by Brandon Smith, Alt Market:
At what point does radical activism cross the line and become a declaration of war? It’s a question I’ve been pondering for a long time, as well as the implications it has for the concept of “democracy.” How much should civilization and heritage bend to the desires of contrary groups in the name of freedom? If a movement has consistently proven itself to be a destructive force that seeks to undermine the foundations of the west, should they be allowed to stay in the west? Is it authoritarian to kick them out? If it is, does it matter?
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
If these activists hate western culture so much, why would they want to stay in places like the US? Why not leave of their own accord to a nation or society that fits their philosophical demands? The only logical conclusion is that they stay because they want to sabotage the US and force everyone else to submit to their political vision. The truth is, leftists are ideological colonizers pretending to be “victims” of colonization.
Last year I published an article titled ‘A Study Of Cultism Shows Us Why Gatekeeping Against Leftists Is A Good Thing.’ The core of my argument was rooted in a historic example of far-left extremism and moral relativism allowed to run amok in a rural community in Oregon, and how state and federal governments eventually had to deal with the threat.
In 1981, the small town of Antelope, Oregon was chosen by the Rajneesh cult led by a man who would later call himself “Osho” as the future capital of his movement. After being run out of India by numerous investigation, the cult sought out a place where they could infiltrate and establish without much opposition. The Rajneesh would visit the town in limited numbers, buy up land, and then thousands arrived suddenly in waves.
The surrounding areas were primarily conservative, and this was the real genius behind the Rajneesh relocation. You see, in conservative regions of America there is a continuing respect for individual liberty and this is something we should always hold dear. That said, our habit of accepting people’s intentions at face value and assuming that discrimination is the same as authoritarianism sometimes gets us into trouble. “Democracy” without skepticism and discernment is a recipe for disaster, and frankly, not all freedom is good. There is such a thing as responsibility, which is a concept that remains alien to most progressives.
At first, the people of Antelope welcomed the Rajneesh with open arms under the notion that they would stick to their compound and let the townspeople be. However, as is always the case with collectivists, any minor resistance to their designs triggers a raging vendetta. The cult, not getting everything they wanted from the town, used their large numbers to take over the local government and push out the original residents.
The group was engaged in numerous criminal activities including fraud, bio-terrorism and sexual exploitation of members and minors. When they came under investigation by state officials they then planned a number of actions including attempts to steal elections, political assassinations, poisoning local restaurants to keep voter numbers down, etc. How did Oregonians respond? They blocked the Rashneesh members from voting based on a loophole, and eventually authorities ran Osho and his followers out of the country.
The town of Antelope and the surrounding areas celebrated joyously. The cancer that had infected their community was gone; a great and oppressive weight had been lifted.
Many conservatives and libertarians today might view the measures used by Oregon and US officials against the Rajneesh as unconstitutional. After all, many of their criminal activities were only suspected at the time, not proven. Yet, if you ask the people who lived in and around Antelope during that bizarre event, most of them would tell you they are thankful.
I use the Rajneesh as a comparison to the political left for good reason; their behaviors and methods are almost identical. They are both cults of moral relativism, placing subjectivity over facts and hedonism over self control. They have also both used the western ideals of “democracy” and freedom as a weapon against the very people that hold those ideals dear. One of Osho’s primary arguments was that if American officials came after him, they would be violating their own values and thus undermining their own system.
But maybe the system of liberty is not made for people who want to tear it down. Maybe they don’t deserve its benefits.
Leftists think they have the edge because you have rules while they do not. They see their Utopian vision as absolute, and anyone that stops them from getting what they want is a tyrant that must be eliminated by any means necessary. Usually this involves overwhelming less organized targets with a mob, tearing the community (or country) down piece by piece until there’s nothing left. Once deconstruction is complete, they then build whatever society they want on the ashes.
