The New Deal, but literally the rest of the world fell to Karl Marx and his disastrous ideas.  Of course Cuba, Mexico and Central then South America followed these movements into the 1980s—which is why they are all economic disasters today.

When we speak of the political left and the academia that fuels their efforts we are talking about people who subscribe to this global unification of the Marxist platform which was created essentially in the mid 1850s based on ideas that go all the way back to Sir Thomas More’s book Utopia.  Regardless of how traditional the Marxists of Iran try to disguise their intentions, their political and social platform is still a product of Europe, just as the communism of China is. All the countries that adopted that European disaster have tossed away their traditions and history to accept these collectivist ideas about humanity.  To date the only place in the world where Marx’s philosophy appears to be conducting a stable society is in Scandinavia—particularly Denmark.  There the people are pretty happy, but we are talking about a culture descended from the Vikings who are nothing like their ancestors.  They are a thoroughly defeated culture that has had to resign themselves to the lack of options present in their cold northern climate.  They don’t work much there and have decided to live a leisurely life with extremely high taxes—they are no longer the ambitious culture that launched the Vikings—and it shows.  It is that region of the world that the academics point to and proclaim that Sir Thomas More’s vision is possible.  But to have it mankind has to turn off their ambitions and treat life as a platform for death—and that just isn’t very appealing to young people when it comes down to it.

That brings us to the protests in Iran.  Like oil rich Venezuela—Iran has very high unemployment, there are very few cultural options for the young people and things never have manifested the way the revolutionaries predicted. Marxism has been a dismal failure and the leftist groups that imposed the revolution upon Iran are looking pretty stupid—and to save themselves from the embarrassments of their folly they sponsor terrorism to keep anybody from looking too deeply at their inner workings.   Ultimately this is why all these leftist countries fail and why they all try to use nuclear proliferation to threaten the world with economic instability because their own cultures look horrible in relation to competing markets.  That is certainly the case with North Korea which is a communist dictatorship.  Like Iran they want access to nuclear missiles so that they can threaten to blow up anybody who is doing better economically than they are.  In the Middle East its Israel which is very friendly to the West and makes everyone else in the region look terrible by any economic measure.  Then in North Korea its first South Korea then the United States and Japan that threaten the fat little kid running the communist country these days.

As we have clearly seen after Donald Trump was elected in the United States these same Marxist ideas have deep roots in our own Beltway politics and the media is a part of that culture.  My theory on the matter is essentially that The Communist Manifesto by Marx is an easy read.  Marxist ideas flow naturally with the empathy that women naturally bring to any decision-making process.  Men wanted to bed these women so adopted those basic philosophies essentially to improve their sex life and that’s how this stuff spreads like such a terrible disease.  I’ve read all those major books on economics including the Marx masterwork Das Kapital—and the German philosopher reveals himself to be essentially a victim to the motors of the world instead of the driver.  That is why Marxism fails everywhere except where people are resigned to any inner ambitions.  Marxism roots itself in exploitation of resources rather than in the productive utilization of what the human mind produces which is the essence of the work I much prefer and find infinitely more fascinating, the great philosophy of Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations, which became the economic driver of The United States from the very beginning in 1776.  Marxism is all about victimization which is appealing to the lazy, corrupt, and emotionally weak of the human species whereas Smith’s capitalism is about empowerment and individualized realization.   The two ideas don’t mix.

The obvious reason that the media did not report the protests in the streets of Iran over the New Year is because they can’t admit to themselves that the premise for which the Marxism that overthrew the Western friendly leadership in Iran in 1979 never has worked and now people want something else. This anxiety goes back to the primary reasons Donald Trump was elected president to begin with—it was a base rejection of the Marxist platform that has destroyed so many American cities, like Detroit, Chicago (economically) and states like California, Illinois, and New York.  The political left is attempting to keep their whole platform together with masking tape and glue by ignoring the basic problem—that Marxism is not a philosophy that people really want when it comes down to it.  In Denmark where their youth are content to drink, have sex, and essentially behave as retired people in their prime income years—Marxism can work—but people have to yield their ambitions in life to such a mentality.  Aside from Bluetooth technology, Scandinavia isn’t exactly lighting up the stage of world culture—they are consumers of the great music, movies and fashion of the West, but they don’t do much to advance anything—due to their Marxist platform of socialism mixed with just enough capitalism to participate in free trade.  Literally everywhere around the world from North Korea, Iran, Mexico, South America all of Africa, and all the countries that touch the Mediterranean Sea except for Israel are drowning in their adoption of Marx as their basic left leaning philosophy—and the American media that is also very Marxist from their college training is embarrassed.

Once the people in Iran topple the Marxists that have been in power there for the last forty years one of the last great hopes of the political left will fall into the sunset of philosophic thought.  Marxism is doomed to fail—it always has been.  But for people who only know and understand it because they learned it in college where they had other good experiences and hold onto those memories as one connected enterprise it’s hard to admit that Marxism is such a disaster.  For them it’s like admitting your mother is a whore even while you live in the next room and hear her faking organisms to pay the bills.  Nobody wants to admit such things about something they care about—but that don’t change the reality about Marxism.  Karl Marx has destroyed the minds and economies of all the people who have followed him and the evidence is abundantly obvious.  Iran is the latest, but won’t be the last.  When people see there are options, they will want to participate.  The leftists who understand that options are their enemy will always try to use fear to attempt to push reality further into the distance, but in 2018 that all falls apart for them.  Iran and North Korea are in the first to fall from the pressure—but the American media will be the next.  And that is why they didn’t cover the protests—because they know they are next.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here:  http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707  Use my name to get added benefits.

Communism and the Seduction of our Youth

I have done plenty of reading to understand that there has been ever-present within the United States a clear and present danger to our country and everything it stands for. These enemies hide like cancer cells within the body of our society and use our Constitution to embed themselves into every aspect of our nation’s activity.

I suppose I was a bit shocked to learn to what extent communism had penetrated our society prior to World War II. Heck, even Ronald Reagan inquired about joining the communist party in 1938 when he was a young actor in Hollywood. I couldn’t help but think of Johnny Depp, George Clooney, or Sean Penn, today’s Hollywood socialists, and wonder what the common appeal is to the seductive power of communism.

Then there is this video which I ran across the other day about the New York Communist Society. I watched this video with intrigue, having to struggle to hold back my laughter while at the same time keeping myself from becoming sick.

Oh…..did you catch that?  They like to be called Progressives.  Not the “C” word. 

What most of these communist’s have in common is that they are young, and particularly sheltered from the harsh realities of the world. They have not yet cast themselves into the fires of life to become battle hardened by experience. And in the case of Hollywood, where once you’re on the inside track, the money comes easy and minds go soft with inactivity.

I remember sitting in a trailer in Hollywood getting my make-up applied by the same woman that had just put on the make-up to Johnny Depp just hours before me, and she made comments about what nice skin I had. The reason that stuck with me is that Depp is a big time star, what some would consider one of the most attractive men in the world, and here was a make-up person that thought my skin was more favorable to work with. It put in perspective for me that much of Hollywood is image once you get behind the façade of things, and many of the actors that perpetrate that image, and the make-up people that apply the image to their faces. It’s about building images, and it is easy for simple minded people to become seduced by Utopian ideas, and in Hollywood beyond the catering trucks, the agents that sit in their cars with a phone to their ears and one on the radio, and the camera crews, well paid actors look out over the Hollywood Hills and travel the streets of Santa Monica, and Beverly Hills as if they lived on another planet.

Those actors create the image that young students attempt to live up to, and when you listen to these “hippie” types repeating what their favorite star has said in some magazine, or entertainment TV show like “E” they turn to these leftist oriented groups like this New York Communist Society to fulfill the dreams of their silver screen heroes.

I emerged from such make-up trailers to ponder these images and relate them to my own experiences. You quickly realize that they don’t like you personally because you represent a world outside their understanding, but they put up with you because you have something they want, otherwise you wouldn’t be there to begin with. And such experiences have given me insight into the pathetic dreams of communists.

The works of Marx and Engels is laughable as a philosophy, rooted naively in sensitivity that is contrary to the nature of all existence. What people who subscribe to those beliefs basically hold on to is that all wealth in the world exists like air, and the rich set themselves up like trolls to guard access to it. And if the trolls were removed, then all people everywhere would have access to that wealth.

The trouble is that wealth doesn’t just exist. The elements that make up wealth do, but the organization of those elements that create the flow of money have to be created from an entrepreneur, and capitalism creates the foundation of the entrepreneur.

I know several people that live in other countries, and particularly England. The Labor Party in England created an environment that ended English Imperialism, which they are guilty of maintaining an Empire at the turn of the last century. It is assumed that America, because of our close relation to England would pursue the same course if left to our own devices. But, what that Labor Party has brought to England is row after row of the same buildings, a tax rate exceeding 50%, and their ability to export virtually nothing. They have become a service oriented society. Those same floppy minds have their hooks in America, and can be seen in that video.

Ironically, it was when Ronald Reagan was working on a film at Elstree Studios in England that scared him away from communism. Living in that country and looking at the run down, un-motivated conditions of the employees, and the residents in the neighborhoods around Elstree Studios set Ronald Reagan on a pro-capitalist journey that would propel the United States to greatness, if only for a short time in the 80’s. Reagan returned from England to the labor riots at Warner Brothers and noticed how many communists had penetrated the labor movement in Hollywood, which Reagan was president of the screen-actors guild and had intimate knowledge of such things, and was on the front line when the McCarthy Hearings took place. Reagan had made the transition because he had enough of an inquiring mind to continue growing, where many of his fellow actors were just happy collecting checks and vacationing in the mountains. Reagan’s pursuit of capitalism cost him his marriage to his first wife, Jane. But Reagan learned, thankfully, of the foolishness of communism through growing up and maturing into a middle-aged man.

And that seems to be the pattern. Young people full of compassion and fresh ideas, hungry to reshape the world into their own images seem prone to the utopian ideas of communism. And entertainment is run by the young. Most studio execs are under 35, same as agents and publicists, as well as the clientele they represent. Sports are in the same situation, where young people rule and old players considered over-the-hill are 38. In a world obsessed with the young, it’s easy to understand how these boondoggled ideas emerged and how those goofy young people could even conceive wasting their time singing songs of leftist propaganda.

Yet it’s age and wisdom that have the real value, and typically once people get both, the move more to the right on the political spectrum is what happens. It would seem those that don’t move to the right after achieving age; have poor minds to begin with. I’m thinking of people like Francis Piven, and Bill Ayers. They are just delinquents at heart in adult bodies that haven’t developed in maturing beyond age 15.

A way to describe the situation is to compare communism, and doing one of the most difficult things which is to give an employee a review. I have had to give hundreds of reviews, and the temptation is always to sit down with the employee and only discuss the nice aspects of an employee, even though the real function of a review is to let the employee know what they need to do to improve them. You can determine the strength of many managers based on the type of reviews they give their employees. Compassion is often thought of as a high quality, but what it really does is allow people to use their weaknesses as handicaps. A good manager would find the weakness in an employee and encourage them to attack that weakness to become better. You may hurt that employees feelings, but in the scheme of things, you will not only make that employee better, but you will also improve your companies operations. I can say that being a compassionate liberal is much easier and mentally less taxing than a conservative that is pushing those around them to achieve all they can with the least amount of resources. Compassion as many people know it is rooted in weakness. Weakness is giving in to shortcomings.

Communism is a disease that is only attractive to the minds of the weak and lazy. Behind advocates of communism you will find the mind of a lethargic being craving the safety of the herd. Such people have no desire to contribute equally to anything, and there will always be people like this in the world. The folly of our times however, is that we’ve allowed those types of people to actually have input in our society because of our defense of free speech, and desire to give them equal footing in our society. But what it really equates to is asking your 5 year old how to drive to California from New York City. The wise of us would ask the opinion of the youngster and pat them on their heads for their attempt at an answer. But we’d use our wisdom and age to determine the correct route based on our experience and knowledge of the terrain. And the child would sit in the back seat and color in their coloring book.

That’s where youthful opinion belongs, in the back seat.

Rich Hoffman