The Dystopian Western World
The West is living the worst of
Orwell’s 1984
and Raspail’s Camp of the Saints
By Dr Paul Craig Roberts
Global Research, December 22, 2020
Region: USA
Theme: History
As the second decade of the 21st century comes to an end, democracy and free speech no longer exist in the Western World. In all its respects, Western civilization no longer exists.
In the United States, which poses as the model for democracy, a presidential election has just been stolen in full view of everyone. There is expert testimony by qualified experts about how the voting machines and software were used to bias Biden's vote count. There are hundreds of signed affidavits of eyewitnesses who saw the fraudulent use of mail-in ballots to boost Biden’s vote count. We know that dead people were voted, illegal aliens were voted, out of state residents were voted, and some precincts had more votes cast than registered voters and even residents in the precincts.
Despite the abundance of evidence, except for state legislatures in some of the swing states, no one is acquainted with the evidence. The presstitutes speak with one voice and deny that any evidence exists. So do the Democrat election officials in the Democrat-controlled counties in the swing states where the presidential election was stolen. The courts have refused to even look at the evidence. The presstitutes misrepresent the courts’ refusals to examine the evidence regarding the judiciary’s ruling against the evidence's validity although no court has looked at the evidence.
The level of hostility of Biden supporters toward those who protest the electoral fraud is extraordinary. Biden supporters threaten Trump supporters with loss of employment and with arrest and prosecution. Tucker Carlson on Fox News reviews the extraordinary situation here:
Radicalized African Americans, unaware that they are being used by the Establishment, see the stolen election as their chance to rule and displace white people. That the winner is the Establishment is beyond their grasp.
Obviously, if the evidence of election theft were bogus, the media would seize the opportunity to discredit President Trump and his supporters’ claims of electoral fraud by investigating the evidence for that purpose.
The Supreme Court knows that the evidence is real. Being an Establishment institution, the Court does not want to damage America’s reputation by ruling that the election was stolen. Moreover, the Supreme Court Justices know that the American Establishment and its presstitutes would not accept a decision that the election was stolen. The Supreme Court understands that the Establishment intends to rid the government of a non-establishment president who is hostile to the Establishment’s agendas, which include globalism, destruction of the American middle class, war, more profit and power for the ruling class, and fewer civil liberties for the governed class.
The American Establishment includes the Republican Party. To protect its agendas—war and US hegemony, the concentration of income and wealth, the elimination of the middle class which gave stability to the country and limited the ability of the Establishment to exercise complete control, and the overthrow of the First Amendment and our other civil liberties which limited the Establishment’s ability to control all explanations—the Establishment is willing to pay the price of the destruction of public confidence in American institutions. The Establishment assumes that it can use the ensuing conflict to its advantage. The country will be further split apart and less able to unite against the Establishment’s self-serving agendas.
The Media Destroyed America
Conservatives blame the Russiagate hoax's presstitutes that for three years kept Trump from his agenda and the subsequent attempt to impeach Trump over false charges that he bribed the Ukrainian president. In actual fact, these efforts to destroy an elected president of the United States were orchestrated by the CIA and FBI. It was CIA director John Brennan who alleged Trump was a traitor in league with the Russians, and it was FBI director James Comey who contrived false indictments and false prosecutions of General Flynn, Michael Cohn, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone hoping to extract in exchange for leniency false testimony against Trump. It is difficult for patriotic conservatives to get their mind around the fact that the CIA and FBI, which they think protect Americans against Russian and Chinese communists and Muslim terrorists, are internal enemies of the people of the United States.
Except for a few Internet websites unknown to most people in the Western world, the only information people in the West receive is controlled explanations that serve the Establishment agendas. Consider Covid, for example. All experts who are critical of lockdowns, mask mandates, the suppression of effective treatments and the focus on vaccines, and who are sceptical of the pandemic's seriousness are censored by the print and TV media and by Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube. As far as I can tell, there are more real experts—and by experts, I do not mean doctors and nurses brainwashed in their training by Big Pharma—who are sceptical of the agenda of public health authorities than experts who support lockdowns and vaccines.
The presstitutes serving Fauci portray the dissenting experts’ views as “conspiracy theory.” But clearly, Dr Kamran Abbasi, executive editor of the British Medical Journal and editor of the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, is not a conspiracy theorist. As I recently reported, he has this to say:
“Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science.
“The UK’s pandemic response relies too heavily on scientists and other government appointees with worrying competing interests, including shareholdings in companies that manufacture covid-19 diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines. Government appointees can ignore or cherry-pick science—another form of misuse—and indulge in anti-competitive practices that favour their own products and those of friends and associates.” See this
Yet in place of such expert informed opinion, Western peoples only hear the ignorant propaganda from the bought-and-paid-for whores on CNN, NPR, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, and the rest of the paid liars.
There can be no democracy, no accountability when people only have controlled explanations that serve the ruling agendas.
The disrespect for free inquiry, the only known basis for discovering the truth, is so powerful today throughout the Western world that even in the West’s most famous universities—Oxford and Cambridge—censorship is entrenched. Any student, especially a privileged “person of colour” can brand any scientific fact, any historical fact, any expressed view or opinion to be “offensive.”
Those found to be the most offensive are white people whose statues and memorials are being taken down at Oxford and Cambridge. The founder of the famous Oxford University Rhodes Scholarships himself has been erased. Cambridge University’s white academics and administrators have accepted a person of colour as their political commissar to control their lectures, choice of words, and reading lists to ensure that no truth can emerge that might be declared by some ignorant student “offensive.” Of course, white students cannot complain that it is offensive to denigrate the white creators of British accomplishments as racists. The use of political commissars to control what can be spoken was the way Stalin controlled Russia. This Stalinist practice has now been institutionalized throughout the Western world in schools, universities, media, corporations, and government.
In the act of contrition, Oxford University has proudly announced that admission to Oxford will no longer be based on the outmoded and racist concept of merit. Oxford University declared that the university is reserving 25 per cent of its annual admissions to those unqualified to be at Oxford.
How are those unqualified to be at Oxford to succeed in graduating? According to Oxford, before they begin on their degree studies, they will be given up to two years in remedial preparation to become qualified to attempt receiving a degree. In other words, they will be coached through the process. Such an act of contrition cannot possibly be permitted to fail.
In other words, Oxford has abandoned merit and is discriminating against those students who displayed merit (and their parents who fostered merit) in favour of those who did not. Twenty-five per cent of those qualified to be at Oxford will not be permitted to be there so that those not qualified to be there can be. This is what “affirmative action” amounts to.
Cambridge has abandoned academic freedom and subjected the knowledge of its distinguished faculty to censorship in subservience to the idea that truth can hurt feelings and be offensive. A university that values feelings more than truth is not a place where learning can take place.
If you think I am exaggerating the direness of the situation, here is an emeritus professor at the University of Kent in Canterbury explaining the factual situation. The situation is so bad that even the professor himself is trapped in his opponents’ language use. He refers to the truths under attack as the “dissident views.”
In the Western World, the policing and censorship of thought and expression have now been institutionalized. As the native-born white inhabitants of these countries have no right or privilege to censor the attacks on them, they are set-up for second class citizenship leading eventually to extermination. Their civilization will proceed them in extermination. Indeed, it is already gone. White people are people without culture and without a country.
Dr Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
