The Agenda of the Progressive Globalist Elites are very similar to that of the
Social Darwinists 1870s.1) The Social Darwinists embraced Eugenics and
Scientific Racism.2) The Social Darwinists asserted the rich were genetically
superior to the masses and thereforehad the right to exploit and lie to the
masses (Survival of the Fittest)
3) The Social Darwinists said the masses should be bred like livestock4) The
Social Darwinists said the rights of the individual were subordinate to the
best interests of thecommunity.5) Progressive Globalist Elites say the concept
of the rights of the individual is nonsense.6) Progressive Globalist Elites say
the masses are too ignorant to govern themselves.7) Progressive Globalist
Elites say they are superior to the allegedly ignorant masses.
8) Progressive Globalist Elites say Government should be administered by
Progressive EducatedElites Selected from amongst the wealthy because only the
wealthy have the time and resourcesto study governance.9) Progressive
Globalists Elites say the best interests of the community are to be established
solelyby the Progressive Educated Elites and the Progressive, Educated Elites
should not be
accountable to the masses and the Progressive Educated Elites have the right to
lie to theallegedly ignorant masses.10) Progressive Educated Elites asserts
that the nature of Progressive Elites is to be altruistic and egalitarian,and
therefore the division of power, checks and balances, accountability and
transparency of theConstitution are unnecessary and hinders progress and
efficient government.
Whereas the US Founder's asserted the Nature of Humankind was to be
nonvirtuous, thus requiringgovernment is constructed with checks and balances
and accountability and transparency.11) Humanity isa single Social Organism and
NOT comprised of autonomous individuals. (As ananalogy, think of humanity as a
honeybee colony with the masses as worker bees,existing only to serve the
Progressive Hive Community as ordered by theProgressive Elite King and Queen
Bees. )
11) MANAGING HUMANITY AS A SINGLE SOCIAL ORGANISM IS THE ESSENCEOF THE
PROGRESSIVE GLOBALIST NEW WORLD ORDER;12) ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.
Proof of these philosophical foundations and agenda can be found in "Illiberal
Reformers: Race, Eugenics and AmericanEconomics in the Progressive Era", 2016,
written by hardcore practicing Progressive Professor Thomas Leonard quotingthe
Founders of Progressivism.
But it is important to remember, the NEW WORLD ORDER and ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT
are the brainchildrenof the Rothschilds family from long ago. And, at some
point (1875-1910), the Rothschilds family hijacked Social
Darwinism/Progressivism for their own purposes. All of this being made possible
by the huge amounts of unearnedmoney created by the now nearly worldwide
Central Bank, "Debt-Based Fiat Money" criminal conspiracy.
[Charles Darwin's 1871 book, "Descent of Man" called for Natural Selection to
be applied to humanity. Out of this sprang the Social Darwinists (1870s). When
the world masses rejected Social Darwinism, Social Darwinism rebranded as
Fabian Socialists in the UK (1884), Progressivism in the US (1890s) and NAZIs
in Germany (1920s)]
Those were my thoughts.
Thank you for your time.
In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
On Monday, May 31, 2021, 2:33:52 PM CDT, nrcwinner@xxxxxxxxx
<nrcwinner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don:
Can you just summarize the agenda of Progressive Global elites instead of using
too many buzz words that most people lost interest?
catch the first minutes of audience than you master the attention. On
Monday, May 31, 2021, 12:28:06 AM PDT, Rey Police <reypolice1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Nelson
Even in Congress they have time limits for speakers. Charlie is correct the
other speakers would have to surrender the floor to you, as if you are speaking
on their behalf. I've seen this done by the new speaker standing up when it is
his turn, next to you and saying to the crowd "I relinquish the floor to the
prior speaker to speak on my behalf".
At the end of it you would have the six other eight speakers standing behind
you with you as their mouthpiece.
Even in a filibuster in Congress even with the guy standing there talking for
24 hours as some have done, or even longer: his constituents were surrendering
their right to speak (to him) and alloted their time to him.
I wish to now explain the difference between freedom and liberty.
First off you don't want anyone to have freedom.
Only despotic Kings had the freedom to do whatever they want to their
countrymen.
Do you want me or anyone else to have the freedom to do whatever they want to
you?
I would guess the answer to that is probably not.
We have liberties not freedoms for that very reason above.
Charlie was right in stating, that they "own" the building you're standing in
and talking to them; BECAUSE they're a private Corporation.
They don't have to let you show up there to speak. It's their gang / clubhouse,
that they're letting you show up and speak at; for the purpose of doing "their
job" to the best of their ability.
I wouldn't want their job for whatever amount of money was offered. Too many
sins involved.
THEY ALLOWED YOUR LIBERTY TO SHOW UP AT THEIR CLUBHOUSE. They do this to keep
up appearances..
You going to accomplish the same result by putting your thoughts down on paper
and noticing them with it. As in a notice and demand, without suffering them
trying to arrest you.
Another way of looking at this is if I was an unwelcome guest in your house,
and started telling you or your family truths you didn't want to hear; would
you have the right to throw me out? If I refuse to leave would you have the
right to call the police to arrest me and throw me out? I think the answer this
would be possibly yes?
In no way am I admitting that the system is perfect, I know it's simply is not.
Remedy may be better placed for your protection by noticing and demanding in
writing and sending it to them. This they have to confront because it was sent
to them in writing. They lure people into these verbal events because they can
ignore you when you show up to talk to them. Way harder to ignore that they've
been noticed and demand a letter with your requests. Simply because it is now a
written statement of your notice to them of what they're doing wrong and your
demand that they fix it.
I hope this is of some help to you in these matters.
Be blessed amen.
On Sat, May 29, 2021, 1:17 PM NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
If a city council meeting allows 2 five minute slots per speaker, with a rule
that I cannot reference the same subject in both places, is it a constitutional
violation under free speech, and if I refuse to stop speaking after being
ordered to by the president of council, can he order my arrest for breach of
the peace as he is a public servant, swore to support the constitutions of the
US and the State, since I am a Citizen and not a 14th amendment?