Incapp.org

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the left is violent at its core. The evidence, historic and topical, is undeniable, and the conclusion that the left exploits violence as a strategy is the only one that can be reached. So if one is violent in nature, the left is the ideal place for them. Progressives, however, will not tolerate any violence used against them. This creates a double standard, where violence is tolerated… if it’s from the left. Riots characterize leftist political agitation, from today’s “No Kings” riots to the 2020 Summer of Love. This predilection to violence is magnified when we tolerate it, and by the tacit approval of the administrative state. The deep state further encourage such antics when they drag their feet in prosecutions, and then pay rioters millions for “violating their Constitutional Rights.”

In Mein Kampf, Hitler said that the reason he established the Brown Shirts was to keep the Bolsheviks from violently dispersing his rallies. In other words, the violence of the Nazis was a direct result of the violence inflicted on them by their political foes, the communists. The reason Hitler was forced to go to such extremes was because the Weimar government wouldn’t do anything about the communists’ violent tactics. The rallies of the Weimar loyalists were also targeted by the Marxists to great effect… not only keeping the moderate message from getting out but driving everyone to the Nazis. The Brown Shirts would have fierce street battles with the communists to protect their rallies, so they could meet in peace, even if only to plot more violence. Showing tolerance of violence only encourages it.

In every union strike there is a threat of violence. From both the corporation and the union… all of it directed at the innocent worker. The union bosses and the corporate executives are free from the violence they prescribe to the rest, though. The scab is threatened with beatings, and the picketers are threatened with losing their jobs, and even gangs with clubs breaking up the picket lines. Even as both the unions and corporate executives favor the left. The unions because their grift is protected, and the executives because their lobbyists manipulating top-down economics allows them to monopolize their markets. Both use violence if it suits them. Because materialists aren’t concerned with right or wrong, the afterlife or the state of their soul, they demand results here and now.

The left generally holds atheistic materialism as their core philosophy. They claim to follow the “scientific method,” though a bastardized version, to be sure. In their view, consensus establishes a paradigm that can’t be overturned by evidence. Indeed, all attempts to falsify their paradigm are met with slander, attacks on credentials, and ostracism. This means what they want to be true must be true, and therefore any evidence to the contrary must be false. In other words, they’re idealists who think they’re pragmatists. Take this mindset to its logical conclusion and you get people who are willing to break a few eggs if they want an omelet. Because there are no immortal consequences… only temporal advantages. So why wouldn’t people who believe such things exploit violence?

It’s obvious that the more socialist a nation is… the more expansionist it is as well. While the US was in the position right after the Cold War ended to conquer the world by military might… it didn’t. By contrast, communist China expanded into Tibet and Mongolia at the first opportunity. Moreover, it threatens war with all its neighbors over “disputed” land. The Nazis were socialists, so were on the left, not right. The racist argument is undermined by the fact that the leftist Woodrow Wilson was also an unapologetic bigot. Therefore, looking at the historical data of leftist expansionism, the violence that accompanies all leftist organizations, and even the leftist violence we see on our streets today, all illustrate the violent nature of the leftist ideology. So if we want it to end, we should stop tolerating it.

Sincerely,

John Pepin